Military Review

Super heavy tanks of France: the interwar failure

84

Tank Char 2C # 98 Berry in training. Photo Gallica.bnf.fr


In the interwar period, several countries at once worked out the issue of creating a super-heavy tank... An armored vehicle with powerful protection and heavy weapons could seriously affect the course of the battle and therefore was of interest to the armies. However, almost all of these projects did not progress beyond prototype testing. The exception was France, which was able to put the super-heavy tank into service. However, he did not live up to expectations - like the whole direction.

First of its kind


The first super-heavy tank in France was the Char 2C (also known under the factory designation FCM 2C). It was the first tank in the world with anti-cannon armor, and was also the first to use a three-man turret. The Char 2C still retains its status as the heaviest production tank in French production, and also remains the largest tank in the world to come into service.

Development of the future Char 2C began at the turn of 1916-17. taking into account the operating experience of early tanks. The army needed a heavily armed and well-protected vehicle to break through enemy lines of defense on a typical battlefield of an ongoing war with all its obstacles and threats.

At the beginning of 1917, Forges et Chantiers de la Méditerranée (FCM) presented three projects of heavy tanks with different characteristics and similar weapons. The largest was the FCM 1C - it was a vehicle over 9 m long and weighing 62 tons with a 75 mm cannon in the turret and four machine guns. The thickness of the armor reached 45 mm.

Super heavy tanks of France: the interwar failure

The Germans are examining a captured Char 2C # 99 Champagne tank. It was this vehicle that previously carried the 155mm cannon. Photo Wikimedia Commons

The processes of creating armored vehicles were seriously delayed, and until the end of the First World Army, the desired tanks did not receive. It was only in the spring of 1919 that an order appeared to start production of the modified FCM 1C, which was designated the Char 2C in the army. Until 1921, only 10 tanks were built, and they all served in the same regiment. 8 vehicles became linear, two others - training and command.

Despite its weight, dimensions and operational complexity, the Char 2C was a very successful armored vehicle for its time. Meeting the requirements of the army, it remained in service for a long time. At the same time, attempts were made to improve the design. So, in 1926, one of the tanks received a 155-mm howitzer (later dismantled), and in the late thirties, experiments with overhead armor were conducted.

Char 2C tanks remained in service until 1940, before the German attack. The tanks failed to take part in the hostilities. Due to logistical problems, the 51st Tank Battalion, equipped with the FCM 2C, was unable to reach the front. Nine tanks were destroyed right on the railway, another went to the enemy intact.

Movable fort


Since 1928, the development of new super-heavy tanks began. This time they were considered not as a means of breaking through someone else's defense, but as an addition to their own. This technique was proposed to be used as "mobile forts" to reinforce the stationary structures of the Maginot Line. The first stage of such a program continued until 1932, after which the work was curtailed due to the restrictions provided for by international agreements.


Char BB tank model. Photo Ftr.wot-news.com

The main result of the program is the Char BB project from FCM. It was a 60-ton tank with armor up to 60 mm thick. He received a box-shaped body with a pair of gun mounts in the front plate. The main armament of the tank was seen by two long-barreled 75-mm cannons. A pair of turrets with machine guns were provided on the roof. The crew included eight people. The project did not progress further than making a model.

The topic of "forts" for the Maginot Line returned already in 1936, and this time the work was more solid. It was proposed to create a tank weighing 45 tons, similar in architecture to the serial Char 2C. Due to modern components and strengthening of the booking, it was possible to obtain significant advantages over it. In the future, the concept was refined and developed, which led to very interesting results.

Canceled projects


One of the participants in the new program is the Ateliers de construction d'Issy-les-Moulineaux (AMX) bureau. The first version of the "mobile fort", called the Char Lourd ("heavy tank"), was proposed in 1937. In fact, it was an enlarged and reinforced Char 2C tank. The key differences were thicker armor, an increased caliber turret gun, and a cannon in the frontal hull. For a number of reasons, such a project was not approved, and the work continued.


The scheme of the AMX Char Lourd tank mod. 1937 Figure Alternathistory.com

In 1939, AMX designed a tank with the tentative name Tracteur C. The existing concepts were revised and the appearance of the vehicle changed. A 140-ton tank with armor up to 100 mm m thick with two turrets was proposed. The main front was armed with a 105-mm cannon, and a 47-mm one was placed in the stern. There were also four machine guns.

Due to the large mass, it was proposed to equip the tank with several engines of an unknown type with an electric transmission. At the same time, an archaic undercarriage was used with many small road wheels without a suspension. According to calculations, the speed on the highway would not exceed 20 km / h. Crew - 6 people.

Such a tank did not interest the army, and in early 1940, a new version of the project was made at AMX. On the updated Tracteur C, the main turret was moved to the center of the hull, and the stern turret was moved to the forehead - in front of the main turret. There have also been various changes and design improvements. However, the development of the project was delayed and could not be completed within an acceptable time frame. In early April 1940, the project was closed.

ARL brand "Tractor"


In parallel with AMX, the Atelier de Construction de Rueil (ARL) bureau worked on Tracteur C. The first version of his project was presented in 1939, and then a modified version appeared. As the tank developed, it received more powerful armor - and at the same time it became heavier. The first version of the project provided for a combat weight of 120 tons, and later it increased to 145 tons.


The latest version of the AMX Tracteur C. Drawing Wardrawings.be

A vehicle with a long body (approx. 12 m) and a turret in the bow was again proposed. Armament included 90 and 47 mm cannons, as well as several machine guns. The thickness of the frontal armor reached 120 mm and guaranteed protection against all existing tank and anti-tank guns. Due to two 550 hp engines. managed to get the design speed at 25 km / h. Crew - 8 people.

In April 1940 ARL presented a mockup of its tank to the customer. It was compared to a competing project from FCM and was considered insufficiently successful. ARL's Tracteur C project was closed following the AMX development of the same name.

"Fort" by FCM


Together with other organizations, the "mobile fort" was developed by the FCM enterprise; his project bore the designation F1. By the spring of 1940, the shape of a 139-ton tank with powerful anti-cannon armor and two turrets with weapons for different purposes.

Once again, it was proposed to build a super-heavy tank on a long chassis. The frontal armor was 120 mm thick, the sides were 100 mm thick. Unlike other models, the FCM F1 received a spring suspension on the road wheels. The main turret with a 90- or 105-mm cannon was placed in the stern, in the bow there was an additional turret with a 47-mm gun. The crew included nine tankers.


Tracteur C model from ARL factory. German soldier allows you to estimate the size of the product. Photo Chars-francais.net

In the spring of 1940, according to the F1 project, a wooden model was built for demonstration to the military. The FCM tank had a number of important advantages over the ARL development and was of greater interest to the army. Its development was supposed to continue, but these plans were not implemented in time.

Common end


On June 10, 1940, Hitler's Germany launched an offensive against France. All the forces of the French tank building were thrown into increasing the rate of production of serial equipment. The continued development of new samples, let alone the launch of the series, proved impossible. The army had to fight in cash armored vehicles - not always meeting current requirements.

The battles were soon over, and German specialists gained access to the French super-heavy tanks. They were able to examine crashed Char 2Cs as well as trophy dummies from ARL and FCM. None of these samples interested the German army - its plans at that time did not provide for the construction of super-heavy equipment.


FCM F1 tank model. Photo Militaryfactory.com

In this история French super-heavy tank building is over. Only one sample was delivered to the series, but it did not become mass. After a long development, several more projects stopped at the stage of demonstrating layouts. Thus, France spent a lot of time and resources, but got no real benefit.

Causes of defeat


Several main reasons led to the unsatisfactory results of the superheavy direction. First of all, these are the limited economic and technological capabilities of France. The army could not order the desired number of tanks, and the industry until the end of the interwar period experienced difficulties in increasing the rate of production, which made it unable to fulfill orders on time.

Another problem was the lack of a competent policy for the development of armored forces. In the twenties and thirties, there were disputes in the highest circles of the French command, often leading to ambiguous results.

So, a direct consequence of this can be considered the fact that almost all of the French tanks built were based on the Renault FT design - with all its limitations. The latter manifested themselves especially clearly in the creation of super-heavy tanks. Fundamentally new ideas were not actively implemented or were absent altogether.

With all this, it should be borne in mind that the very idea of ​​a super-heavy tank at that time was dubious and did not have clear prospects. As it became clear during the Second World War, such a technique in terms of the totality of characteristics and qualities turned out to be unnecessary for a modern and developed army. Thus, the French army wasted time and resources on questionable projects - instead of programs with real benefits.
Author:
84 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 1 August 2020 04: 46 New
    +2
    Very interesting. But
    Super heavy tanks of France: the interwar failure
    Everyone who dealt with them had a failure. Only we got a real heavy tank. recourse
    1. mat-vey
      mat-vey 1 August 2020 05: 11 New
      -6
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Very interesting. But
      Super heavy tanks of France: the interwar failure
      Everyone who dealt with them had a failure. Only we got a real heavy tank. recourse

      Are you talking about a "ghost" - KV-1? ..
      1. Mavrikiy
        Mavrikiy 1 August 2020 05: 22 New
        10
        Quote: mat-vey
        Are you talking about a "ghost" - KV-1

        Germans about KV
        the very concept of tank warfare changed radically, the KV vehicles marked a completely different level of weapons, armor protection and tank weight. German tanks instantly switched to the category of exclusively anti-personnel weapons ... From now on, enemy tanks became the main threat, and the need to fight them demanded new weapons - powerful long-barreled guns of a larger caliber
        1. mat-vey
          mat-vey 1 August 2020 05: 24 New
          +3
          Ek you tricky "yes" said))
        2. PSih2097
          PSih2097 1 August 2020 13: 52 New
          +3
          Quote: Mavrikiy
          Germans about KV

          EMNIP at the beginning of the war the Germans had instructions on how to fight the Soviet T-34 and KV (they apparently had not yet thought of putting the FlaK 41 88mm anti-aircraft guns on direct fire), well, very interesting for psychiatry - probably from hopelessness.
          It was supposed to let the tank pass over it, then climb onto it with a bucket of gasoline fool , pour over the tank and set it on fire fool ... For this act, he was entitled to leave to Germany for two weeks and an iron cross.
          1. Alf
            Alf 1 August 2020 21: 56 New
            +7
            Quote: PSih2097
            and an iron cross.

            Iron or wooden?
            1. Mavrikiy
              Mavrikiy 2 August 2020 06: 35 New
              0
              Quote: Alf
              Quote: PSih2097
              and an iron cross.

              Iron or wooden?

              a wooden cross or a cast-iron cross .... (Okudzhava) Yes, I agree, for the Germans this is not real, but by the way already for everyone (scrap metal). request
              1. Doctor
                Doctor 2 August 2020 13: 28 New
                +1
                a wooden cross or a cast-iron cross .... (Okudzhava) Yes, I agree, for the Germans this is not real, but by the way already for everyone (scrap metal). request

                This is how they saw it.

                1. Mavrikiy
                  Mavrikiy 2 August 2020 15: 01 New
                  0
                  Interesting educational film, thank you. yes
            2. aleks neym_2
              aleks neym_2 2 August 2020 06: 58 New
              +2
              birch!!! Russia is rich in birches and we do not feel sorry for them for those who really want something.
              1. Aviator_
                Aviator_ 2 August 2020 14: 55 New
                +2
                So the Poles also came in handy in 2010
          2. mat-vey
            mat-vey 2 August 2020 08: 24 New
            0
            Quote: PSih2097
            (they apparently had not yet thought of putting FlaK 41 88mm anti-aircraft guns on direct fire)

            When there was something to put, they put it ...
          3. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 3 August 2020 09: 34 New
            +1
            Quote: PSih2097
            EMNIP at the beginning of the war the Germans had instructions on how to fight the Soviet T-34 and KV (they apparently had not yet thought of putting the FlaK 41 88mm anti-aircraft guns on direct fire), well, very interesting for psychiatry - probably from hopelessness.
            It was supposed to let the tank pass over it, then climb onto it with a bucket of gasoline fool , pour over the tank and set it on fire fool .

            Everyone had such instructions. For the British, for example, their military theorists suggested stopping tanks with a rail, blanket and gasoline. smile
            According to the instructions, the team was to consist of four people armed with a rail (where to get it, the brochure did not explain), a blanket, a bucket of gasoline and a box of matches. The command was to set up an ambush on the driveway where tanks were supposed to pass. When enemy vehicles appeared, two fighters of the anti-tank team had to take a rail with one end wrapped in a blanket and drive it straight into the chassis of the tank so as to jam the drive wheel and caterpillar. The third number of the team poured gasoline on the blanket, and the fourth could only throw a burning match at him.

            We generally proposed to use "mud-clay" in VET:
            7. Having used up grenades and bottles with a combustible mixture, fighter fighters harvest mud-clay, which is thrown over the tank’s viewing slots.
            © Instructions for fighting tanks issued. NWF. July 5, 1941. Signed by Vatutin.
          4. yehat2
            yehat2 6 October 2020 16: 47 New
            0
            the kv-1 had a 3rd machine gun in the back just for cross lovers
        3. mat-vey
          mat-vey 2 August 2020 08: 23 New
          0
          N-yeah, I didn't think that there are those on VO who don't know about the German nickname KV ...
    2. antivirus
      antivirus 1 August 2020 07: 42 New
      -2
      It turned out that the Germans were not eccentrics (on M), they took semi-finished products for their mice from their main rivals.
    3. mvg
      mvg 3 August 2020 01: 31 New
      -1
      Only we got a real heavy tank

      Which one? T-35? At the start of the war, we did not have an acceptable tank at all, maybe only partially KV. The British had Matilda, Churchill, who fought the entire war, including in the SA.
  2. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 1 August 2020 05: 06 New
    0
    A 140-ton tank with armor up to 100 mm m thick with two turrets was proposed. The first version of the project provided for a combat weight of 120 tons, and later it increased to 145 tons.
    Much better this ... lively, right? And then how is the house ... (Office romance)
    "TM": Frederick II developed a draft battleship with mighty cannons and powerful armor, reported to the expert council. Summary: battleship drowned repeat
  3. svp67
    svp67 1 August 2020 05: 22 New
    +2
    Super heavy tanks of France: the interwar failure
    This is not a "failure", this is an "eclipse" of the "gloomy Gali genius ..."
    1. Serg koma
      Serg koma 1 August 2020 08: 57 New
      +6
      Quote: svp67
      this is the "eclipse" of the "gloomy Gali genius ..."

      This trend of the "fashion" of those years on the minds of designers - giant tanks, airplanes, airships, guns, ships, submarines ...
    2. PSih2097
      PSih2097 1 August 2020 14: 11 New
      +2
      Quote: svp67
      This is not a "failure", this is an "eclipse" of the "gloomy Gali genius ..."

      oh, okay, just remember this creation ...

      And if it were not for Stalin's - "how much I took off (this is about the weight of the tower)" there would be a freak SMK, not KV ... By the way, here is the SMK itself and its prototype according to the TZ Bolshoi Theater:

      1. svp67
        svp67 1 August 2020 14: 49 New
        +5
        Quote: PSih2097
        oh, okay, just remember this creation ...

        Yes, this is a "creation" "puppy" in comparison with "French"
        Quote: PSih2097
        would be a freak SMK

        Here's how you turn it over, unlike the KV SMK, it was a normal WALKING tank, since it used an engine corresponding to its weight and a transmission corresponding to the type of its engine, but a diesel engine was "pushed" into the "truncated version", into the KV, and the transmission was left tighter, as a result, she simply did not pull him and went out of order
        1. PSih2097
          PSih2097 1 August 2020 14: 59 New
          +2
          Quote: svp67
          and the transmission was left tighter, as a result of which she simply did not pull it and went out of order

          about the transmission - yes, it was not reliable (like the B-2, on which they forgot to put an air filter), but even now - put the soldier in any armored vehicle from the habit of clutch (other "reasonable with training in DOSAAF" manage to kill engine with a box - together or separately) will be burned - tested by generations of officers, warrant officers and foremen.
          Quote: svp67
          since I used an engine corresponding to my weight and corresponding to my engine type

          okay, the gasoline engine for the tank is "Gut" ???
          1. svp67
            svp67 1 August 2020 16: 30 New
            +8
            Quote: PSih2097
            okay, the gasoline engine for the tank is "Gut" ???

            This is according to FIG, the main thing is that the engine had the required power, and the transmission was designed for its load, and what it is like there, gasoline, kerosene, diesel, this is the third thing
            1. PSih2097
              PSih2097 1 August 2020 17: 23 New
              -6
              Quote: svp67
              This is according to FIG, the main thing is that the engine had the required power, and the transmission was designed for its load, and what it is like there, gasoline, kerosene, diesel, this is the third thing

              Would you like / would like to go into battle in a similar tank (which is like a match), if this is the third thing ???
              By the way, your surname is not Kulik by chance or are you related ???
              1. PSih2097
                PSih2097 1 August 2020 17: 40 New
                0
                By the way, Kulik reasoned in the same way, as a result, in the PTO and in the air defense by the beginning of WWII there was no nichr *** on the word at all ...
                1. svp67
                  svp67 1 August 2020 18: 32 New
                  +4
                  Quote: PSih2097
                  By the way, Kulik reasoned in the same way, as a result, in the PTO and in the air defense by the beginning of WWII there was no nichr *** on the word at all ...

                  Talk nonsense. The lack of high-quality anti-aircraft and air defense systems is an indicator of the weakness of our industry, which has failed to establish mass production of quality products. And the marshal, then General Kulik, has many merits, as well as many defeats, he is a man of his time.
                  And if you so decided to switch to historical personalities, you have nothing to do with Mehlis?
              2. svp67
                svp67 1 August 2020 18: 29 New
                +1
                Quote: PSih2097
                Would you like / would like to go into battle in a similar tank (which is like a match), if this is the third thing ???

                Do not be silly, this issue has long been sorted out on the shelves and it has been proven that a gasoline or diesel engine plays little for fire safety, and even more for explosion safety, more than the quality of design and manufacture matters. I can provide you with photos of dozens of burnt-out T-34 and KV tanks, or with torn armor plates in the areas of fuel tanks in the early years of the war, when it was believed that they were not affected by enemy anti-tank weapons.
                And for the purity of the "experiment", the BT-2M tank with a V-7 diesel was lost on the battlefield as often as its gasoline brother BT-7 and burned just as often
                1. PSih2097
                  PSih2097 1 August 2020 19: 19 New
                  +3
                  Quote: svp67
                  BT-7M

                  how much armor was there? 22mm, so her (BT / T-26) that Rak. 35/36 that Pak 38 practically together with the engine had to endure ...
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 1 August 2020 20: 09 New
                    +1
                    Quote: PSih2097
                    how much armor was there?

                    It's not so much about armor resistance as about fire safety ...
                    But on the T-34, its level was normal, and nevertheless there are plenty of photos of burnt-out T-34s
                    1. PSih2097
                      PSih2097 1 August 2020 21: 57 New
                      +1
                      Quote: svp67
                      and nevertheless there are plenty of photos of burnt-out T-34s

                      burnt or burnt in retreat?
                      1. svp67
                        svp67 2 August 2020 06: 50 New
                        +1
                        Quote: PSih2097
                        burnt or burnt in retreat?

                        Burnt and exploded in battle in the same June 1941 ...







              3. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 3 August 2020 09: 50 New
                0
                Quote: PSih2097
                Would you like / would like to go into battle in a similar tank (which is like a match), if this is the third thing ???

                The Germans use on a new tank of a carburetor engine, and not a diesel engine can be explained:
                a) the specificity of the German fuel balance, in which synthetic gasolines, benzene and alcohol mixtures, unsuitable for combustion in diesel engines, play the main role;
                b) the advantage of a carburetor engine over a diesel engine in terms of such important indicators for a tank as the smallest possible dimensions for a given power, reliability of starting in winter and ease of manufacture;
                c) a very significant percentage of fires of tanks with diesel engines in combat conditions and their lack of significant advantages in this respect over carburetor engines, especially with the competent design of the latter and the presence of automatic fire extinguishers;
                d) the short service life of tank engines due to the low survivability of tanks in combat conditions, due to which the cost of gasoline saved when a diesel engine is used on a tank does not have time to justify the increased consumption of alloy steels required for the manufacture of a diesel engine and highly skilled labor, no less scarce in wartime than liquid fuel.

                According to statistics from October 1942, the percentage of fires on gasoline T-70s was lower than on diesel T-34s - 19% versus 23%. Despite the fact that the T-70 was powered by aviation gasoline.
    3. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 2 August 2020 06: 45 New
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      This is not a "failure", this is an "eclipse" of the "gloomy Gali genius ..."

      Rather "acute Gali meaning" repeat It is very likely that they did not create a heavy tank, but they grab onto super-heavy ones. We were more adequate. T-28 - T-35 - KV, not counting the SMK, etc.
  4. Thrifty
    Thrifty 1 August 2020 07: 10 New
    -8
    "Looking at the world, one cannot help but look at it" - compared to the project of the German 1000-ton tank "rat, French projects are a childish prank, although gigantomania is still characteristic of Europeans in tank building, and their tanks are more suitable for driving on the Autobahn than for war. ...
  5. AX
    AX 1 August 2020 07: 25 New
    0
    Gloomy French genius ...)))
    1. unknown
      unknown 1 August 2020 07: 36 New
      -9
      Astrologers do not recommend people born in the year of the Goat to engage in POLITICS, COMMERCIAL, MILITARY BUSINESS.
      Failure is guaranteed.
      Countries whose totem animal is the Goat have similar problems.
      France is still lucky in this regard.
      She is the best of these countries.
      And if you look closely at Poland and Ukraine ...
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 1 August 2020 08: 12 New
        -1
        If my memory serves me right, the rooster was the totem animal of France. Where did you get the goat ?!
        1. unknown
          unknown 2 August 2020 06: 15 New
          -2
          The rooster is the totem animal of the Maghreb countries.
          France is the Goat.
      2. Doctor
        Doctor 1 August 2020 10: 10 New
        +3
        Astrologers do not recommend people born in the year of the Goat to engage in POLITICS, COMMERCIAL, MILITARY BUSINESS.
        Failure is guaranteed.
        Countries whose totem animal is the Goat have similar problems.
        France is still lucky in this regard.
        She is the best of these countries.
        And if you look closely at Poland and Ukraine ...

        And Richard Sorge, Mikhail Kalashnikov and Guy Julius Caesar did not know. laughing
        Bill Gates to the heap.
        Astrologers, such astrologers ...
        1. unknown
          unknown 2 August 2020 06: 22 New
          -2
          Sorge is a literary character.
          Kalashnikov is an official of the "comrades" group.
          Julius Caesar is a collective image, a literary hoax.
          And add Steve Jobs to Bill Geitz.
          Goats also have merits.
          They are pioneers, better than anyone else, they highlight new, innovative ideas.
          Ideas that are put forward and implemented by other people.
          Look at the Geitz and Jobs teams.
          And everything will become clear.
          In psychology, there are about fifty theories of personality.
          And all the workers.
          Because they look at the personality from different angles.
          Astrology allows you to bypass the most difficult topic - motivation.
          And in this regard, it is better than other theories.
          Plus, any theory works SEVENTY percent.
          1. Doctor
            Doctor 2 August 2020 07: 09 New
            0
            Sorge is a literary character.
            Kalashnikov is an official of the "comrades" group.
            Julius Caesar is a collective image, a literary hoax.

            laughing ))
            And add Steve Jobs to Bill Geitz.

            Che to add, there was one Goat, now there are two! drinks Or do astrologers have quantity also turns into quality?
          2. The leader of the Redskins
            The leader of the Redskins 2 August 2020 07: 11 New
            +2
            You are wrong about the symbol of France ...

            Why is the rooster the symbol of France? In ancient times, the Celts, or Gauls, as the Romans called them, lived on the territory of France. In Latin, the word "gall" accidentally coincided with the word "rooster": gallus.
          3. Doctor
            Doctor 2 August 2020 07: 15 New
            0
            Astrology allows you to bypass the most difficult topic - motivation.
            And in this regard, it is better than other theories.
            Plus, any theory works SEVENTY percent.

            It "works" only in the minds of idiots who believe in it.
            Dexterous compilers of horoscopes compose them in such a contradictory way that ANYONE could recognize himself in them.
            I still remember how one friend wrote to me:
            "By nature you are a fearless person, but life has taught you to be careful ..."
  6. rocket757
    rocket757 1 August 2020 07: 34 New
    +3
    EVERYONE probably had to go through their stage of gigantism.
  7. Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka 1 August 2020 07: 37 New
    +4
    During the interwar period, several countries at once worked out the issue of creating a super-heavy tank. An armored vehicle with powerful protection and heavy weapons could seriously affect the course of the battle and therefore was of interest to the armies. However, almost all of these projects did not progress beyond prototype testing. The exception was France, which was able to put the super-heavy tank into service.

    ? And, like the Soviet serial T-35!
    1. The leader of the Redskins
      The leader of the Redskins 1 August 2020 08: 14 New
      0
      They took it off the tongue! I also noticed this nonsense.
      But, apparently, the author of five towers and 58 tons seemed commonplace and he praised France.
    2. dzvero
      dzvero 1 August 2020 08: 33 New
      +1
      The T-35 is too light to be considered super-heavy. The same applies to the KV-1 and KV-2. The border is not clearly indicated in the article, but if we take the Frenchman as a landmark, then about 70 tons. Even modern MBTs are not very suitable for 70 tons. Fitness and movement so you don't get fat smile
      1. Tochilka
        Tochilka 1 August 2020 09: 54 New
        +2
        Out of interest, I looked at the combat weight of the Merkava Mk.4 tank - 65 tons. 5 tons fell short of 70.
      2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 2 August 2020 14: 40 New
        +3
        Quote: dzvero
        The T-35 is too light to be considered super-heavy. The same applies to the KV-1 and KV-2. The border is not clearly indicated in the article, but if we take the Frenchman as a landmark, then about 70 tons. Even modern MBTs are not very suitable for 70 tons. Fitness and movement so you don't get fat smile

        Then be clean! Where are the German Collosal and Mouse? If we dismiss them as not serial, then the "Frenchman" is the only serial super-heavy tank in history !!!
        If we open the reference books of those years, then we will not find the definition of "superheavy tank" in any of them !!! Everywhere the mass is given (in the Soviet heavy tanks it was determined by the weight of over 40 tons, in the British and French - 50 tons. So the 2C is a corny heavy tank, and according to German qualifications it is also an average one with its 75mm cannon!
        1. dzvero
          dzvero 2 August 2020 17: 00 New
          +1
          "Superheavy" as a term is really absent, but 70 tons, it seems to me, did not arise out of nowhere - the carrying capacity of platforms and bridges, the stability of the road surface, off-road patency and overcoming fords, and the evacuation of a damaged vehicle weighing over 60 tons is already problematic.
          For the sake of truth, the author should have mentioned German creations, especially since two copies can already be considered a series smile I could also mention the British Turtle (albeit an SPG in fact).
          drinks
          1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Kote Pan Kokhanka 2 August 2020 17: 27 New
            +1
            Then the German Karlov - 126 tons, not shit-muhry !!!
            And why 70 tons, and not 60 or 160?
            By carrying capacity of bridges in Europe. Let's refer to the French standards and our SNIPs! Until the middle of the last century in Europe, the standard of an automobile bridge was within 30 tons, we have all 25 !!!!
            Following from this, every T-34-85 is known to be a super-heavy tank, its 32 tons !!!
    3. mat-vey
      mat-vey 1 August 2020 10: 08 New
      +2
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      ? And, like the Soviet serial T-35!

      Something I got the feeling that if the T-35 hadn't been tried, the KV might not have been born ... well, or much later ..
  8. Free wind
    Free wind 1 August 2020 08: 36 New
    0
    Well, at least they will make a model out of shit and sticks, they will see that there is nothing good, they will mold something further. Although they did not have the worst V1bis tank, which the Germans could not take head-on. We have blinded a T-35 with 20 mm armor, which was fired from rifles.
    1. Alf
      Alf 1 August 2020 22: 01 New
      +1
      Quote: Free Wind
      with 20 mm armor, which made its way from rifles.

      What is your evidence?
      1. Free wind
        Free wind 2 August 2020 05: 02 New
        0
        From the Internet, of course, and on this resource there were articles, the first T-35 20mm in circular, then the upper armor plate was increased to 30 mm. Some people really claim that the armor was increased to 50-60 mm, but it seems to me that this tank could not go, taking on such a weight.
        1. Alf
          Alf 2 August 2020 20: 03 New
          +1
          Quote: Free Wind
          Naturally from the internet

          Have you listened to Carbine? Even officially, no 20mm rifle will penetrate.
          1. Alf
            Alf 2 August 2020 20: 05 New
            0
            Quote: Free Wind
            Some people really claim that the armor was increased to 50-60 mm, but it seems to me that this tank could not go, taking on such a weight.

    2. hohol95
      hohol95 1 August 2020 22: 54 New
      +1
      We have blinded a T-35 with 20 mm armor, which was fired from rifles.

      At the time of the creation of the T-35, which rifle could pierce 20 mm sheets from?
      1. Free wind
        Free wind 2 August 2020 05: 05 New
        0
        Mosin rifle, armor-piercing cartridge already in 1909.
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 2 August 2020 17: 25 New
          +1
          Can you tell us more about this cartridge and its armor-piercing bullet?
          And the Internet does not find this!
          I gave only this information -
          В 1916 year the Russian army adopted a 7,62-mm cartridge with an armor-piercing bullet of Staff Captain Kutovoy. GAU ordered 36 million cartridges with Kutovoy's "shield-piercing" bullet; production began at the Petrograd Cartridge Plant.

          1916 year. Not 1909!
  9. iouris
    iouris 1 August 2020 11: 05 New
    0
    The French made the tank, for the Maginot Line. The line was built. Yes (as always, it never happened again) the trouble came from where they did not expect. Something in the conservatory has not changed.
  10. Kerensky
    Kerensky 1 August 2020 11: 28 New
    +1
    So it's a defensive machine.
    Should act from ambush, leave in the evening, by morning take a new caponier at a key point.
    He doesn't need speed, but he needs a sapper company in the service and a couple of motorcycles.
  11. Catfish
    Catfish 1 August 2020 14: 20 New
    +5

    Dreadnought, damn it ... laughing
    1. Undecim
      Undecim 1 August 2020 20: 04 New
      +4
      Almost all countries that built tanks, even Japan, have had this disease.

      One of the variants of the OI family of super-heavy tanks developed by Japan in 1936-1945, which were to be used for attacks on the USSR and China, as well as for coastal defense. Weight 120-150 tons.
      1. Catfish
        Catfish 1 August 2020 20: 13 New
        +4
        Hi victor hi
        Which is the type 100? And the weight of the hull alone is also 100 tons.

        1. Undecim
          Undecim 1 August 2020 20: 21 New
          +4
          There were several options - Mi-To, Type 100, Type 120. And before that - Type 87, Type 91, Type 92 and Type 95.

          Type 95. Weighed, though not 120 tons, but only 26, but for the early thirties and this is quite a lot.
          1. Catfish
            Catfish 1 August 2020 20: 34 New
            +3
            Type 87

            Type 91

            Type 92 "Key-Sensha" generally a light cavalry tank
            1. Undecim
              Undecim 1 August 2020 21: 06 New
              +2
              I inserted Type 92 by inertia.
              1. hohol95
                hohol95 1 August 2020 23: 09 New
                0
                Oh, those Japanese with their "originality" in terms of names and numbering of military equipment!
                Type 95 - under a similar number the Japanese have 3 vehicles: a light tank "Ha-Go", an armored personnel carrier "Ho-Gi" and naturally heavy Type 95 (a prototype that did not take part in battles).
                1. Undecim
                  Undecim 2 August 2020 00: 02 New
                  +2
                  BTR "Ho-Gi
                  Wrong. Type 95 So-Ki.
                  1. Undecim
                    Undecim 2 August 2020 00: 09 New
                    +3
                    In addition, there was a Type 95 Crane Vehicle Ri-Ki engineering vehicle.
                  2. hohol95
                    hohol95 2 August 2020 19: 52 New
                    0
                    The Internet gives out both names. And "Ho-Gi" and "So-Ki".
                    As only the Japanese know correctly!
                    Fedoseev S. - Armored collection 1995 No. 03 Armored vehicles of Japan 1939-1945
                    Armored personnel carrier-railcar "2595" ("XO-GI")
                    1. Undecim
                      Undecim 2 August 2020 20: 01 New
                      +1
                      I adhere to the rule that the main source of information on the technique of any country should be from that country. Therefore, Akira Takizawa, in this case, is preferable to Fedoseev.
                      1. hohol95
                        hohol95 2 August 2020 20: 09 New
                        0
                        Then, in your opinion, what is the correct name for a British bomber - Blenim or Blenheim?
                      2. Undecim
                        Undecim 2 August 2020 20: 20 New
                        0
                        "In my opinion" there is no need. There is an English language with its own rules. The British pronounce | ˈblɛnɪm |, the Americans - | ˈblenəm |.
                      3. hohol95
                        hohol95 2 August 2020 20: 34 New
                        0
                        However, among our compatriots, the Germanized name is widespread - Blenheim!
                        And if a Japanese author claims that "Ho-Gi" is not correct, but "So-Ki" is true - so be it.
                        I will try to remember. hi
                      4. Undecim
                        Undecim 2 August 2020 21: 02 New
                        +1
                        Among our compatriots, what is not common, especially thanks to the Internet, Wikipedia and writers of the level of some local workaholic keyboards and copy-paste.
  • ecolog
    ecolog 2 August 2020 18: 23 New
    0
    Given the enormous distances and the lack of roads in that part of the USSR, where the Japanese, purely theoretically, could invade, the use of such a tank is some kind of fierce BDSM for the Japanese themselves. It would take a whole horde of sapper units with cunning strangers, so that it could get somewhere. To evacuate IT from the battlefield (which still needs to be reached) or just in case of a critical breakdown is a whole quest. And to organize the crossing, and to transport it by the railway ... uuu the scriptwriters of hentai cartoons are resting. The Germans suffered with lighter Tigers in places much less wild and not explored.
  • Fitter65
    Fitter65 2 August 2020 02: 08 New
    0
    Char 2C tanks remained in service until 1940, before the German attack.

    Rather, before the defeat of France ...
  • blackbird
    blackbird 2 August 2020 17: 43 New
    +1
    Nothing will ever go beyond proud French tanks.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 3 August 2020 19: 29 New
      0
      Quote: Amsel
      Nothing will ever go beyond proud French tanks.

      Come on. The founders of tanks in 1943 brought it to the test heavy a tank weighing over 80 tons with 63 mm armor and a 76 mm cannon. smile
      You can also recall the "turtle" and the T28 / T95 ("the world's most invisible self-propelled gun, disappeared from sight for 27 years in three bushes" smile ).
  • DeKo
    DeKo 8 September 2020 08: 17 New
    -2
    If a soldier is a coward, and we remember how easily the French surrendered to captivity, then no tanks will help
    1. Yaroslav Tekkel
      Yaroslav Tekkel 24 October 2020 00: 30 New
      0
      Remember? Are you a veteran of the Wehrmacht?