Military Review

Stalin and tanks. In search of an adequate answer

253

Source: bigenc.ru


Tank dash


Soviet Union before the start of the famous "tank race "of the 1930s was a power that could not produce modern tanks, and did not know how to use it on the battlefield. There was no experience, no design groundwork, no well-formed engineering school. It so happened that the Russian army during the First World War failed to create tanks and, accordingly, did not receive experience in their use, did not work out tactics, and did not form tank troops. In the 20s and 30s of the last century, Soviet engineers came to build armored vehicles virtually from scratch. It is worth remembering that the UK and France had no problems with tank building and tank use. The British and French became the creators of a new kind of troops, gained vast experience in their use, developed the theory and tactics of their use, forged tank personnel, and accumulated a considerable fleet of armored vehicles. Germany also managed to gain some experience in tank operations at the very end of World War I, as well as create modest tank units. It was in such a situation that Soviet Russia had to prove its right to life by creating powerful tank troops. And this should be taken into account by numerous critics of the development models of Soviet tank building.

Stalin and tanks. In search of an adequate answer

Source: trv-science.ru

Joseph Stalin first drew attention to domestic tank building at the very end of the 20s, perfectly understanding the threats of impending wars and the rapid development of the armies of European states. In the ground forces, it was the armored formations that were to become prevalent due to the combination of speed, firepower and armor protection. The idea of ​​a "tank dash", during which thousands of new armored vehicles were to appear in the Red Army, belongs to the country's top leadership, namely Stalin. On July 15, 1929, a decree "On the state of defense of the USSR" appeared, which clearly stated: in terms of the number of armies not to be inferior to a potential enemy, and in terms of saturation with equipment - two to three times superior. Stalin's priority was tanks, artillery and combat aviation... Actually, it was these areas that became the main lines for the Soviet Army for many decades after. For tanks, the leader's appetites were exorbitant: initially, by the end of the first five-year plan, it was planned to send 1,5 combat tanks to the troops and have about 2 more in reserve. The plan provided for an increase in the production of small arms weapons 2,5-3 times, cars - 4-5 times, tanks - 15 times! A similar growth rate of tank armaments became the basis of the so-called tankization of the Red Army. Over time, the movement unfolding in the country to revise the plans of the first five-year plan in the direction of increasing fully affected the military. On October 13, 1929, the executive meeting of the Labor and Defense Council (RZ STO) proposed

to take all measures for the maximum expansion of tank building in 1930/31 in order to fulfill the task received for the five-year period, if possible, in most of it during the first half of this five-year period.

In November 1929, the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the National Economy (VSNKh) set the industry the task of producing 1934 tanks and tankettes by the end of 5611. A. A. Kilichenkov from the Russian State University for the Humanities believes that this enthusiasm for the technical side of equipping the army has a fairly simple explanation. In his opinion, Stalin and his entourage perfectly understood the impossibility of maintaining a multimillion army in peacetime - the economy of the USSR could not withstand such stress. Therefore, it was quite logical to qualitatively strengthen the army with technical innovations, which, of course, included tanks. However, in stories the main thing - technical competence - was badly lacking. If the issue with production capacity could somehow be resolved, then there were no skills in designing armored vehicles. I had to go to the West for help.

According to other people's patterns


Stalin attached the utmost importance to borrowing foreign military equipment for the needs of the Red Army. The well-known commission for the procurement of foreign equipment under the leadership of Khalepsky from the beginning of 1930 managed to purchase some samples of tanks from Germany, the USA, France and the UK. Many models cannot be called modern, but for the USSR of that time they were like breaths of fresh air. It is interesting to trace Stalin's correspondence with his specialists involved in the procurement of foreign equipment. A. A. Kilichenkov mentioned in one of the materials writes that in January 1930, the deputy chairman of the Supreme Economic Council of the Soviet Union, comrade Osinsky, suggested that Stalin borrow the German tractor "Linke-Hoffmann". This vehicle combined the advantages of an armored vehicle and a 37-mm cannon, which was quite heavy for its time, allowing it to destroy enemy tanks. It would seem that this is an excellent tank destroyer capable of becoming the ancestor of a whole class of domestic armored vehicles. But this example did not impress Stalin, and the USSR was deprived of mobile anti-tank weapons for many years, which was negatively reflected in further military history. The country's leadership viewed the tanks mainly as artillery pieces, clad in armor-plated armor and mounted on a track.

Conceptually, Stalin considered the structure of the tank forces in the format of an alternative response to the Western aggressor. What does it mean? Particular emphasis was placed on unusual, even experimental designs that could surpass enemy tanks by an order of magnitude. The idea is very similar to the notorious "wunderwaffe" that appeared a decade later. In particular, the amphibious tanks, born to the British in 1931, aroused particular interest, if not delight, in Stalin. Now the entrenched enemy can receive a dagger tank strike, from where he was not expected - for example, from the side of a water barrier. In addition, the hordes of amphibious tanks were much more mobile than ground tracked vehicles. There was no need to look for bridges or wait for a crossing to be established. They preferred not to know or not to notice that anti-tank weapons were being developed in Europe, capable of penetrating through such armored boxes. It is interesting that the developers of the amphibious tank from the Vickers-Armstrong company themselves came up with a proposal to the Soviet side to purchase several copies of armored vehicles. Mikhail Tukhachevsky, a supporter of military innovation, was on the side of Stalin in this matter and spoke with enthusiasm about the English amphibious tanks. After the deputy people's commissar was notified of the intentions of the British, he replied on the same day:

Immediately familiarize yourself with the amphibious tank on site. Start negotiations on the purchase of five amphibious tanks. Immediately start designing this amphibian from the photographs ...


Source: cdn1.img.ukraina.ru

To understand the level of Stalin's attention to armored amphibians, it is worth telling about one episode associated with his reaction to the appearance of this class of tanks. As soon as Moscow learned about the appearance of Vickers-Carden-Lloyd in Great Britain, Stalin called Khalepsky and rudely reprimanded him for not buying a floating car from Christie in the USA. Khalepsky at that time was with an ulcer in the hospital and was seriously scared, especially since Christie did not present any working prototype to the Soviet commission - there was only a model. This time everything ended well for the head of the Department of Mechanization and Motorization of the Red Army. Innokenty Khalepsky was shot later, in 1938, and for a slightly different reason. Meanwhile, the dead-end branch of amphibious tanks received unprecedented development in Soviet Russia, which resulted in more than a thousand T-37 amphibians built on the basis of the British tank.


T-37A. Source: wikimedia.org

Among the initiatives of Stalin and his entourage were even less sensible thoughts about the design of tanks. "Vickers" was then offered to create and produce a heavy tank, the parameters of which could be the envy of modern military theorists. For obvious reasons, this project was too difficult for the USSR industry. According to the requirements, the tank, weighing 43 tons, 11 meters long, protected by 40-60 mm armor, was armed with two 76-mm guns and four machine guns. Despite its gigantic dimensions, the breakthrough tank had to "pass a ford up to 2 meters deep ... while maintaining the possibility of firing on the move." At a depth of up to 5 meters, the tank was supposed to be able to move along the bottom at a speed of up to 15 km / h, using tracks and reversible propellers. Underwater movement was provided by observation and lighting devices. In addition, a desire was additionally expressed to ensure the possibility of "self-propelled movement on rails, both 1524-mm track of the USSR and 1435-mm international". Transitions from the railway track to the tracks and back were to be made from inside the tank in five minutes. No less stringent requirements were imposed on the noiselessness of this whopper. At a distance of 250 meters, "in calm weather, it was impossible to determine the presence of a tank moving along the highway with the naked ear." For comparison: the "silence distance" of a small tank was, respectively, 300 m. The most amazing thing is that "Vickers" undertook to implement such fantastic requirements, with the exception of some very exotic ones. But in the end, the negotiations, which lasted from May 1930 to July 1931, ended in nothing.

To be continued ...
Author:
253 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 3 October 2020 05: 32 New
    10
    "anti-tank weapons were developed," Not very well written.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 06: 19 New
      +3
      He who does not work is not mistaken!
    2. Fitter65
      Fitter65 4 October 2020 09: 39 New
      +5
      Quote: Pessimist22
      "anti-tank weapons were developed," Not very well written.

      So - the same as the phrase at the beginning of the article
      the Russian army during the First World War failed to create tanks
      I first learned that the army is creating something. The army is usually supplied with equipment, weapons and weapons that industry creates, but according to the tactical and technical requirements, tasks that the army puts forward, but industry creates ...
      1. ccsr
        ccsr 4 October 2020 10: 39 New
        +1
        Quote: Fitter65
        I first learned that the army is creating something.

        There were such products both before the war and after:
        "Sever" is a Soviet portable short-wave radio station, widely used during the Great Patriotic War. The radio station was developed in 1939-1940 at the Scientific Research Institute for Communication Technology of the Red Army (NIITS KA) by BA Mikhalin, V. Pokrovsky and I. Mukhachev under the guidance of Professor MEIS, Chief Engineer of NIITS KA BP Aseev.
        At the development stage, the product passed under the code "Omega". After military trials of an experimental batch, the radio station was put into service under the name "North". Serial production began in October 1941 in Leningrad at the plant. Kozitsky and continued under the blockade. Until the end of 1941, about 1000 units were produced, by the end of 1943, the production rate reached 2000 units. per month [1].

        Of the later Soviet developments, one can name "Taran" and "Kolchuga", which were developed at the Kursk Research Institute of the GRU General Staff, and serial production was deployed at industrial enterprises.
        1. zenion
          zenion 4 October 2020 15: 05 New
          +1
          The best was the radio station "Melnik". So good that back in the mid-60s it was secret.
          1. Tamer
            Tamer 6 October 2020 12: 38 New
            0
            Quote: zenion
            The best was the radio station "Melnik". So good that back in the mid-60s it was secret.

            Which was shown in "Striped Flight" (1961)? An episode in the radio room, where the radio operator - actor Alexei Kozhevnikov - hid from the tiger in the closet?
            1. zenion
              zenion 22 November 2020 22: 03 New
              0
              Tamer (Timur) This is not a radio station "Melnik". I saw it in the Army when I served, but it was like an exhibit. And he worked at another radio station in the instructions of which it was written - the connection is unlimited. And the receiver there was such that it could automatically scan or scramble everything that you ask the automation from long waves to decimeter. When he found something, he would ask - is it interesting? Several times I caught SOS and transmitted the wave and frequency by instance, and there they already found where it was and who. In the mid-1960s, there were a lot of interesting things in the army in connection, even though he served in the aviation. We connected to the flight directors and provided communication with the planes. Beauty was service.
  2. Catfish
    Catfish 3 October 2020 06: 01 New
    11
    The floating T-37 was going to be used as a scout, but I didn't notice the antennas in any photo, and who needs a scout without communication. Anyone have any information on this?
    Thanks to the author, I read it with interest, and ordering a super-heavy monster to Vickers is generally a song of songs. As far as our leadership of that time did not represent the essence of mobile tank warfare. And Tukhachevsky is clearly not Guderian.
    1. Pessimist22
      Pessimist22 3 October 2020 06: 13 New
      13
      I think that even the BT 5, BT 7 and T26 tanks could be used more rationally, it would be at each radio station.
      1. Graz
        Graz 3 October 2020 06: 28 New
        14
        the concept was still not thought out, unlike the Germans, who had a bunch of specialized vehicles in the tank forces, these are self-propelled guns, and armored personnel carriers with grenadiers, and a good number of tankers, and armored vehicles with an anti-aircraft component, all sorts of tractors and, more importantly, repair brigades with everything necessary on wheels.
        but for some reason we drove only tanks in 95%
        1. Eug
          Eug 3 October 2020 07: 33 New
          +2
          As for me, you are absolutely right - it is precisely complex mechanization that is needed, and not "flux" in the form of tank formations with only tanks in the state ..
        2. Alf
          Alf 3 October 2020 19: 16 New
          +6
          Quote: Graz
          and armored personnel carriers with grenadiers, and a good number of tankers, and armored vehicles with an anti-aircraft component, all sorts of tractors and, more importantly, repair teams with everything necessary on wheels.

          The fact is that all wheeled army equipment, especially those working together with tanks, must have an all-wheel drive chassis, and with this it was not so hot in the USSR. The first more or less workable samples that the industry was able to master appeared only by the age of 39-40. For the sake of interest, ask how many prototypes were designed in the USSR, but the industry did not stupidly pull.
          1. strannik1985
            strannik1985 5 October 2020 11: 22 New
            +2
            The fact is that all wheeled army equipment, especially those working together with tanks, must have an all-wheel drive chassis.

            No one had such a thing, even the Germans were able to equip some of the combat units, as well as control and repair, the supply service is completely on mobilized trucks. 6x4.
        3. Selevc
          Selevc 4 October 2020 07: 41 New
          +1
          [quote] The concept was still not thought out, unlike the Germans, who had a bunch of specialized vehicles in the tank forces, these are self-propelled guns, and armored personnel carriers with grenadiers, and a good number of tankers, and armored vehicles with an anti-aircraft component, all sorts of tractors [quote]
          People are you serious ??? Have you ever seen a map of the USSR? What refuellers are hundreds of kilometers to the nearest gas station ??? What are the rembrigades in the taiga and tundra conditions ??? What is all you need ???

          In the USSR, when designing armored vehicles, engineers were very far-sighted and reasonably guided by the following principles:
          1) The design is as simple as possible in maintenance and repair (and everything that is possible is repaired by the crew itself)
          2) A tank or an armored car should be easy to transport and easily thrown over huge distances and, if necessary, then make long-distance throws on its own. It was not at all just that Koshkin drove a tank from Kharkov to Moscow !!!
          3) Armored vehicles must have good heat and frost resistance, and the tank must be as maneuverable as possible and have good maneuverability.
          This was all very important for the USSR with its dirt roads, muddy roads, and severe frosts.
          And it is not so obvious and relevant by the standards of Europe - for the same Germany, the tank building of which was never in the favorites and finally lagged behind the USSR by the end of the 30s !!!
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 5 October 2020 09: 42 New
            +4
            Quote: Selevc
            People are you serious ??? Have you ever seen a map of the USSR? What refuellers are hundreds of kilometers to the nearest gas station ???

            The usual ones are oil and fuel tankers. Without which the same T-34 will cover 185 km on fuel from its tanks - and stand up. And no simple design, ease of transportation and maneuverability they will not help here - the tank does not move without fuel.
            In the USSR, the supply of tankers before the war was as follows:
            Peacetime Need:
            Gas tank trucks - 19683

            The need for war:
            Gas tank trucks - 60914

            Availability on 15.06.41/XNUMX/XNUMX:
            Gas tank trucks - 11252

            Will receive machines for mobilization from the bunk. farms:
            Gas tanks - no

            Peacetime Lack:
            Gas tank trucks - 8431

            Wartime incomplete:
            Gas tank trucks - 49662
            © "Fedorenko Report"
            From such garbage, little ones ... ©
            In 1940, at a meeting in December, it came to proposals to take fuel in barrels directly onto the armor - but in practice there were no barrels either. And the crews had to throw absolutely serviceable tanks into the war only because there was no fuel.
            Quote: Selevc
            What are the rembrigades in the taiga and tundra conditions ???

            Ordinary - from the composition of the repair units of divisions and corps. The very ones that, with the standard equipment of the MK, had to either make minor repairs (inaccessible to the crew) on the spot, or pull off the qualitatively disabled equipment for SPAM by the Rembatov Voroshilovites.
            1. hohol95
              hohol95 5 October 2020 10: 03 New
              +1
              Without which the same T-34 will cover 185 km on fuel from its tanks - and stand up.

              185 km without external tanks?
              And the Germans tried to increase the range of their tanks. Only they attached to the body a certain amount of ordinary 20 liter canisters.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 5 October 2020 10: 51 New
                +1
                Quote: hohol95
                185 km without external tanks?

                Yes. The cruising range of serial T-34s produced in the spring of 1941 is 165-185 km.
                1. hohol95
                  hohol95 5 October 2020 11: 09 New
                  +2
                  So the "groove three G" tested in 1942 showed:
                  The range of the German tank was not impressed either: on the highway it was 150 kilometers, on the dirt road - 115, and on the virgin soil - 95 km. The difference with the declared characteristics turned out to be insignificant: according to German data, the cruising range on the highway was 165 kilometers, and on the dirt road - 95 kilometers.
                  1. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA 5 October 2020 11: 22 New
                    +2
                    Quote: hohol95
                    So the "groove three G" tested in 1942 showed:

                    Exactly. Diesel tank has a long rangethey said ... smile
                    And I still don't mention such a wonderful characteristic of the T-34 as "oil power reserve".
                    1. hohol95
                      hohol95 5 October 2020 12: 23 New
                      +3
                      Butter oil, but did the Germans carry cans of fuel with them? We drove. Was the fuel for tanks in barrels dropped from planes? Dumped.
                      The British even came up with the idea of ​​attaching tanks with the same fuel to tanks.
                      So what?
                      All the same, either specialized tankers or simple trucks were required to transport fuel, oils and water in barrels or cans!
                      All the same, without such vehicles, the tank will not go further than the inherent characteristics!
                      1. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA 5 October 2020 13: 41 New
                        +1
                        Quote: hohol95
                        So what?
                        All the same, either specialized tankers or simple trucks were required to transport fuel, oils and water in barrels or cans!
                        All the same, without such vehicles, the tank will not go further than the inherent characteristics!

                        This is what I wrote about - tank does not move without fuel.
                        So I started to make tanks - be so kind as to provide them with either a tanker, or at least a truck and barrels for fuel (and also a hand pump). Otherwise you will get "disposable BTV".
                      2. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 6 October 2020 17: 25 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        Otherwise you will get "disposable BTV".

                        it was so ... request except for tanks (better than lightly armored, you need armored personnel carriers for the delivery of shells, removal of the wounded, etc., as well as command tanks or armored personnel carriers, both for tankers and for art, air, etc. ... and a lot of things are needed , for the effective use of tanks, but they did not think about it - the superiors lacked the horizons (primary education) ... request
                      3. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA 7 October 2020 13: 49 New
                        +1
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        except for tanks (it is better to lightly armored vehicles need armored personnel carriers for the delivery of shells, removal of the wounded, etc.,

                        With the APC in the pre-war USSR, everything is bad. The reason is simple - there is no compact 120-140 hp engine. There is either a ZIS-ovsky with its 73 hp, or a GAZ-11 with its 85 hp. to the maximum.
                        And then there are only tank vehicles: a twin GAZ-202 or a "cut-off" V-2.
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        as well as command tanks or armored personnel carriers, both for tankers and for art

                        For leading corps - there is no connection. Tank radios were unsuitable for adjusting fire.
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        but they did not think about it - the authorities lacked the horizons (primary education) ...

                        We thought. And they demanded - more than once. But for all the demands "give the army an armored personnel carrier" the industry rolled out such that the army did not suit in any way. As a result, according to the plan, the T-26 was to be converted into an armored personnel carrier. But they didn't.
                      4. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 7 October 2020 15: 52 New
                        0
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        The reason is simple - there is no compact engine for 120-140 hp.

                        I agree, but this is only 1 of the reasons - another and more important - lack of understanding of the importance!
                        Just a little fantasy - if they made a T-20 (Komsomolets) on an engine from a ZIS-5 (73) hp, then it would be possible to make an armored car for 5t a la Scout, but on a tracked (ala T-20) or half-track ( a la M3 or Ba-6s), no, we riveted 4 thousand Ba-6/10 and 7 T-000 ... and 20 10t p / g BRT would completely cover the needs of the Red Army in tractors for divisional and anti-aircraft guns for mech troops, as well as armored personnel carriers! The idea of ​​having mechtyagu art throughout the Red Army was a utopia ...

                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        But for all the demands "give the army an armored personnel carrier" the industry rolled out such that the army did not suit in any way.

                        and who created such a system - that the manufacturer is always right? request
      2. strannik1985
        strannik1985 5 October 2020 11: 29 New
        +1
        In the USSR, the supply of tankers before the war was as follows

        Perhaps it would be more correct to indicate "the supply of petrol tanks from February to June 1941". These figures are the product of the idea of ​​the military, in particular Zhukov, about the formation of the 21st additional mechanized corps. Naturally, the industry could not satisfy such appetites, no one would have coped here, neither the Germans nor the Americans.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 5 October 2020 12: 37 New
          +1
          Quote: strannik1985
          Perhaps it would be more correct to indicate "the supply of petrol tanks from February to June 1941". These figures are the product of the idea of ​​the military, in particular Zhukov, about the formation of the 21st additional mechanized corps.

          So the amount does not change due to a change in the places. smile
          In the sense that even without the formation of the 29th MK, the entire pre-war armada of LT needed all the same feed and water - even in divisions, even in brigades, even in separate battalions. And this had to be done, having in the initial gas-oil refuelers, produced in small quantities (even factories that made fire tankers were involved in their production) and costing like a BT tank.
          It was bad in the USSR with industry. What about tanks - the first truck cranes began to be mass-produced only since 1940. ICHH, according to the state they were in MK, but in fact there were dashes in the columns of availability.
          1. strannik1985
            strannik1985 5 October 2020 13: 13 New
            +1
            It was bad in the USSR with industry.

            It would be much easier to supply the MK to supply, at the rate of 343 petrol tankers per hull - 343x9 = 3 tanks / plus VMZ / plus 087-liter iron barrels and cans (20 units for gasoline).
            For the "rest" mobilization is needed, but everyone had such an alignment, the Germans also mobilized, back in 1939.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 5 October 2020 13: 26 New
              +1
              Quote: strannik1985
              It would be much easier to supply the MK to supply, at the rate of 343 petrol tankers per hull - 343x9 = 3 tanks / plus VMZ / plus 087-liter iron barrels and cans (20 units for gasoline).

              Well, that's another plus of collecting all the tanks in the mechanized corps. smile
              Moreover, 29 MK is a total of 9947 tankers. And the army men demand 19683 in peacetime and as much as 60914 in war.
              Quote: strannik1985
              For the "rest" mobilization is needed, but everyone had such an alignment, the Germans also mobilized, back in 1939.

              There is one problem with mobilization ...
              Will receive machines for mobilization from the bunk. farms:
              Gas tanks - no
              1. strannik1985
                strannik1985 5 October 2020 14: 06 New
                +1
                Well, that's another plus of collecting all the tanks in the mechanized corps.

                So what are we talking about, before discussing the industry it is worth disassembling the wish of the military, even the rich Germans, after the occupation of Austria - Czechoslovakia - Poland - France against the USSR, they collected 10 AK (mot) - each state ~ 6700 cars.
                There is one problem with mobilization ...

                In 1 KMK by 22.03.1945, there were 44 tank trucks in the state, 33 on the face, while the weight of one refueling was 256,3 tons. Carried in barrels.
  3. Jager
    Jager 4 October 2020 14: 32 New
    +1
    On the other hand, the Germans were so carried away by the design of various kinds of equipment that the same Guderian wrote - there is no standardization even for tanks.
    1. DrEng527
      DrEng527 6 October 2020 17: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: Jager
      there is no standardization even for tanks.

      ours are better? count on 41g - for the Germans T1, T2, T3, T4 and 2 Prague = 6, for us: T-37/38, BT-2/5/7 / 7M + T-26 + T-28 + T-35 + T-34 and KV-1/2 = 12 ... request
      1. Single-n
        Single-n 9 October 2020 16: 09 New
        0
        If you think that the t3 way. 1937 and T3 when 42 "cars of the same type" I will definitely disappoint you. Between bt2 and bt 7 differences are probably even less
        1. DrEng527
          DrEng527 10 October 2020 13: 52 New
          0
          Quote: Single-n
          If you think that the t3 way. 1937 and T3 when 42 "machines of the same type"

          1) I believe that it is necessary to use uniform criteria for everyone - otherwise it is not an analysis, but demagogy from propaganda ...
          2) just watch the modifications of the T-26 if it's boring hi
  • Vladimir Demyanov
    Vladimir Demyanov 3 October 2020 06: 43 New
    +4
    You are probably right: after all, German motorcycles did not have armor at all and were quite a formidable weapon. These tanks could work against infantry and cavalry. With a lack of vehicles in the Red Army at the beginning of the Second World War, they could transport the infantry and support them with fire, like an ersatz BMP.
    1. Saxahorse
      Saxahorse 3 October 2020 19: 32 New
      +4
      Quote: Vladimir Demyanov
      You are probably right: after all, German motorcycles had no armor at all and were quite a formidable weapon.

      German motorcycles are not weapons at all, but just a means of transportation. Their appearance was a consequence of the popularity of sidecar motorcycles among German peasants. Because it's cheap. With the beginning of the war, of course, they were all mobilized together with the owners. For Russia, with its winters, the American approach, with a small jeep, is wiser.
  • Aviator_
    Aviator_ 3 October 2020 20: 57 New
    +2
    would be at every radio station.

    They still had to be developed, because they were not at all. Nowhere.
  • lelik613
    lelik613 3 October 2020 06: 44 New
    +9
    Then the intelligence concept was far from Major Vortex with a transmitter. Here rather about an armored cavalryman on an iron horse. Something close - the forward patrol of the Germans on a motorcycle with a sidecar and a machine gun.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 3 October 2020 06: 53 New
      +8
      For the Germans, as a rule, motorcyclists did not act alone, and all of their reconnaissance armored vehicles had radio stations.

      1. Serg koma
        Serg koma 3 October 2020 21: 29 New
        11
        Go to the beginning of the article and read:
        In the 20-30s of the last century, Soviet engineers came to build armored vehicles virtually from scratch. ....

        It was in such a situation that Soviet Russia had to prove its right to life by creating powerful tank troops. And this should be taken into account by numerous critics of the development models of Soviet tank building.

        1922 the formal end of the civil war, the country is in ruin ... And "In November 1929, the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the National Economy (VSNKh) set the industry the task of producing 1934 tanks and tankettes by the end of 5611." - this is already a feat !!!
        Do not forget, there was NO auto-building, aircraft-building in the country, and what is there about "high", there was no watch production, which are necessary for any army, in all branches of the military.
        And now, sitting on the couch, teaching grandfathers and great-grandfathers, knowing the history, having practically (due to the Internet) knowledge about everything - probably overly arrogant.
        Didn't the French and British, possessing a huge production and design base, having the richest experience in tank building and using tank units (in comparison with us) on the battlefield, did not make a lot of mistakes, both theoretical and practical in the use of tanks and tank building? Were your vaunted Germans also without mistakes?
        About personnel NEW for the country arms of the troops - a separate song ...
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 4 October 2020 15: 50 New
          +2
          I just don't understand one thing, why you need to distort and misinterpret other people's posts. Where do I have a word of praise for the "vaunted Germans"? As for the British and French, the British and the end of the war could not really comprehend the correct use of tanks, although they themselves "invented" this combat vehicle, there is nothing to say about the French.

          And now, sitting on the couch, teaching grandfathers and great-grandfathers, knowing the history, having practically (due to the Internet) knowledge about everything - probably overly arrogant.


          Where did you find any arrogant statements from me? Again, you pass off your own inventions as someone else's words. And, by the way, I began to study history at a time when there was no Internet at all, and the available processor occupied the entire basement of the University.

          So, your entire pathetic speech flew past the target. Into milk. "As you fight, you shoot." (C)

          And I will also note. Everyone knows the "blitzkrieg formula" and its successful application by the Germans, so our victory over an intelligent and strong enemy is even more magnificent, and you should not belittle it.

          PS, Do the surnames Anatra and Sikorsky tell you anything about the aviation of tsarist Russia?
          1. Serg koma
            Serg koma 4 October 2020 21: 32 New
            +4
            The post is not directed to you personally. Sorry if it turned out ambiguous in relation to you.hi
            Quote: Sea Cat
            PS, Regarding the aviation of tsarist Russia -
            Do you mean "Aeronautical Department of Russo-Baltic Carriage Works" and Odessa? How many airplanes were Anatra and I. Muromets in RI?
            And about the automotive industry - Russo-Balt (about 500 cars in 7 years), the plant (???)))) Puzyreva (38 cars in three years). , and about the tank building - N. Lebedenko, A. Porokhovshchikov and Usё. Armored cars crying .....
            After all, the conversation is about industry, and not about "knee-length production" from imported components.

            Quote: Sea Cat
            the British and the end of the war could not really comprehend the correct use of tanks
            good what is only Dieppe + Churchill with 57-mm.
        2. DrEng527
          DrEng527 6 October 2020 17: 36 New
          -4
          Quote: Serg Koma
          - this is already a feat !!!

          stupidity and a waste of resources ... request
          Quote: Serg Koma
          THERE WAS NO auto-building, aircraft-building,

          I wonder what the planes of Grigorovich and Sikovsky were built on in WW1? laughing
          Let me remind you that ZIL was founded under the tsar ... hi and in Riga they made cars even before WW1 ...
          Quote: Serg Koma
          About personnel NEW for the country arms of the troops - a separate song ...

          read how armored cars were used in WW1 in RIA - maybe it was not necessary to shoot or expel the officers? repeat
          1. Serg koma
            Serg koma 7 October 2020 07: 33 New
            +2
            Quote: DrEng527
            stupidity and a waste of resources ...
            ??
            Over 19 years (after the formal end of the Civil War) have the T-34 in service; KV-1; Yak-1; Pe-8; BA-10 and BA-11, PMZ A-750 and M-72; etc. On November 14, 1939, the USSR produced the millionth car. Since 1939, the aviation industry has been equipped with only domestically produced watches .... You call this EVERYTHING "stupidity"?
            Quote: DrEng527
            and on what were the planes of Grigorovich and Sikovsky built in WW1?

            Quote: Serg Koma
            How many airplanes were Anatra and I. Muromets in RI?

            Quote: DrEng527
            they made cars in Riga before WW1.

            Quote: Serg Koma
            about the automotive industry - Russo-Balt (about 500 cars in 7 years),

            Back in our day, to our technology, to our manufacturing and design capabilities. For example, the United States, as one of the most developed countries in the field of weapons.
            In 1981, the US Air Force formulated requirements for a new jet fighter
            In July 1986, the start of the competition was announced
            By 1990 a prototype of the aircraft was built
            Pre-production car took off on September 7, 1997
            Serial production of the aircraft began in 2001.
            On January 14, 2003, the first production F-22 entered the army.
            Total: 22 years from the formulated requirements, before entering service.

            Quote: DrEng527
            maybe it was not necessary to shoot or expel the officers?

            By the summer-autumn of 1919, thanks to the professional efforts of the 703 "General Staff" (meaning graduates of the Nikolaev Academy of the General Staff), not only was the most powerful army in the vastness of the former empire (the Red Army) created, but also the troops of the main political opponents of the Bolsheviks were crushingly defeated - Kolchak's Russian Army and Denikin's AFYUR. - from "Graduates of the Nikolaev Academy of the General Staff in service in the Red Army" Kaminsky V.V.
            1. Serg koma
              Serg koma 7 October 2020 07: 46 New
              +2
              One diesel V-2 is worth it !!!
              1. DrEng527
                DrEng527 7 October 2020 12: 57 New
                0
                Quote: Serg Koma
                One diesel V-2 is worth it !!!

                which cost 5 times more than the M-17, ate oil and had a resource of 50 hours? request
              2. DrEng527
                DrEng527 7 October 2020 13: 03 New
                0
                Quote: Serg Koma
                One diesel V-2 is worth it !!!

                a mediocre waste of resources - M17 was 5 times cheaper ...
            2. DrEng527
              DrEng527 7 October 2020 13: 01 New
              -1
              Quote: Serg Koma
              You call this EVERYTHING "stupidity"?

              a lot of the above - yes, but actually I spoke about something else - see what I have quoted and written above from you .. hi
              Quote: Serg Koma
              Total: 22 years from the formulated requirements, before entering service.

              So what? there is an elder in the garden, and in Kuevo there is an uncle ... bully
              Quote: Serg Koma
              summer-autumn 1919

              after the operation Spring in 1930, only a few graduates of the General Staff of the RIA remained in the Red Army - they were repaid by the SV for their diligence ... request as a result, the defeat of 41g ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Selevc
        Selevc 4 October 2020 07: 53 New
        +1
        For the Germans, as a rule, motorcyclists did not act alone, and all of their reconnaissance armored vehicles had radio stations.

        You are showing clearly ostentatious advertising photos of the times of Goebbels propaganda !!! So in the USSR there was also a similar advertisement !!!

        I saw archival photos of the German occupation of Kharkov - you will not believe it mainly on horse carts !!! And only at the head of the advancing units were armored cars and motorcyclists !!!
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 4 October 2020 16: 02 New
          +2
          I saw archival photos of the German occupation of Kharkov - you will not believe it mainly on horse carts !!! And only at the head of the advancing units were armored vehicles

          And it would be strange if the opposite was true. laughing
          Our rear services were also not rolled out on "Studers" with "Fords".
          As for the photographs, I placed those that turned up under the arm, and only Goebbels, or someone else had a hand in them, this is not known to me or to you.





          Isn't it too much for one Goeckbels, and if you sit longer and search?
          1. Selevc
            Selevc 4 October 2020 17: 51 New
            +1
            Isn't it too much for one Goeckbels, and if you sit longer and search?
            you'd better take an interest in the photos of the Red Army from the pre-war maneuvers - there are many armored cars and cars !!! Here are just a lot of this technique died in the boilers of the 41st !!! And at the time of the outbreak of the war, the Red Army, especially in the western directions, was as approximately motorized as the Wehrmacht !!!
            1. Catfish
              Catfish 4 October 2020 18: 22 New
              +3
              I was interested in all this and more than once. But, specifically here, we mean radio-equipped cars, and not the whole mass of bulletproof iron. In addition, without a competent doctrine of the use of tanks, their number is not yet what it is customary to call tank troops. Which, in general, the Second World War and proved.
            2. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 5 October 2020 09: 47 New
              +1
              Quote: Selevc
              you'd better take an interest in the photos of the Red Army from the pre-war maneuvers - there are many armored cars and cars !!!

              It is better not to look at photographs, but documents. And in them the picture of the radio coverage of the intelligence units of the same MC is by no means rosy.
              ... to conduct reconnaissance at the disposal of the mechanized corps commander, there was only a separate reconnaissance battalion as part of a motorized rifle company on motorcycles, a company of armored vehicles and a company of small amphibious tanks, a total of 17 armored vehicles and small tanks and about fifty motorcycles. To put it mildly, sparsely on a semicircle with a radius of one hundred kilometers. In addition, there are only ten radio stations in the reconnaissance battalion - three 5-AK stations in the battalion's communications platoon, 2 71-TK stations on armored vehicles, and 5 radio stations on the "floaters". Whatever one may say, and more than five reconnaissance patrols cannot be allocated in any way. Moreover, it is necessary to take into account that the communication range of radio stations was up to 50 km in telegraph mode in the parking lot, while on the move the communication range dropped to 30 km in telegraph mode and 15 km in telephone mode (remember about communication support "with the application of incredible efforts?), Then From the far end of the 100-kilometer circle, the reconnaissance battalion radio stations (even those in the most perfect condition and tuned by outstanding masters of their craft) simply did not have a chance to “shout” to the main forces of the mechanized corps.
              The motorcycle regiment could not help in this regard either - on the standard 738 motorcycles the regiment had only 5 5-AK radio stations (two stations in the regiment's control and one in each of the three motorcycle battalions) with the same communication range (50 km by telegraph from the parking lot ).
              Therefore, even in the best case - the advance dispatch of reconnaissance detachments and patrols within a radius of 100 km - patrols that found the enemy on the border of a 100-km observation radius had to spend a considerable part of the precious time reserve on transferring the collected information to the mechanized corps headquarters. Accordingly, the chances of the mechanized corps to react in a timely manner to the countermeasures taken by the enemy became ghostly.
              © Ulanov / Shein
              1. DrEng527
                DrEng527 6 October 2020 17: 38 New
                +1
                Quote: Alexey RA
                And in them the picture of the radio coverage of intelligence units of the same MK is by no means rosy.

                at the same time, radio factories were not part of the defense industry and were financed on a leftover basis ... request
        2. Serg koma
          Serg koma 7 October 2020 09: 41 New
          +1
          Quote: Selevc
          You are showing clearly showy advertising photos
          laughing

          And the Krauts are not always and not everywhere with radio stations wassat
  • kalibr
    kalibr 3 October 2020 06: 55 New
    +5
    It was planned to install a hand-held antenna. There is even a photo of this thing with her. But not at hand. At one time we made a conversion to the T-37 model - just the antenna on the racks.
    1. BAI
      BAI 3 October 2020 22: 25 New
      +4
      It was planned to install a hand-held antenna. There is even a photo of this thing with her.

      1. kalibr
        kalibr 4 October 2020 06: 59 New
        +1
        Yes exactly. Thanks!
  • The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 3 October 2020 06: 55 New
    +4
    If I am not mistaken, at the time of the creation of the T 37, a tank radio station of acceptable dimensions had not yet been created. Later, antennas flashed on the T 38.
    Well, and, again, I think, "there was no command" - after all, the infantry reconnaissance then had to secretly get to the enemy, find out everything and return to report!)))
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 07: 09 New
      11
      Inertia of thinking + industrial poverty!
      Considering that at the initial stage of the Great Patriotic War, it was assumed that the commanders of the tank platoon would lead them with signal flags!
      Likewise, a large number of line tanks without a walkie-talkie! How many radios the factories received, they installed everything! The rest drove without them, with increased ammunition.
      1. da Vinci
        da Vinci 3 October 2020 12: 17 New
        +3
        Considering that the concept of the battle provided for the use of individual cells by the fighter, and not the trenches (a fighter of the Red Army alone did not become a penetrating force), apparently the tank was also considered as an indestructible striking fist - you are fighting: look for, see the enemy - crush. The interaction between the fighter (s) or the tank (s) was not assigned the main role. This is probably why at the beginning of the war, without normal interaction even between squads and platoons (not to mention regiments and armies), a very uncoordinated organization of defense or offensive took place. what
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 5 October 2020 09: 49 New
          +2
          Quote: da Vinci
          Considering that the concept of the battle provided for the use of individual cells by the fighter, and not the trench

          In fact, according to the instruction, individual cells in the second stage of the field defense equipment were to be connected by a trench. But this stage in 1941 usually did not reach.
      2. Doliva63
        Doliva63 3 October 2020 20: 07 New
        +4
        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Inertia of thinking + industrial poverty!
        Considering that at the initial stage of the Great Patriotic War, it was assumed that the commanders of the tank platoon would lead them with signal flags!
        Likewise, a large number of line tanks without a walkie-talkie! How many radios the factories received, they installed everything! The rest drove without them, with increased ammunition.

        This is how the commanders of tank platoons are still taught to operate the flags, although no one canceled the p / s.
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 20: 34 New
          +1
          Quote: Doliva63
          This is how the commanders of tank platoons are still taught to operate the flags, although no one canceled the p / s.

          It's one thing when there is a need for radio silence and in marching formation. Other in battle.
          1. Doliva63
            Doliva63 4 October 2020 19: 49 New
            +2
            Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Quote: Doliva63
            This is how the commanders of tank platoons are still taught to operate the flags, although no one canceled the p / s.

            It's one thing when there is a need for radio silence and in marching formation. Other in battle.

            Well, damn it, it's unrealistic to control flags in battle - not so much because it's just a stray bullet / splinter, but because the tanks are deployed in a "line" and no one will see any flags. I think so with my soaked brains: in the absence of radio control, the task is set for the crews in advance, then - everyone, as best he can, works autonomously until the tanks are in visual visibility of each other - then it is possible with flags, of course. But this is nonsense. "I don't see - I'm not going, I don't hear - I'm not going."
            1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
              Kote Pan Kokhanka 4 October 2020 20: 12 New
              +1
              I'm about the same!
              Regards, Vlad!
              1. Doliva63
                Doliva63 4 October 2020 20: 15 New
                +2
                Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
                I'm about the same!
                Regards, Vlad!

                drinks
      3. Selevc
        Selevc 4 October 2020 08: 06 New
        +2
        Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
        Inertia of thinking + industrial poverty!
        Considering that at the initial stage of the Great Patriotic War, it was assumed that the commanders of the tank platoon would lead them with signal flags!

        Complete lies !!! The flag signaling system was initially taken as a temporary measure - since the new T-34 and KV tanks simply did not have time to develop and install radio stations before the war !!! And during the war they were quickly developed and installed !!!

        But this was all new for the Red Army, if in the Wehrmacht radio support was a matter long mastered and tested, then we mastered it on the fly, at a frantic pace and in war conditions !!!
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 4 October 2020 13: 01 New
          +2
          Where do I write about T-34 or KV-1? Linear (without radios) released T-26, BT-5, BT-7 and PT babies.
          During the war, there was a lot of that (serial tanks were sometimes not equipped with walkie-talkies, 76,2 mm guns were installed 45 mm, gasoline engines instead of V-2 diesels do not count.
          1. Selevc
            Selevc 4 October 2020 16: 52 New
            0
            Where do I write about T-34 or KV-1? Linear (without radios) released T-26, BT-5, BT-7 and PT babies.
            In the conditions of war, much that was
            Stop writing nonsense !!! People who point to the flag signaling as a sign of a certain backwardness of the USSR do not even understand what they are writing about !!! Flag and light alarms were used by all armies during World War II - both Russians and Germans and Japanese and Anglo-Americans !!! With the help of flags or light signals, a column of tanks was controlled in the front line when it was necessary to carry out strict radio silence on the air !!!
            (serial tanks were sometimes not equipped with radios,
            sorry, but in the first place with regard to the USSR, the tank units on the western front by the beginning of the war were mainly equipped with radio stations, but not every tank is possibly 1 per unit. That's what then, when retreating in the general chaos, often large units of the Red Army were left without communication, yes.

            Throughout the war, the USSR kept large motorized rifle units in the Transcaucasus and in Central Asia and the Far East. That's where I think that they sent all the outdated equipment and perhaps without radio communication !!! Therefore, if you say that some of the serial tanks did not have radio communication - so specify where these tanks were and how they fought ??? !!!
            1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
              Kote Pan Kokhanka 4 October 2020 17: 24 New
              +2
              Read Katerina, Sick or Shpakovsky at last.
              Pulling quotes from posts of three or four comments, you are corny confused!
              I started to write about floating light pre-war tanks !!! The percentage of radium of them hint to you !!!
              On light BT and T-26 with walkie-talkies in the army there were less than a third! Basically, the latest modifications of BT-5 and BT-7. There were three-quarters of the T-26 linemen!
              If you want "oil" then catch - the medium T-28 and heavy T-35 were completely radio-equipped!
              KV and "34" also relied on a walkie-talkie. For commanders with a transceiver, for linear ones with a receiver. Only at the Nizhny Tagil plant at the beginning of 42, the radios received less than two hundred cars!
              The checkbox system, I criticize as being 41 years old. I did not dispute its auxiliary and additional meaning!

              About the fact that Turkalo went to the front! There are photographs of machine-gun BT-2 in battle formations of 42 and 43 years. Why pound water in a mortar, google how many KV and T-70 were near Prokhorovka.
              1. Selevc
                Selevc 4 October 2020 17: 48 New
                -1
                The checkbox system, I criticize as being 41 years old. I did not dispute its auxiliary and additional meaning!
                it didn’t become obsolete either in the 41st year or in the 45th - the flag control system was used by all the belligerent armies throughout the war !!! And the movement of military equipment in the frontline zone is an auxiliary meaning ???

                In fact, it was precisely these maneuvers that were practiced primarily by motorized rifle units in the USSR in the pre-war years !!! And so there are a lot of photos and videos of these actions. And this has nothing at all to do with the backwardness or leadership of the USSR in the development and use of tanks !!!
                1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                  Kote Pan Kokhanka 4 October 2020 19: 16 New
                  +1
                  Basically, I'm talking about walkie-talkies!
                2. The leader of the Redskins
                  The leader of the Redskins 4 October 2020 21: 08 New
                  0
                  Write nonsense. I am a tanker in the past. Have you ever seen a column of tanks on the march? There is so much dust that it's not like a flag - you can't always see the car in front! By the way, my friend flew into the front one.
                  And during the war, for stealth, if the radio station could not be used AT ALL, then they stopped the convoy and shouted from car to car "commanders of cars to ..."!
                  The flags were more for exercises. Although in the charter for 1937, I saw this semaphore alphabet.
      4. Serg koma
        Serg koma 7 October 2020 08: 17 New
        +1
        Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
        How many radios the factories received, they installed everything!
        good

        The head of the Communications Directorate of the USSR Armed Forces, Major General Nikolai Ivanovich Gapich, seven months before the outbreak of the war, prepared the Report “On the State of the Communications Service of the Red Army,” which lay on the table of Commissar of Defense Semen Konstantinovich Timoshenko. In particular, it stated:
        “Despite the annual an increase in the number of communications equipment supplied to the troops, the percentage of provision of communications equipment not only does not increase, but, on the contrary, decreases due to the fact that the increase in the supply of products is not proportional to the increase in the size of the army. The large shortage of communications equipment for the deployment of new military units does not allow creating the necessary mobilization reserves for the first period of the war. There are no carryover reserves either in the center or in the districts. All property received from industry, immediately, "from the wheels" is sent to the troops. If the supply of communications by the industry remains at the same level and there will be no loss in the property of communications, then it will take more than 5 years for a number of nomenclatures to meet the full needs of NGOs without creating mobilization reserves. ”
        https://topwar.ru/152458-proizvodstvo-otechestvennyh-sredstv-voennoj-svjazi-v-1940-1945-godah-chast-1.html
    2. Undecim
      Undecim 4 October 2020 20: 57 New
      +4

      The first Soviet tank radio station - 71-TK, 1933. Installed on the entire armored vehicle until 1941. It weighs about 60 kg. Communication in telephony mode - up to 40 km. After every 30 minutes, the transmitter must be turned off for 20-30 minutes, otherwise it will fail from overheating.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 4 October 2020 21: 06 New
        +1

        Similar German Fusprech.f for tanks. 280 x 200 x 170 mm. Weight - 12,5 kg.
        1. Beringovsky
          Beringovsky 9 October 2020 18: 35 New
          0
          Add.
          71-TC, 1933. Installed Until 1941 year
          Fusprech.f - Telefunken production. Start of release the end of the year 1940
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 9 October 2020 18: 45 New
            0
            Model 71-TK-3 of 1940 is practically no different from the model of 1933.
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 5 October 2020 09: 53 New
        +1
        Quote: Undecim
        The first Soviet tank radio station - 71-TK, 1933. Installed on the entire armored vehicle until 1941. It weighs about 60 kg. Communication in telephony mode - up to 40 km.

        In the parking lot. On the move, the communication range dropped to 30 km in telegraph mode and 15 km in telephone mode (based on test results in 1940).
  • Kot_Kuzya
    Kot_Kuzya 3 October 2020 09: 29 New
    +7
    Quote: Sea Cat
    The floating T-37 was going to be used as a scout, but I didn't notice the antennas in any photo, and who needs a scout without communication. Anyone have any information on this?

    It's just that in the USSR of the 30s, with its industry and science, there were no radio transceivers that could fit into the dimensions of a tank interior, especially since they were then tube ones. It was not for nothing that even the fighters did not have radio transceivers, and for the first half of the year, before the arrival of Lend-Lease stations and technologies, Soviet pilots fought without radio communications, according to the principle "do as I do". So there is no need to blame ancestors for stupidity from the height of the 21st century. The scouts were supposed to scout, return and report. There were simply no radio stations for them.
    1. ccsr
      ccsr 3 October 2020 10: 34 New
      +9
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      It was not for nothing that even the fighters did not have radio transceivers, and for the first half of the year, before the arrival of Lend-Lease stations and technologies, Soviet pilots fought without radio communications, according to the principle "do as I do".

      I agree with your assessment of the article and the state of radio communications in the armed forces, but I will add on my own that aviation radio stations themselves were already developed in our country in the thirties, but they were cumbersome and not reliable. Moreover, their release was insufficient, although, for example, they were already on the TB-3 bombers:
      Radio communication equipment included:
      powerful short-wave transmitting telegraph-telephone radio station of the "11-SK" type for long distance communication. The 70 kg unit is located in a common cabin in the front left corner. The station is powered by a dynamo with a windmill located on the fuselage section F-3.
      receiving radio station for communication with radio beacons. Receiver type "13-PS." Installed in a common cabin.
      short-wave transmitting and receiving radio station "14-SK", for aircraft communication with each other. Located in the navigator's cockpit on the left side, it is powered by a dynamo with a windmill in front left on the center section of the Ts-2 between the fuselage and the 2nd engine.
      The command vehicles could be equipped with an additional "V.L-5" radio receiver

      As far as I understand, our fighter pilots simply did not know how to use such equipment, which required a trained radio operator, which is why the Air Force command believed that fighters did not really need radio stations. Of course, we paid with a lot of blood for these mistakes, but only people illiterate in military affairs can hang dogs on Stalin for military mistakes.
      1. Saxahorse
        Saxahorse 3 October 2020 19: 37 New
        +2
        Quote: ccsr
        our fighter pilots simply did not know how to use such equipment, for which a trained radio operator was required,

        A dedicated radio operator was required due to the poor quality of the components of these radio stations, which were not capable of stably keeping characteristics during operation. In fact, the frequency was constantly floating and it was required to adjust the knobs to the desired channel all the time. As far as I remember, the main difference between fighter radio stations and bomber ones was the appearance of a separate module, which supposedly automatically kept the desired frequency. At first it didn't work out very well, but gradually we learned to do it right.
      2. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 3 October 2020 21: 00 New
        +3
        Those radio stations required a separate crew member - a radio operator. This was on bombers, by the end of the 30s there was not even a talk about fighters, about tanks - even more so. There was nothing trite to put on.
      3. Vladimir Demyanov
        Vladimir Demyanov 7 October 2020 15: 13 New
        0
        The fighters (pilots) even had a punishment: to fly with a walkie-talkie. It's up to Spain. Usually the commander gave the order to install the violator of flight discipline on the aircraft. The radio beacon was generally considered an inability to fly on the map. Then we understood what it would lead to when we faced the enemy. Plus, there is still an insufficient number of radios at the initial stage.
    2. Alf
      Alf 3 October 2020 19: 18 New
      +5
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      Soviet pilots fought without radio communications, according to the principle "do as I do".

      In the Battle of Britain, for every five ME-109s, the transmitter was on only one machine, on the other four, only receivers.
      1. Kot_Kuzya
        Kot_Kuzya 3 October 2020 21: 09 New
        +2
        Quote: Alf

        In the Battle of Britain, for every five ME-109s, the transmitter was on only one machine, on the other four, only receivers.

        Well, even more so. If even developed Germany could not fully provide its fighters with transceivers, then what can we say about the USSR of the 30s? It's as if modern Russia would start producing smartphones on an equal level with Apple, Samsung and Huawei.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 5 October 2020 09: 56 New
          +2
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          Well, even more so. If even developed Germany could not fully provide its fighters with transceivers, then what can we say about the USSR of the 30s?

          Most likely, the point is not in technique, but in tactics. I will not say about fighters, but in the Panzerwaffe until 1941, radio transmitters were deliberately installed only on the cars of platoon commanders and above and on the vehicles of reconnaissance units. Line tanks had only receivers - for it was believed that the presence of transmitters on them would lead to clogging the air with unnecessary messages and loss of control. Source - appendix to the first volume of Jenz.
          1. Alf
            Alf 6 October 2020 15: 01 New
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Line tanks had only receivers - for it was believed that the presence of transmitters on them would lead to clogging the air with unnecessary messages and loss of control.

            And what, after 41, the air did not start clogging? What changed ?
            And for some reason, all the American SINGLE-SEATED fighters were equipped with transmitters, and our pilots praised these stations - you are talking like on the phone.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 7 October 2020 14: 16 New
              +1
              Quote: Alf
              And what, after 41, the air did not start clogging? What changed ?

              The concept has changed. The experience of the first months of fighting in the USSR showed that the lack of information is worse than clogging the airwaves: subordinates must be able to promptly inform the commander of information about changes on the battlefield. Otherwise, it may happen that while the platoon commander is looking towards one flank, on the other flank, a suddenly revived PTP sticks armor-piercing cucumbers on the other flank to his subordinate - and he cannot even report it.
    3. Selevc
      Selevc 4 October 2020 18: 03 New
      +1
      It's just that in the USSR in the 30s, with its industry and science, there were no radio transceivers that could fit into the dimensions of a tank interior, especially since they were then tube ones.
      This is nonsense !!! In fact, before the era of the invention of the transistor, all radios were tube radios in all countries !!!
      In the USSR, all bombers were equipped with radio stations at the time of the outbreak of the war - even TB-3, which were outdated by that time !!! It is almost impossible to command aircraft from the ground if they do not have a radio station on board !!!
      In the USSR, radio stations were used in aviation in the first place - as in the most strategically important part of the army !!!
      It was not for nothing that even the fighters did not have radio transceivers, and for the first half of the year, before the arrival of Lend-Lease stations and technologies, Soviet pilots fought without radio communications, according to the principle "do as I do"
      You are generally far from the truth !!! In fighter squadrons, radio communication was in the cockpit of the flight commander !!! The rest had receivers - they carried out his commands as a link !!! the same was about the same with the Fritzes !!! And that was in the most difficult moments of the war !!!
      "Do as I do" - according to this principle, bombers were bombed because before the raid on the target there was silence on the radio!
      The USSR lost radio electronics, which was produced mainly at factories in the European part of the country and was either captured by the enemy or was regularly bombed !!! And only because of this the USSR bought a lot of radio stations under Lend-Lease and not because it somehow lagged behind in their production !!!
      1. your1970
        your1970 6 October 2020 09: 52 New
        +1
        Quote: Selevc
        not because I somehow lagged behind in their production !!!

        No, I didn’t lag behind .... Yeah ... Even in the 80s, our connection was obscenely crooked ... Our battalion commander had two Pakistani radios from Afgan - larger than today's small ones (about the size of A4 and a finger thickness of 2 ), but many times fewer, lighter and more stable workers - than our P-124 ...
  • Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
    Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 3 October 2020 13: 47 New
    +4
    Quote: Sea Cat
    Thanks to the author, I read it with interest,

    I would still recommend reading the source (Kilichenkov), and not this free retelling of his articles.
  • maximghost
    maximghost 3 October 2020 19: 41 New
    +4
    At that time I was strained with radio stations. Then reconnaissance equipment without a walkie-talkie is an ordinary practice, and not only in the USSR.
  • Fitter65
    Fitter65 4 October 2020 09: 53 New
    +1
    Quote: Sea Cat
    The floating T-37 was going to be used as a scout, but I didn't notice the antennas in any photo, and who needs a scout without communication. Anyone have any information on this?

    The reason is very commonplace, there were simply not enough radio stations. Even the aircraft designed and launched into series in the late 1930s, early 1940s, and even then not all had full-fledged radio communication, PRD + PRM, only the commander had a transmitter, and even then not always, and the slaves were equipped only with receivers, and also not always ...
  • Captain Pushkin
    Captain Pushkin 4 October 2020 20: 55 New
    +1
    Quote: Sea Cat
    As far as our leadership of that time did not represent the essence of mobile tank warfare.

    As far as I understand, the surname of Triandafill is not familiar to you?
    Read his book "The Nature of Operations in Modern Armies"
  • Zementbomber
    Zementbomber 6 October 2020 23: 26 New
    +1
    1. In the spring of 37 inclusive, the T-1940a were going to (and actually tried in the "Winter War") to be used as an NPP tank as well. And also - right up to the middle of 1942 - it was envisaged to use as a tank the NP PDSiCh and AM (landing) Sich Airborne Forces. Moreover, an amphibious-tank division was created in the ABTV Red Army (40th TD of the 19th MK of district subordination KOVO / SWF), by the beginning of the war almost completely (139 units out of 158 available vehicles) equipped with T-37a and T -38.
    2. According to the then (of course, erroneous to the point of complete illiteracy) notions - tank reconnaissance by small amphibious tanks should have been conducted no less than a company. Therefore, only the tanks of the commander and the deputy were to be "radio". comrotes. A total of 165 pieces were produced. T-37a is happy. out of the total number, either 1376, or 1382 pcs. serial machines of this type.
  • Zementbomber
    Zementbomber 8 October 2020 00: 14 New
    0
    Out of 1376 (or 1382) pcs. serial T-37a - "radio" were 165.
    This was due to the fact that:
    1. According to the ideas of the time, reconnaissance by small amphibious tanks should have been carried out no less than by a company, and walkie-talkies were considered necessary only on lump tanks. and the deputy commander of the company.
    2. Up to the spring of 1940 inclusive (and in the Airborne Forces - up to the middle of 1942 g.) - The T-37a and T-38 were seen not so much as rangers, but as NPP tanks "for special conditions."
    3. Even a whole amphibious tank unit was created (40th TD of the 19th MK of district subordination KOVO / Southwestern Fleet) - of its 158 tanks, 137 pcs. there were T-37a and T-38.
  • Kot_Kuzya
    Kot_Kuzya 3 October 2020 06: 17 New
    26
    The article is complete nonsense, repeating liberal tales about the "stupid" and "bloodthirsty tyrant" Stalin. Stalin was not a military man, and therefore did not particularly understand military technology and strategy, only during the Second World War Stalin had to closely engage in military affairs and gain experience. All these swimmers and thousands of tankettes and tanks with bulletproof armor are the "merit" of Tukhachevsky, who in 1931 became the chief of armaments of the Red Army, and in 1936 became the first deputy people's commissar of defense. Back in 1930, Tukhachevsky presented Voroshilov with a delusional report with an increase in the number of divisions to 250 (this is a peaceful time !!!!), the calculations presented in the report, based on the experience of Germany and France in the First World War, contained, for example, the production of one hundred thousand tanks per year. If Tukhach had not been stopped in time, then there would have been no tanks with anti-cannon armor of the T-34 and KV type in the Red Army in 1941.
    1. Graz
      Graz 3 October 2020 06: 39 New
      +3
      Well, the Germans, by and large, then for the summer of 41, there were no tanks with anti-cannon armor either, at best there was something 45 mm in the forehead held from a long range, and our medium and heavy ones were then very raw, time for revision they were gone, and everything had to be done in the process
      1. Kot_Kuzya
        Kot_Kuzya 3 October 2020 06: 56 New
        12
        According to tests carried out in the USSR in 1940 by shelling a T-3 purchased from Germany, 32-mm frontal and side armor could not be penetrated by a 45-mm cannon at a distance of more than 300 m, due to the poor quality of Soviet shells and the very high quality of German armor.
        1. Stas1973
          Stas1973 3 October 2020 12: 33 New
          +1
          Not the quality of the armor, but the way it is hardened
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 5 October 2020 09: 58 New
            +1
            Quote: Stas1973
            Not the quality of the armor, but the way it is hardened

            More precisely, cementation. However, by 1943 the Germans had abandoned the use of cemented armor on linear tanks - for the repair of an armored hull made of such armor in the field was hellish torment.
    2. kalibr
      kalibr 3 October 2020 07: 03 New
      0
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      Stalin was not a military man, and therefore did not particularly understand military technology and strategy,

      That is, in the 30s he was not involved in this, he was not involved in military construction, and completely entrusted himself to the "specialists!" Whom, however, he shot with terrible force, right? That is, he did not know, but he shot? Or did he know? that "idol and god", but ... write in "defense" should be ... more correct!
      1. Eug
        Eug 3 October 2020 07: 53 New
        +7
        He just shot them later, when he figured out what the so-called. "specialists" ...
        1. kalibr
          kalibr 4 October 2020 11: 55 New
          -1
          Quote: Eug
          he then

          Then this is when? What years?
          1. Eug
            Eug 4 October 2020 12: 38 New
            +1
            After 1936.
            1. kalibr
              kalibr 4 October 2020 16: 23 New
              -1
              And the repressions began in 1927, and against scientists in 1929. According to official data, about 1934 million people were convicted in the RSFSR in 1,2. So a lot of people fell under the "distribution". And by no means later, but ... here and now!
              1. The leader of the Redskins
                The leader of the Redskins 4 October 2020 21: 15 New
                -2
                It's useless to argue, Vyacheslav Olegovich. Below, the opponent gives you data on the developed models adopted after 1938 ... Interestingly, he himself believes that the designers after the repressions breathed a sigh of relief and in a year and a half created the correct and necessary models of equipment?
              2. Eug
                Eug 4 October 2020 21: 25 New
                +1
                Repressions against military experts (about whom are discussed in the article) began during Spain, when the ineffectiveness of some types of spacecraft weapons was revealed.
              3. Captain Pushkin
                Captain Pushkin 5 October 2020 11: 43 New
                +1
                Quote: kalibr
                And the repressions began in 1927, and against scientists in 1929. According to official figures, about 1934 million people were convicted in the RSFSR in 1,2.

                The worst blow to the army was inflicted in the early thirties (1937 is the second series), then almost all the former senior officers of the tsarist army were removed from the army, precisely those who ensured the victory of the Red Army in the Civil War.
                Nobles were purged from everywhere: from the army, science, education, all spheres of government, finance, etc. etc. and replaced by "cook's children". Sometimes they were talented nuggets, but the connection between generations was interrupted and almost everywhere and the whole country had to start from scratch.
                1. kalibr
                  kalibr 5 October 2020 12: 31 New
                  0
                  Quote: Captain Pushkin
                  Sometimes they were talented nuggets, but the connection between generations was interrupted and almost everywhere and the whole country had to start from scratch.

                  That's it!
                2. Vladimir Demyanov
                  Vladimir Demyanov 7 October 2020 15: 35 New
                  -1
                  Captain Pushkin, in 1937 there were just fewer landings than before and after. This is the impression I got from Rybakov's book. Sorry...
                  1. Captain Pushkin
                    Captain Pushkin 7 October 2020 18: 39 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Vladimir Demyanov
                    in 1937 there were just fewer landings than before and after

                    I remembered a stupid anecdote:
                    - Are you going to the bathhouse?
                    - No, I went to the bathhouse.
                    - Ah .. and I thought you were going to the bathhouse ...
      2. Kot_Kuzya
        Kot_Kuzya 3 October 2020 09: 04 New
        15
        Quote: kalibr
        That is, in the 30s he did not do this, he was not involved in military construction, and completely entrusted himself to the "specialists!" Whom, however, he shot with terrible force, right? That is, he did not know, but did he shoot? Or did he know?

        Yes, just before 1937, Stalin did not particularly go into the affairs of the army, therefore, millions of people's rubles were spent from a poor, hungry country on all sorts of projects such as teletanks, polygonal shells, universal divisional guns, on the production of thousands and thousands of tankettes and tanks with bulletproof armor. Only after Tukhach was removed, the designers began to be given normal tasks, and only after 1938 the DShK, 37-mm anti-aircraft machine guns, PUAZO for 76- and 85-mm anti-aircraft guns, 76-mm divisional UNIVERSAL USV gun began to enter the army, 122-mm M-30 howitzer, 152-mm M-10 howitzer, KV and T-34 tanks with anti-cannon armor, 57-mm ZIS-2 cannon, 82- and 120-mm mortars, PPSh, etc. Tukhach could be shot only for his projects without a political component, since it is Tukhach who is to blame for the fact that the Red Army in 1941 did not have a sufficient number of DShK and 37-mm anti-aircraft machine guns, the production of which began only in 1940, and before that the production of these desperately needed air defense systems were hampered by the wrecking idea of ​​universal divisional cannons, working with equal success against ground targets and air targets. Well this is just idiocy!
        1. bk0010
          bk0010 3 October 2020 13: 04 New
          0
          On the contrary, the idea of ​​universal guns appeared because there were few anti-aircraft guns and it was not very successful to build them in large quantities. And so - at least some cover from aviation. And the DShK was not enough, since its price turned out to be comparable to the price of a forty-five.
        2. boris epstein
          boris epstein 3 October 2020 16: 37 New
          +4
          And if Tukhachevsky had been shot earlier, even for the defeat near Warsaw ...
          1. Doliva63
            Doliva63 3 October 2020 20: 14 New
            +4
            Quote: boris epstein
            And if Tukhachevsky had been shot earlier, even for the defeat near Warsaw ...

            And that would be fair.
          2. mmaxx
            mmaxx 4 October 2020 06: 38 New
            +1
            It is strange that they had not thought of this before.
          3. Crane
            Crane 4 October 2020 18: 31 New
            0
            And if Tukhachevsky had been shot earlier, even for the defeat near Warsaw ...
            =========
            There, and Stalin noted ...
          4. Captain Pushkin
            Captain Pushkin 5 October 2020 14: 25 New
            0
            Quote: boris epstein
            And if Tukhachevsky had been shot earlier, even for the defeat near Warsaw ...

            There, not only Tukhachevsky was guilty, there were accomplices who, instead of covering the flank of the advancing army of Tukhachevsky, went to take Krakow, and to no avail.
            Try to guess who was in command there ...
        3. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 5 October 2020 10: 29 New
          -2
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          universal divisional guns

          At the beginning of the 30s, it was quite a sensible idea: to replace the "field three-inch guns on the Ivanov machine" (which were the main means of army air defense) with a divisional gun, initially more or less adapted for anti-aircraft shooting. For at that time, no one could give a guarantee that 3-K would enter the series, and the volume of its release would be enough for the army.
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          Only after Tukhach was removed, the designers began to be given normal tasks, and only after 1938 the DShK began to enter the army,

          DShK is a modified recreation center of 1931. TK for which was issued back in the mid-20s. And all the pre-war and military problems with the infantry KKP in the Red Army are not associated with the personalities of the chiefs, but with the dampness of the structure and the low manufacturability of this machine gun.
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          37-mm anti-aircraft guns

          The first approach was exactly under Tukhachevsky - Kondakov's and Shpitalny's machine guns. But the topic was too new, and development dragged on - and then 61-K appeared.
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          122 mm howitzer M-30

          It grew out of work on the "German" 122-mm howitzer in the early 30s, the production of which the industry solemnly failed.
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          152 mm howitzer M-10

          Similarly.
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          PCA

          PPD. A small series of which was caused by the high cost and complexity of manufacture.
          A massive and cheap submachine gun appeared only after gunsmiths mastered stamping and welding - and this happened only at the very end of the 30s (source - Bolotin).

          There is no need to blame Tukhachevsky on the weakness of the Soviet industry of the 30s, which regularly filled up the tasks assigned to it.
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          since it is Tukhach who is to blame for the fact that the Red Army in 1941 did not have a sufficient number of DShK and 37-mm anti-aircraft guns, the production of which began only in 1940, and before that the release of these extremely necessary air defense weapons was hampered by the wrecking idea of ​​universal divisional guns, with the same success working on ground targets and air

          Tell me, was Tukhachevsky in the USA too? The most technically developed industry with the most experienced design and working personnel has been making MZA for 10 years (!). And brought it to the series only in 1940.
          Just for reference:
          In 1935 year By the decree of the Council of Labor and Defense, Shpitalny and the plant named after Kalinin was instructed to develop a 37 mm automatic cannon by the end of the year.

          Kondakov has been working on the MZA since 1932. Shpitalny has been working since 1935. But they did not manage to meet the requirements of the military MZA until 1938. By that time, the Kalinin Plant had issued the Bofors-Russian AKA 61-K.

          The funny thing is that two years later the same thing happened in the United States: the racially loyal 37-mm and 28-mm MZA, on the development of which a lot of money and effort were spent, were eventually rejected by the army and navy, who chose the Bofors.
          1. Kot_Kuzya
            Kot_Kuzya 5 October 2020 10: 48 New
            +1
            But do not you think that if the Red Army in particular and the USSR in general, instead of engaging in nonsense like universal guns, teletanks, thousands of released tankettes and tanks with bulletproof armor and DRP, would have been developing real means like DShK, 61-K , ZIS-3, M-30, in June 1941 the Red Army would have had a sufficient amount of these funds? German generals, for example, were not fond of nonsense such as universal guns, teletanks and bulletproof tanks, and as a result, in June 1941 they had a lot of excellent air defense, artillery and tanks in service?
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 5 October 2020 11: 20 New
              +2
              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              But do not you think that if the Red Army in particular and the USSR in general, instead of engaging in nonsense like universal guns, teletanks, thousands of released tankettes and tanks with bulletproof armor and DRP, would have been developing real means like DShK, 61-K , ZIS-3, M-30, in June 1941 the Red Army would have had a sufficient amount of these funds?

              No, it doesn't seem. Because everything depends on the capabilities of the industry and design bureaus - on experience and qualifications. Even if you disperse Kurchevsky's Sharashkin office, it will not help Grabin before army trials understand that you need to test the gun with all kinds of shots, and not just in perfect condition. And you will have to do SPM again. And you will have to fight again for normal casting and normal technology, and not for shaft plan and leaving 90% of the material in chips.
              And foreign experience will not help us - because on the same Bofors, with which the USSR collaborated, the technology was exactly the same (and remained the same until the early 40s).
              And even if the DC turns into a DShK in the mid-30s, it will still cost as a 45-mm anti-tank gun and be produced in small series - as in the late 30s and early 40s.
              There will be no mass PP without stamping and welding - and this is the end of the 30s.
              To obtain 61-K, the Kalinin Plant needs to rework Bofors to suit its capabilities. In the United States, a group of enterprises headed by Chrysler took 2 years to do this with all the CD, TD and samples in hardware.
              1. DrEng527
                DrEng527 6 October 2020 17: 50 New
                -1
                Quote: Alexey RA
                this will not help Grabin before the army tests to understand that the gun needs to be tested with all types of shots, and not just in perfect condition

                but how was it tested under the king? and they were good tools ... request
                Quote: Alexey RA
                you will again have to fight for normal casting and normal technology, and not for the plan for the shaft and the departure of 90% of the material into chips.

                and this is the usual Soviet bullshit - not real plans are made, and without providing resources - in order to get something by the red date and show it at the parade ... request
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 7 October 2020 15: 18 New
                  +1
                  Quote: DrEng527
                  but how was it tested under the king? and they were good tools ...

                  And under the tsar there were no "wartime shots", not only were they fired according to the simplified "French" technology, but also lay in warehouses.
                  The F-22 fired normally with those shots that were tested under the tsar. But the trouble is - in the war she would have had to shoot wartime shots. And the extraction of their sleeves on the F-22 was carried out only by knocking out through the barrel.
                  Quote: DrEng527
                  and this is the usual Soviet bullshit - not real plans are made, and without providing resources - in order to get something by the red date and show it at the parade ...

                  This is the standard technology of the day.
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  on the same "Bofors", with which the USSR collaborated, the technology was exactly the same (and remained the same until the early 40s).

                  That is, 75-90% of the material in shavings is by no means a Soviet invention. One of the leaders of the arms industry (whose product is at the heart of the Grabin divisions) did everything exactly the same. Moreover, the Swedes in the technical documentation for serial products generally met pearls of the type "drill in place after assembly" or "finalize with a file during assembly" - the Yankees are witnesses to this. smile
                  1. DrEng527
                    DrEng527 7 October 2020 15: 54 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    "to drill in place after assembly" or "to finalize with a file during assembly" - the Yankees are witnesses to this.

                    funny and is it a batch production? bully
            2. strannik1985
              strannik1985 5 October 2020 12: 02 New
              0
              Don't you think that if the Red Army in particular and the USSR in general, instead of doing nonsense like universal guns

              It's not about the development, but the rational use of what was in the series.
              No MZA and DShK - replace with M-4/61-K. No tractor - replace with a combination of 76,2mm divisional cannons and 82-120mm mortars. There are no four-wheel drive trucks - there are Gas-AAA, Zis-6 and ordinary Gas / Zis.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 5 October 2020 12: 46 New
                +1
                Quote: strannik1985
                It's not about the development, but the rational use of what was in the series.
                No MZA and DShK - replace with M-4/61-K.

                Army men are against. They say that the M-4 does not suit them because of the weakness of the bullets and the short range. The army in 1936 already agreed even to the ShVAK-12,7 - well, give at least something besides the "Maxim"!
                61-K is not enough at first, and there is practically nothing to carry them "in the field".
                The army was waiting for a light MZA, but Taubin failed all the work on it.
                Quote: strannik1985
                There are no four-wheel drive trucks - there are Gas-AAA, Zis-6 and ordinary Gas / Zis.

                Forget about the ZIS-6 - it is not enough even for the same special vehicles. There is also a shortage of conventional ZIS-5s. There are only "lorries" in abundance that will pull the maximum of SPM.
                Armyitsev fed breakfast about GAZ-63 arr. 1940 g.
                1. strannik1985
                  strannik1985 5 October 2020 14: 17 New
                  0
                  Army men are against.

                  According to the reference book, the ZPR of 9 installations covers an object 1x1 km with multilayer fire, and approaches to it with a single layer of 1-1,5 km. Anyway, something is better than 0.
                  In the TA by 1945, 165 DShK, 104 61-K, 16 85-mm guns, in the MK model 1941 48 ZPU and 32 61-K. As they say - feel the difference.
                  Forget about Zis-6

                  The summer of 1941 was dry and hot; it was the passability that was far from the first place.
                  1. hohol95
                    hohol95 5 October 2020 16: 15 New
                    +1
                    It's not about dryness and heat.
                    And in how much this or that car can move not only in the back, but also on the trailer!
                    Could the domestic ZiS and GAZs be able to drag all the heavy artillery to the rear?
                    No. They were not created for such weights.
                    But 18 "Studebakers" across Budapest pulled the ML-400 m for 20 km, not a single car failed.
                    1. strannik1985
                      strannik1985 5 October 2020 17: 53 New
                      0
                      And in how much they or another car can move not only in the back, but also on the trailer!

                      The maximum traction force US-6 6x6 5448 kg, but the weight of the trailer on all types of roads is 2043 kg, therefore, including the TA, there were no towed howitzers / guns 122-152 mm.
                      1. hohol95
                        hohol95 5 October 2020 22: 26 New
                        +1
                        Let's not take 1944 and 1945.
                        There was also a corresponding technique. Experience and understanding of how to fight.
                        In 1941, this experience and understanding did not exist!
                        As there was no equipment corresponding to the tasks and in the required quantity!
                        Apparently there was a choice - to build a lot of tanks, but few trucks. Or vice versa.
                        We chose the mass construction of tanks.
            3. DrEng527
              DrEng527 6 October 2020 17: 47 New
              +1
              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              in June 1941 the Red Army would have had enough of these funds?

              problems in 41g the Red Army is not in service request
      3. Fitter65
        Fitter65 4 October 2020 10: 05 New
        +3
        Quote: kalibr
        entrusted to "specialists!", whom, however, he shot with terrible force, right?

        And how much did he shoot? According to some reports, several million, according to others in the USSR from the late 20s, until the mid-50s, a little more than 8,6 million were convicted, and just over 600 thousand people were sentenced to death. Moreover, all the convicts were not, as it is now customary to say, “illegally repressed”. Firstly, they were all convicted according to the laws then in force, that is, on completely legal grounds, and secondly, the bulk of the convicts were banal criminals.
        1. Kot_Kuzya
          Kot_Kuzya 4 October 2020 11: 49 New
          +2
          Our liberals with bright faces are ready to classify all those executed under Stalin as "innocent victims of the bloody Stalinist regime", as if under Stalin there were no murderers, maniacs, robbers and pedophiles. They and Chikatilo, who would have been executed under any government, would have been counted among the "innocent victims of Stalinism." Liberators believe that under Stalin, only political convicts sat in the camps, as if there were no criminals then, and in the USSR in the 30s there were no thieves, swindlers and elementary murderers convicted of a drunken brawl. Apparently, in the opinion of the liberals, in the USSR in the 30s, the population was exclusively conscious, and they ended up in prisons and execution lists solely for political reasons.
          1. kalibr
            kalibr 4 October 2020 11: 59 New
            -1
            Quote: Kot_Kuzya
            according to the liberals, in the USSR in the 30s, the population was exclusively conscientious, and they ended up in prisons and execution lists solely for political reasons.

            This is in your opinion. But there are documents where it is precisely recorded who, for what and where they got. Including there are lists signed by Stalin, and it is clear that he did not care about criminals. If you do not know this, then you should not blame your sore head on a healthy one. Do not consider people stupider than yourself!
            1. Kot_Kuzya
              Kot_Kuzya 4 October 2020 12: 27 New
              +4
              You consider yourself a historian. Is it not disgusting to repeat the mantras of Rezun and modern Poroshenko and Zelensky, who claim that "Russia is to blame for unleashing WWII"? I hope you will not argue that only Ukrainians fought in the Second Ukrainian Front, as well as in the first and third?
              1. kalibr
                kalibr 4 October 2020 16: 09 New
                -3
                I don’t repeat any mantras. Everything I write is based on documents, and I don't say anything about the fronts, so there is no need to invent anything. I only know that there are archival documents that have been in the public domain for a long time, and everything has been written there long ago. That's all.
              2. DrEng527
                DrEng527 6 October 2020 17: 56 New
                -1
                Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                modern Poroshenko and Zelensky, who argue that "Russia is to blame for the outbreak of WWII"?

                1) in fact, Japan started it by attacking China ... hi
                2) and if you are about Europe, then tell us how the Red Army's Liberation Campaign to Poland or Bessarabia differed from the Anschluss of Austria / Sudetenland, and the Winter War from Polish-German 1939 - except for the results and losses, of course ...
                3) well, there is also the Treaty of Friendship and the Border of October 39 - well, very similar to the division of Czechoslovakia between Germany, Poland and Hungary at 38 repeat
            2. Fitter65
              Fitter65 4 October 2020 14: 55 New
              +5
              Quote: kalibr
              But there are documents where it is precisely recorded who, for what and where they got. Including there are lists with the personal signature of Stalin.

              There are documents, although a lot of them turned out to be, as it were, not quite documents, but the type of evidence shot up Polish prisoners in Katyn. Many different documents appeared during perestroika ...
              1. kalibr
                kalibr 4 October 2020 16: 25 New
                -4
                Quote: Fitter65
                Many different documents appeared during perestroika ...

                I wonder which ones? Not familiar with this information ... But only documents and EVIDENCE are different things, don't you think?
          2. your1970
            your1970 6 October 2020 10: 36 New
            -2
            Quote: Kot_Kuzya
            as if under Stalin there were no murderers, maniacs, robbers and pedophiles.

            Were ???? !!!!! Vaughn Th .... Why were you being shy ??
            Quote: Kot_Kuzya
            In the USSR in the 30s there were no thieves, swindlers and elementary murderers convicted of a drunken brawl.

            They didn't shoot for a drunken fight even then ...
            1. Kot_Kuzya
              Kot_Kuzya 6 October 2020 16: 48 New
              +2
              For a drunken brawl they did not shoot, but put them in camps, but the liberals even consider such convicts to be political "victims" of the Stalinist regime. The liberals have an interesting logic, the USA, for example, are leaders in the world in terms of the number of prisoners, but for some reason the liberals do not shout about "repression" in the United States, although the United States has more political prisoners than all countries of the world combined. Take the same Butina, for example. Not a single light-faced elf jumped up in Butina's defense. But in defense of the pedophile Dmitriev, the whole liberal bohemia rushed up.
    3. mmaxx
      mmaxx 4 October 2020 11: 23 New
      -2
      Stalin was just a military man. The entire Civil War is his. And he showed himself quite well. Combat experience no less than any other.
      1. Kot_Kuzya
        Kot_Kuzya 4 October 2020 11: 56 New
        +2
        Don't write nonsense. Stalin was never a military man, in the Civil War he led only the defense of Tsaritsyn, since Snesarev showed his complete insignificance. If not for Stalin, then Tsaritsyn would have been surrendered, as Rostov and Kharkov were surrendered before. However, even after the successful defense of Tsaritsyn, Stalin showed no interest in military affairs and remained a politician.
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 4 October 2020 16: 02 New
          -1
          Stalin took part not only in the defense of Tsaritsyn.
          Already in the military affairs of his time, he understood more than many. This is what life has shown. And strategically, he still needs to look for a competitor.
          1. DrEng527
            DrEng527 6 October 2020 18: 00 New
            -1
            Quote: mmaxx
            And strategically, he still needs to look for a competitor.

            This is especially noticeable in the defeat of the Red Army in Poland in 1920, where the IVS was a PMC of the South-Western Front bully
            1. stalkerwalker
              stalkerwalker 6 October 2020 18: 03 New
              +1
              Quote: DrEng527
              This is especially noticeable in the defeat of the Red Army in Poland in 1920, where the IVS was a PMC of the South-Western Front

              Learn the materiel ...
              The SWF was just developing an offensive in the south-western direction towards Krakow.
              1. DrEng527
                DrEng527 7 October 2020 12: 55 New
                -1
                Quote: stalkerwalker
                Learn the materiel ...

                pay it to yourself ... bully
                Quote: stalkerwalker
                The SWF was just developing an offensive in the south-western direction towards Krakow.

                1) Lviv
                2) and ordered where to send 1KA? hi
                1. stalkerwalker
                  stalkerwalker 8 October 2020 11: 50 New
                  0
                  Quote: DrEng527
                  Quote: stalkerwalker
                  The SWF was just developing an offensive in the south-western direction towards Krakow.
                  1) Lviv

                  And how to get to Krakow, without bypassing Lviv, as a central center of defense, communications and transport?
                  The commander of the SWF Yegorov sent reports to Moscow, and the commander of the ZF Tukhachevsky, with a request not to break the flanks, at least. Keep an elbow tie.
                  But the former lieutenant, a graduate of the Alexander School, looked into the mouth of his PMC - Comrade Trotsky, who, by the way, "commanded" from Moscow.
                  Quote: DrEng527
                  2) and ordered where to send 1KA?

                  Who ordered?
                  Is there documentary evidence that Stalin did it?
                  1. DrEng527
                    DrEng527 9 October 2020 13: 14 New
                    -1
                    Quote: stalkerwalker
                    Who ordered?

                    country leadership
                    Quote: stalkerwalker
                    Is there documentary evidence that Stalin did it?

                    went the classic ... do you scan? bully
                    Quote: stalkerwalker
                    And how to get to Krakow without passing Lviv,

                    tasks are solved sequentially, so it is possible to Berlin ...
                    Quote: stalkerwalker
                    But the former lieutenant, a graduate of the Alexander School, looked into the mouth of his PMC - Comrade Trotsky, who, by the way, "commanded" from Moscow.

                    fi, you already have Trotsky to blame for everything .. bully So, for example - the IVS throughout the Second World War was commanded from Moscow, so what? hi
    4. DrEng527
      DrEng527 6 October 2020 17: 46 New
      -1
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      Stalin was not a military man, and therefore did not particularly understand military technology and strategy,

      that he did not understand - one can agree. However, he was in charge of this process - read the memoirs of designers from aviation (Yakovlev) to guns (Grabin) ...
  • Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 06: 24 New
    16
    ... It is worth remembering that the UK and France had no problems with tank building and tank use. The British and French became the creators of a new kind of troops, gained vast experience in their use, developed the theory and tactics of their use, forged tank personnel, and accumulated a considerable fleet of armored vehicles.

    And at the initial stage, they "got a nose for it" from the Germans, who, with a smaller force, but with a better organization, multiplied by zero all the "tank troops" of France and Britain on the continent.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 3 October 2020 06: 37 New
      +4
      Hello, hello! hi
      multiplied by zero all the "tank troops" of France and Britain on the continent.

      Funny statement. Do not name specific battles in which the "tank troops" of the Entente were "multiplied by zero." Maybe I forgot something and don't know something. smile
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 07: 01 New
        +5
        I'm talking about World War II!
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 3 October 2020 07: 18 New
          +3
          Then it is clear that Rommel and Guderian drove them, even at the end of the war they managed to beat, though mostly the British, the founders of the tank forces, so to speak, I mean Michael Wittmann and his famous battle at Villers-Bocage.
          1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 07: 49 New
            +7
            The battle of M. Vitman is just an indicator of the "collapse" of the organization of the German tank forces.
            Having single-handedly kicked the causal place for the neophytes, he showed the systemic omissions of the ideas of his "tank theorists".
            In place of Vitman's battalion, there should have been a tank division, reinforced by two or three motorized infantry, two or three artillery regiments, supported from the air, sapper units and other formations.
            Whitman's sufferers were to be cut, surrounded and crushed. And yet Vitman as part of a division, roll to the last sea, closing the blitzkrick ring.

            What was portrayed by the tank troops of the Germans on the Western Front can only cause a smile. They were simply lucky that even more inept British and Americans stood against them!
            And so, an example of using a separate heavy battalion of Yag-tigers is typical. First, the German self-propelled guns smash the allies, the next day their positions are ironed under a thousand aircraft.
            The last offensive of the Fascists in the Ardennes causes a sad smile, especially in comparison with the operation on Lake Balaton!
            Steeper, you are right, only Montgomery, the great commander was not born for this war, he was destined to die at the head of the Red cavalry in the Eastern War. And he managed to be born a century later. If, in short, “the parents took the saber away from the peasant, and the Gypsies took the horse away”!
            1. Catfish
              Catfish 3 October 2020 08: 01 New
              12
              Bravo! About Monty you are cool, neither subtract nor add. And as for the Germans at the end of the war, you yourself notice the total superiority of the allies in the air. By the way, Vitman and his crew died from a rocket either from the Typhoon or from Thunderbolt.
              In place of Vitman's battalion, there should have been a tank division, reinforced by two or three motorized infantry, two or three artillery regiments, supported from the air, sapper units and other formations.

              But how could they have gotten all this in XNUMX, they did marches only at night. And in the Ardennes, as soon as the cloudiness cleared away, the kirdyk came to the whole offensive.
              Yes, another funny question, I wonder how the Japanese imagined a war with us, at least after the same Balaton operation, I’m not speaking for others. laughing
              1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 10: 19 New
                +3
                Quote: Sea Cat
                Yes, another funny question, I wonder how the Japanese imagined a war with us, at least after the same Balaton operation, I’m not speaking for others.

                No, they prayed in a pillow and hoped for our decency !!! Forgetting completely their habits in Port Arthur, in the Far East (during the Civil) and near Hassan!
                1. Catfish
                  Catfish 3 October 2020 10: 39 New
                  +3
                  The coolest blitzkrieg in our performance. good
                  1. Doliva63
                    Doliva63 3 October 2020 20: 22 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Sea Cat
                    The coolest blitzkrieg in our performance. good

                    My father said it was difficult, but the experience took its toll.
                2. Siberian54
                  Siberian54 4 October 2020 06: 45 New
                  +2
                  And what was not "decent" "accomplished by the Soviet Union, having an agreement with Swushington and not having the same with Tokyo?
              2. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 7 October 2020 15: 22 New
                +1
                Quote: Sea Cat
                Yes, another funny question, I wonder how the Japanese imagined a war with us, at least after the same Balaton operation, I’m not speaking for others.

                Hike, the war with the USSR was planned on the basis of data from the Far Eastern Front and the ZabVO. And there was a slightly different Red Army - the improved version of Khalkhin-Gol. smile
                1. Catfish
                  Catfish 7 October 2020 16: 36 New
                  0
                  It seems that the Japanese initially missed literally everything: both with the "American drunks" and with our "improved Khalkhin Gol".
    2. Stas1973
      Stas1973 3 October 2020 12: 38 New
      0
      They multiplied in connection with the successes in tactics and the ability to improvise on the bloodline of the lower command staff, on the one hand, and not skill on the other hand. No more.
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 13: 29 New
        +4
        Quote: Stas1973
        They multiplied in connection with the successes in tactics and the ability to improvise on the bloodline of the lower command staff, on the one hand, and not skill on the other hand. No more.

        Can you explain your position in terms of “humanity”?
        If you are about to "showered with hats", then this is the war between the Moscow and Ryazan great princes in the 14th century!
        If about the successes of Germany in France at the first stage of World War II, then the losses on both sides were negligible! The Germans entered the borders of Belgium and France like a knife in butter, outplaying the enemy promptly, tactically, psychologically and ...
        To be honest, the Germans themselves were “fucking crazy” about their successes! In the "run to the sea", the higher authorities tried fifty times to stop Guderian, and a couple of times they even fired him! But the impudence of the "impetuous Gantz" took its toll every time! The French, with rare exceptions, were corny, throwing equipment and weapons !!!
        Guderian's last jump was stopped by Hitler himself! The rest of the "blitzkriegs" in Poland and France were rehearsals before the attack on the USSR. We try, check, work on bugs, fix bugs! So, on June 22, 1941, the Red Army met a mobilized, well-functioning military machine that had been victoriously fighting for two years! The latter, like mechonism, beautifully conquered until November, then choked on the scale, permanent mobilization and motivation of the Soviet state !!!
        "Lightning-fast Hans" saw and squeaked about the T-34 and the "barn gates" of his anti-tank artillery in late autumn 41! Then Colonel "Dirt", General "Frost" appeared !!! All this is nothing more than first "tactical" slaps in the face, later "operational" and then "strategic knockdowns and knockouts" of the Wehrmacht generals !!!
        From personal experience. Yesterday I caught up with a healthy truck on the road. She has an inscription on the trailer “I missed you, well done, well, let me hug you” !!! And the bear is drawn !!!
        So Hitler and his Third Reich lost exactly when he thought to swing at Russia! And not earlier and not later, but the second I presented myself in Moscow on Red Square !!!
        Good day!!!
        1. WapentakeLokki
          WapentakeLokki 3 October 2020 21: 52 New
          +2
          ... I do not agree ... a number of Hitler's mistakes (interfering in the OKW's activities, being essentially a corporal and not having that colossal skill of Stalin's self-education) in strategy and, most importantly, the notorious theory of Racial superiority (well, the Ost plan as a derivative of this) which provoked a response from the Russian ethnos (victory or slavery and death) .. and even despite the help of the allies and the military-industrial complex of the USSR deployed beyond the Urals, more than once, not two was it on the verge of defeat (well, or at least a separate (like the Brest-Litovsk) peace) and only by changing the composition and bleeding Doychev (for example, the USSR lost ~ 1/6 part in WWII and Germany in WW II ~ 1/4 part of the population) were able to crush ... (here, by the way, the Nazi Judo-phobia played its role - after all ~ 90% of the Manhattan project was made up of refugees from Nazi Germany ... but if in Germany they would adhere to the position of G. Goering (.. in my Luftwaffe I myself decide who is a Jew ..) and created- if by the 43rd atomic weapon ... but history does not know the subjunctive moods .. and this is GOOD !!!
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 5 October 2020 10: 34 New
          +2
          Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
          Guderian's last jump was stopped by Hitler himself!

          Von Rundstedt. Hitler only endorsed the already executed stop order, and under the pressure of the arguments of this von Rundstedt.
          In fact, the British stopped the Germans - their inept and unsuccessful counterattack at Arras was strategically victorious, giving time for evacuation.
  • mark1
    mark1 3 October 2020 06: 31 New
    +9
    Some kind of perestroika-style nonsense.
  • kalibr
    kalibr 3 October 2020 07: 00 New
    +2
    Evgeniy! Not bad for a start. But ... under the photo it is necessary to indicate what it is, who and where, not only the source. You only have the T-37 marked. And it was possible to write about Christie's tank and the first photo ... On it, by the way, Yezhov is still alive ... Further ... it is advisable to give sources for such articles, up to direct citation with links. You have about Tukhachevsky, but not about Stalin. And you could have taken the materials of the 18th Congress and the speeches of Voroshilov, Budyonny ... In a word, such materials should be written "more weighty".
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 3 October 2020 13: 39 New
      +3
      Quote: kalibr
      Evgeniy! Not bad for a start.

      What exactly is 'not bad'? That he retells Kilichenkov's article?
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 3 October 2020 15: 17 New
        +1
        If so, the level of novelty is interesting. VO rules must be more than 70%. The AST rules are more than 75% ... But I didn't check it, it's just the impression ...
    2. Alf
      Alf 3 October 2020 19: 25 New
      +3
      Quote: kalibr
      under the photo it is necessary to indicate what it is, who and where, not only the source.

      And if you don't indicate what will change?
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 3 October 2020 20: 56 New
        +1
        There are certain rules. They matter. Fulfilling them speaks of the author's respect for the readers. Moreover, not everyone knows what a particular photograph depicts. That's all.
  • Avior
    Avior 3 October 2020 07: 13 New
    +9
    Until the middle of the article, the impression was that the author had not heard of Tukhachevsky at all, but his name suddenly flashed once.
    But in reality, in his article about these events, it should have been the other way around - Stalin's name should flash once - and the rest is Tukhachevsky smile
    For it is very strange to talk about the processes of building the Red Army in the late 20s and in the 30s without mentioning the role and influence on the events taking place in relation to the changes in the Red Army of Tukhachevsky in what is happening.
    ... On December 26, 1926, Tukhachevsky stated that there was no army and home front in the country in his report "Defense of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics":
    3. If the development of hostilities in the first period of the war is favorable for the bloc [probable opponents in the West], its forces may increase significantly, which in connection with the “Western European rear” can create an insurmountable threat for us <...>
    6. Our scarce material combat mobilization reserves are barely enough for the first period of the war. In the future, our situation will worsen (especially in the conditions of the blockade).
    7. The Red Army will fulfill the tasks of defense of the USSR only on condition of high mobilization readiness of the armed forces, railway transport and industry.
    8. Neither the Red Army nor the country is ready for war.
  • Operator
    Operator 3 October 2020 07: 34 New
    +8
    Stalin was a fan of technology - the Lenin Library contains thousands of books of special literature on auto, tank, aircraft, motor and other constructions with Stalin's pencil marks in the margins.
    1. kalibr
      kalibr 3 October 2020 07: 38 New
      +3
      Well, Andrei, not everyone has been there in the past and are there now. Then you need to request these books, and for that you need to know that they exist ... That is, you need to live in Moscow and generally know a lot.
      1. Operator
        Operator 3 October 2020 07: 46 New
        +4
        Everything is much simpler - it is enough to choose the right historical monographs for your reading. laughing
        1. kalibr
          kalibr 3 October 2020 07: 48 New
          +5
          Quote: Operator
          Everything is much simpler - it is enough to choose the right historical monographs for your reading.

          It is truth too! This is my old habit says - to feel everything with your own hands. But of course this is also a great option.
          1. Operator
            Operator 3 October 2020 07: 51 New
            +2
            The skills of a domestic official cannot be spent on drink - to get acquainted only with the necessary materials and learn Chinese in one day laughing
      2. boris epstein
        boris epstein 3 October 2020 16: 59 New
        0
        In the Soviet Army there were libraries and there was an interlibrary loan. You could learn about books on this topic and subscribe a book "to the hall" in the library of a military unit (not lower than a division). I used it back in the late 70s. And at the end of the 80s there was a small kiosk in GUM where you could order some materials. But it was used selectively and for their dirty purposes, mostly by wicked people.
    2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 13: 37 New
      +8
      Andrei and Vyacheslav, I will add one stroke to the "demon Stalin", in the 30s it was he who proposed to remove the third tower from the SMK, letting the freed weight go for booking.
      So, technically, the "Seminarist" anticipated the military with their machine guns sticking out in different directions and the designers from the multi-turret "monsters". Which, paradoxically, bore the name of the Leader of the USSR !!!?
      1. Operator
        Operator 3 October 2020 14: 05 New
        +4
        Iosif Vissarionovich was an intelligent person (for example, he insisted on bringing to mind a diesel engine for main tanks - in the absence of foreign analogues), but often overly addicted.

        In any case, it was easier for the leadership of the USSR to make decisions in the military-industrial complex - the country was in the role of catch-up and it was possible to learn from other people's mistakes, and now the Russian Federation has taken the place of the leader (a compact fast neutron reactor with a liquid metal coolant, a motor hypersound, a space glider, a ten-megawatt laser, uninhabited fighting compartment of a tank, etc.) and learn to fall on your mistakes.
      2. Tochilka
        Tochilka 3 October 2020 18: 15 New
        +2
        The IS was single-turret. SMK and T-28, T-35 multi-turret.
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 20: 02 New
          +4
          If you set the task to list all the multi-turret tanks of the USSR, then you should include the T-24, T-26, T-29 and T-100 in the list, and this is just what was blinded in metal!
          Under the Stalinist "monsters", I had "Stalinist organs" !!! Let everyone decide for themselves about their existence.
  • kalibr
    kalibr 3 October 2020 07: 56 New
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    get acquainted only with the necessary materials

    Yes, the ability to select and structure material is very important for a historian. I have before my eyes two dissertations of former colleagues ... In one of more than 1000 sources !!! But the man barely defended himself and swam on defense like a schoolboy. And then my graduate student used his work ... as a source, and due to the clear structuring of the material and the selection of the necessary materials, she did everything OK! So you are 100% right
    1. nnm
      nnm 3 October 2020 08: 28 New
      +5
      To be honest, I disagree with you, colleague. All the same, this is a scientific work, not a citation competition. And sometimes a doctoral dissertation, which, in theory, should be the development of a new direction, looks like a compilation of hundreds of other works.
      A large number of references to other works, in my subjective opinion, rather devalues ​​the quality of my own work. Not to mention the quality of many primary sources. As, for example, earlier in the works there was an insane amount of references to materials of party congresses, etc.
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 3 October 2020 08: 32 New
        +5
        Quote: nnm
        And sometimes a doctoral dissertation, which, in theory, should be the development of a new direction, looks like a compilation of hundreds of other works.
        A large number of references to other works, in my subjective opinion, rather devalues ​​the quality of my own work. Not to mention the quality of many primary sources. As, for example, earlier in the works there was an insane amount of references to materials of party congresses, etc.

        Totally agree with you!
      2. Narak-zempo
        Narak-zempo 3 October 2020 08: 53 New
        0
        Further - in a tough defense
        Outlined the forbidden circle
        Otherworldly candidate
        Or Dr. Prahnauk.

        In the pre-specified order
        Books are put into action,
        In them bookmarked quotes
        Staked out for him.

        Interspersed with them from books
        It lowers on a living thread,
        And hang down from her
        A thousand pages dead ...

        (A. Tvardovsky, "Turkin in the Next World")
    2. Operator
      Operator 3 October 2020 08: 28 New
      +1
      Tell your systematizing graduate student that she will have an excellent career as an official bully
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 3 October 2020 08: 33 New
        +1
        I think so too, but she loves teaching and is good at it!
        1. Operator
          Operator 3 October 2020 08: 38 New
          0
          Nevertheless, the state apparatus needs it.
          1. kalibr
            kalibr 3 October 2020 08: 53 New
            +4
            I will definitely tell you how I go to visit them.
  • parusnik
    parusnik 3 October 2020 08: 18 New
    +5
    Meanwhile, the dead-end branch of amphibious tanks received unprecedented development in Soviet Russia, which resulted in more than a thousand T-37 amphibians built on the basis of the British tank.
    .... This "dead-end branch", or rather its remnants, was successfully used during the Svir operation in 1944, or rather what was left of it .. The "dead-end branch" continued with the T-40 amphibious tank. How much they were later lacked, during the offensive operations of the Red Army, especially when crossing rivers and seizing bridgeheads.
    1. Operator
      Operator 3 October 2020 08: 35 New
      +1
      The amphibious tanks were originally a dead-end branch, since the tank, in theory, is a means of raids on the enemy's rear (see the German experience of 1940-41 and the Soviet experience of 1944-45).

      And the amphibious tank is designed only to capture and hold coastal bridgeheads (because of cardboard armor and no guns), which is much better for the infantry on motor boats with rear artillery support.

      PS And the old woman (Stalin) has a breakdown (due to the lack of competent specialists at his disposal due to the low scientific and technical level of the USSR in the 1930s).
      1. parusnik
        parusnik 3 October 2020 09: 55 New
        +6
        So the T-37A was used in the Svir operation to capture and hold coastal bridgeheads and to support the infantry. I wrote about this in a commentary, but such tanks, not for the battle at Prokhorovka, such a tank has highly specialized tasks. And such tanks really did not have enough in the future, to perform such tasks. Yes, the T-37,38,40 is not ideal, but this is an experience. And then the hole happened when the PT-76 was adopted? And this tank fought heartily in foreign armies, and I must say, our PT-76 was not a whipping boy. It corresponded to the tasks for which it was created, this is crossing water obstacles on the move, capturing and holding the bridgehead until the main forces approach, when these vehicles were used for their intended purpose, they met with success. Alas, the T-37A, T-38 and T-40 were used for other purposes.
        1. Operator
          Operator 3 October 2020 14: 00 New
          -6
          PT-76 served as a "tank" in rogue countries, while it was not used for its intended purpose (not as a waterfowl).
          1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 15: 27 New
            +8
            Here Andrei you are wrong!
            The floating qualities of the PT-76 were useful to India, Vietnam and Israel (trophy). A highly specialized machine that we lacked in operations in the European theater of operations in 44 and 45 years.
            1. Operator
              Operator 3 October 2020 18: 52 New
              -3
              Firstly, India and Vietnam during the period of using the PT-76 were exemplary rogues, and secondly, name at least one military operation in these countries where its waterfowl qualities would have been involved.

              Israel is the only exception that proves the rule.
              1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 19: 55 New
                +4
                Read the Sick, how rogues burned Chaffee on the PT-76.
                1. Operator
                  Operator 3 October 2020 21: 22 New
                  -3
                  PT-76 burned Chaffee during sea battles, obviously laughing
                  1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                    Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 22: 07 New
                    +3

                    Page 295.
                    Oddly enough, but a couple of tank skirmishes in the east took place. On November 21, the Indian infantry regiment, supported by a squadron of amphibious tanks PT-76, with a sudden blow separated the 107th Pakistani brigade, supported by a squadron of M24 Chaffee tanks in the Garibpur region, 11 Pakistani tanks were burned, and 3 more were captured, the Indians lost 6 tanks.
                    1. Operator
                      Operator 3 October 2020 23: 17 New
                      -4
                      Especially for Aleksandr Bolnykh: tanks are not designed to fight tanks - for this there are ATGMs that do much better with this and are two orders of magnitude cheaper.

                      The task of the tanks is to carry out raids on the enemy's rear (see 1940-41 and 1944-45).

                      A typical example is the Vistula-Oder operation in 1945, in which the highest average daily rate of advance of fronts / army groups in WWII was achieved. The ultimate goal of Soviet tank and mechanized formations is to seize bridgeheads on the western bank of the Oder to create conditions for an offensive on Berlin. The goal was not achieved (with the exception of the Kyustrinsky bridgehead), not due to the lack of an analogue of the PT-76 in service, but for a completely different reason:
                      - the reserves of fuel and ammunition in the tank and mechanized units in the raid were not enough for the vast majority of combat vehicles to get to the eastern bank of the Oder;
                      - unarmored trucks of logistic services did not manage to get to the combat units in time due to the banal reason for their interception by German troops and militia, which remained in the rear of tank and mechanized formations;
                      - as a result, extremely small mobile groups were formed in the combat units, into the tanks of which the remnants of fuel were poured and the ammunition was filled;
                      - small mobile groups reached the eastern bank of the Oder and quite successfully, with the help of improvised means, transported infantry units and light artillery to the western bank;
                      - however, almost all created bridgeheads (except one) were eliminated by the Germans using main battle tanks, against which the analogs of the PT-76 would not have helped;
                      - The Kyustrinsky bridgehead was defended by artillery, which they were able to pull up to the eastern bank.

                      It was about this (the continuous supply of fuel and ammunition to tanks and motorized rifle units in a raid on the enemy's rear) that GABTU had to think about, and not invent another floating nedotank to trump cards at parades.

                      The main guarantee of the successful crossing of any water obstacle is the concentration of fire weapons attacking on their shore with full ammunition. Then the seizure of the bridgehead by infantry on motor boats under the cover of an artillery umbrella, then the building of the pontoon bridge and at the end of the transfer of the main battle tanks, heavy infantry fighting vehicles and self-propelled guns to the bridgehead.

                      Games with floating nedotanks - from the evil one.
                      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                        Kote Pan Kokhanka 4 October 2020 04: 45 New
                        +1
                        Andrey - what is all this for?
                        I responded to your following comment:
                        PT-76 burned Chaffee during naval battles, probably laughing
                      2. Operator
                        Operator 4 October 2020 10: 18 New
                        -4
                        My comment kind of hints that Alexander Sick needs to tighten up the materiel laughing
                    2. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 5 October 2020 10: 48 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Operator
                      - as a result, extremely small mobile groups were formed in the combat units, into the tanks of which the remnants of fuel were poured and the ammunition was filled;

                      Not quite so: in the combined-arms armies, the advanced groups were formed for the reason that the army's vehicles were unable to "lift" all the personnel and equipment. Therefore, they did what the Germans did in 1941: they created mobile advance groups to capture important objects and communication centers. And the bulk of the troops followed them.
                      Quote: Operator
                      - however, almost all created bridgeheads (except one) were eliminated by the Germans using main battle tanks, against which the analogs of the PT-76 would not have helped;
                      - The Kyustrinsky bridgehead was defended by artillery, which they were able to pull up to the eastern bank.

                      This is some kind of alternative. smile
                      In fact, at first there was no "Kyustrinsky bridgehead" - there were several bridgeheads captured north and south of the fortress. These bridgeheads survived, united in the northern and southern, and during the encirclement of Kustrin they finally merged into one large bridgehead.
                    3. Oprichnik
                      Oprichnik 6 October 2020 03: 20 New
                      +2
                      It is enough to look at a large-scale map of Vietnam to make sure that it is only on the PT-76 that you can move around there - continuous rivers, streams, swamps and rice fields. The Hindus, too, did not use them in the desert.
                    4. Operator
                      Operator 6 October 2020 09: 35 New
                      -3
                      And helicopters no longer fly over rivers, streams, swamps and rice fields?
              2. hohol95
                hohol95 3 October 2020 23: 46 New
                +4
                On December 9, 1971, Company D from the 1st Independent Squadron, armed with Gurkian riflemen on armor, stormed the Chandpur docks, where they encountered three Pakistani gunboats on the Meghna River. The tanks sank all three boats in a furious exchange of fire. These gunboats were ferrying 450 Pakistani soldiers!
              3. hohol95
                hohol95 3 October 2020 23: 52 New
                +3
                For 2 weeks of fighting, the Pakistanis have lost 66 Chaffee. Indians 13 PT-76!
                "Tested at strong current": BMP-3F is being prepared for new Indonesian ships
                VO September 30, 2020
                At the same time, PT-76 amphibious tanks were tested, which continue to serve in the Indonesian Marine Corps and are considered one of its main weapons due to the insufficient number of alternative equipment.
                Indonesia is the sole operator of the BMP-3F. On orders from 2009 and 2012, 54 cars were transferred to it. The 2019 contract provides for the supply of another 22 units.

                Can you name an alternative to the PT-76? For countries like Indonesia!
                1. Operator
                  Operator 4 October 2020 01: 23 New
                  -3
                  Assault motorboats with high deadrise + tank landing ships.

                  The seaworthiness of the BMP-3F does not exceed 3 points, then their buoyancy coincides with the buoyancy of the ax.

                  And the main question - how will the BMP-3F help in the confrontation with the MBT?
                  1. hohol95
                    hohol95 4 October 2020 10: 31 New
                    +1
                    The MBT still needs to be delivered to the island!
                    Will the assault boat cover the troops with its armor?
                  2. Operator
                    Operator 4 October 2020 11: 36 New
                    -2
                    If they landed on the island, then the PT-76 would be opposed by ATGMs (people with money).

                    The PT-76 has cardboard armor with a thickness of 6 to 10 mm - it is pierced by shrapnel of mines of 120-mm caliber and armor-piercing bullets of 12,7 mm caliber.
                  3. hohol95
                    hohol95 4 October 2020 22: 39 New
                    +1
                    The PT-76 has cardboard armor with a thickness of 6 to 10 mm - it is pierced by shrapnel of mines of 120-mm caliber and armor-piercing bullets of 12,7 mm caliber.

                    This is all true. But the American RPG M72 LAW turned out to be, to put it mildly, "not quite suitable" for fighting the "cardboard" PT-76s in Vietnam !!!
                    And this happened in life!
                    Each country tries to create or purchase equipment suitable for its terrain and weather conditions!
                    If the Indonesians were once staged by the PT-76, it means that for their country and their terrain they were the most optimal combat vehicles for the marines!
                  4. Operator
                    Operator 4 October 2020 22: 50 New
                    -2
                    In addition to the M72, there is an RPG-7.

                    Did Indonesia manage to fight someone using the PT-76? laughing
                  5. hohol95
                    hohol95 5 October 2020 00: 34 New
                    +1
                    Possibly in Aceh province. But I did not find specifics! And separatism in this province was very strong.
                    If they have been used and are trying to maintain them in working order, then they are satisfied for now!
                  6. Operator
                    Operator 5 October 2020 02: 31 New
                    -2
                    Well, this is a purely gendarme use of the PT-76 to suppress internal unrest of weakly armed rebels.

                    In such cases, the most passable transport is a helicopter.
                  7. hohol95
                    hohol95 5 October 2020 09: 46 New
                    +1
                    In such cases, the most passable transport is a helicopter.

                    Advise the Indonesians.
                    And then they are worse than a "steam locomotive" if they have been keeping Soviet PT-76s in combat readiness for so many years.
                    And we also bought the BMP-3F.
                  8. Operator
                    Operator 5 October 2020 10: 18 New
                    -5
                    Purely specifically rogue laughing
                  9. hohol95
                    hohol95 5 October 2020 10: 24 New
                    +2
                    On this we will stop the useless clogging of the page with comments! You stand in your position. I'm on mine.
                    It will stay that way. hi
  • ccsr
    ccsr 4 October 2020 10: 49 New
    +2
    Quote: hohol95
    Can you name an alternative to the PT-76? For countries like Indonesia!

    This is one of the most successful tanks for such theaters - just not everyone understands that this type of armored vehicle is not suitable for the whole world. But the need for such tanks will always be taking into account at least the actions of the separatists in difficult-to-pass areas.
    1. hohol95
      hohol95 4 October 2020 22: 43 New
      +1
      Totally agree with you!
      It was not for nothing that the T-54/55 and T-62 tanks were sent to Afghanistan. And they coped with their task there!
      Initially, the tank units of the 40th Army were armed with T-55 tanks. But, as General Gromov recalled, in anticipation of military operations, in January 1980, the troops began to receive T-62 and T-64 tanks. The latter, however, did not survive the tests in the highlands: the two-stroke diesel engine failed, and they did not stay long in the DRA. But the T-55 and T-62 fought in the mountains for a long time.
  • Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 3 October 2020 20: 01 New
    +4
    Quote: Operator
    Amphibious tanks were originally a dead-end branch, since a tank, in theory, is a means of raids on the enemy's rear

    You're not right. What you write plays if the river is one for a couple of hundred kilometers. Look to the west and northwest of Russia, there are two three rivers and four lakes for every kilometer. And this is not to mention the swamps, where only floating equipment can pass. Of course, the amphibious tank will be less protected, but it acts where it has no opponents. It won't hurt to drag an anti-tank gun through the swamps and an anti-tank gun, because it is on wheels.

    Another thing is that these T-37, T-38 themselves are rather poor in terms of performance characteristics, are weak, poorly armed and barely swim. Rather wedges than a tank. T-76 showed itself very well in the swamps and floodplains of Burma during the Indo-Pakistani war. It was simply impossible to use any other tank there. There is no land there.
    1. Operator
      Operator 3 October 2020 21: 26 New
      -5
      Rogues in the lake, swamp and river areas use PT-76, people with money - infantrymen with ATGM.
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 22: 09 New
        +6
        People with money against tanks use aircraft. hi
        1. Operator
          Operator 3 October 2020 23: 22 New
          -3
          I was referring to the time period for using the PT-76 in service with the Soviet Army.

          And so yes - at the moment people with money (Azerbaijanis) are using RUGs (reconnaissance UAVs + guided artillery ammunition), strike UAVs and loitering ammunition against enemy tanks.
          1. Saxahorse
            Saxahorse 3 October 2020 23: 48 New
            +3
            The ATGM and UAV you mentioned make the use of heavily armored vehicles meaningless. But the vehicles for the infantry are still relevant in the same swampy terrain. So at the moment, the role of amphibious tanks is played rather by BMPs, the direct heirs of amphibious tanks.
            1. Operator
              Operator 4 October 2020 01: 30 New
              -4
              There is KAZ against ATGM, and "nails" against UAVs.

              The infantry vehicle for swampy terrain is the BTR-50, not the PT-76.
          2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Kote Pan Kokhanka 4 October 2020 04: 49 New
            +2
            Quote: Operator
            I was referring to the time period for using the PT-76 in service with the Soviet Army.


            Aviation still rules! It is more effective to knock out tanks on the way, and not in a field battle.
            1. Operator
              Operator 4 October 2020 10: 21 New
              -5
              All aviation anti-tank ammunition (except for those equipped with special warheads) are intercepted by "nails" and KAZ.
              1. Saxahorse
                Saxahorse 4 October 2020 19: 58 New
                +1
                Quote: Operator
                All aviation anti-tank ammunition (except for those equipped with special warheads) are intercepted by "nails" and KAZ.

                Are you broadcasting from the future now? laughing
                1. Operator
                  Operator 4 October 2020 20: 24 New
                  -1
                  I applied the verb form of the present extended tense laughing
    2. ccsr
      ccsr 4 October 2020 10: 56 New
      +4
      Quote: Saxahorse
      Another thing is that these T-37, T-38 themselves are rather poor in terms of performance characteristics, are weak, poorly armed and barely swim. Rather wedges than a tank.

      These were real tankettes, only such "specialists" as Meltyukhov recorded them in "tanks" and before the war we suddenly had 4,5 thousand extra "tanks", the weight of which was about 3 tons. For comparison, the German armored personnel carrier had in some modifications the weight was up to 9,5 tons, but no one considered it a tank, although the armor was stronger than that of some of our "tanks".
      Quote: Saxahorse
      T-76 showed itself very well in the swamps and floodplains of Burma during the Indo-Pakistani war. It was simply impossible to use any other tank there. There is no land there.

      Quite right - it is the T-76 that is a typical example of highly targeted armored vehicles, and, at the same time, well-designed.
  • DWG1905
    DWG1905 3 October 2020 09: 03 New
    +7
    The branch is not a dead-end, without it there would be no post-war amphibious vehicles PT-76, BTR-50 …………… BMP-3 …… .. Because the topic of overcoming water obstacles is very relevant. An assessment of the quality of the material presented is given in other comments. I recommend the author to visit the archive on Admiral Makarov Street in Moscow and read the files of the GABTU.
    As for T-40, I have a little https://drawingstanks.blogspot.com/2013_04_14_archive.html only watch through Opera with VPN, because Roskomnadzor is weird.
    And by the brainchild of comrade. There is also a little Tukhachevsky https://drawingstanks.blogspot.com/2014/06/20-20.html
    1. Kot_Kuzya
      Kot_Kuzya 3 October 2020 09: 35 New
      0
      Quote: DWG1905
      This branch is not a dead end, without it there would be no post-war amphibious vehicles PT-76, BTR-50 …………… BMP-3 …… ..

      Do not confuse a tank with an armored personnel carrier and an infantry fighting vehicle. Armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles carry infantry, and the amphibious tank carries only itself, well, as a last resort, two infantrymen on armor. That is, the concept of application is completely different, it's like comparing the T-40 and the BTR-60.
  • Train
    Train 3 October 2020 09: 23 New
    +2
    There were a lot of hobbyists, but then, in general, viable designs were realized.
  • Operator
    Operator 3 October 2020 09: 33 New
    -2
    Quote: DWG1905
    PT-76, BTR-50 …………… BMP-3

    Technique for show - they did not show themselves in any real operation, except in the crossing of the Suez Canal by Sharon, but there they were opposed by the Arabs.

    The same (absolute uselessness in terms of targeted use) applies to all, without exception, domestic infantry fighting vehicles, even as armored transporters for transporting infantry to the battlefield - due to the terrible conditions for placing troops in an armored personnel carrier (one swinging armored personnel carrier-1/2 is worth what). Therefore, BMPs are used in the form of carts of the 19th century with the deployment of troops on the armor.

    GABTU does not need to suffer from garbage, but to put into service modern analogues of the BTR-50 with anti-fragmentation armor, KAZ "Arena", anti-mine seats, air conditioning, etc. etc. At the same time, the optional swimming capability will be provided (due to the large cubic capacity of the hull and the low weight of the armor), and with a multiple buoyancy reserve, and not like the axes in the face of the BTR-1/2/3.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 15: 28 New
      +6
      Quote: Operator
      At the same time, the optional swimming capability will be provided (due to the large cubic capacity of the hull and the low weight of the armor), and with a multiple buoyancy reserve, and not like the axes in the face of the BTR-1/2/3.


      What kind of armored personnel carriers are they?
      1. Operator
        Operator 3 October 2020 18: 54 New
        -4
        Sorry, BMP-1/2/3.
  • DWG1905
    DWG1905 3 October 2020 10: 37 New
    +5
    We are talking about a floating trough with caterpillars, and what to put on top of a booth for the landing or a tower with a gun is the second question. The main entrance into the water, movement on the water and most importantly getting ashore, these tasks were solved by consistently developing the design purchased from the British. By the way, the T-37-T-40 with access to the shore was not very good. It is possible to criticize our armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, but we must not forget that design is a compromise between conflicting requirements, and therefore everything turns out to be a little crooked in universal designs. Naturally, I would like to have a lot of different specialized equipment for different theaters and different tasks. Only the country's budget will not stand it.
    Right now in Karabakh, the ability of the BTT to overcome water obstacles is probably not very relevant. Ideally, both opposing antiquities should have made a BTT in advance, sharpened for this theater of operations, taking into account the technical capabilities of the enemy, but this is fantastic.
    1. vch62388
      vch62388 3 October 2020 15: 45 New
      +7
      It is good for the Israelis to make a technique sharpened for a theater of operations. And if you have a territory in 1/6 of the land from the Arctic through Germany to the mountains and deserts, then try to make special equipment for all local conditions, and then service it, train crews, supply spare parts, etc. By the way, the "unpromising" PT-76 showed itself very well in the jungles of Vietnam, the swamps of Bangladesh and the lakes of Karelia (though in the latter case it did not fight).
  • Crabong
    Crabong 3 October 2020 14: 52 New
    +1
    France and Britain did not and could not get any experience in tank battles in particular and the theory of using tanks in general. All this was received in full only by the USSR and Germany during WWII.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 3 October 2020 15: 33 New
      +6
      The Battle of Cambrai, if I'm not mistaken.
      The military use of tanks, had a long tedious journey, one or two did not work. Everyone was running around in the dark, understanding of the instrument began to come in the late 30s, but not everyone learned to use it!
  • kalibr
    kalibr 3 October 2020 17: 22 New
    +4
    Quote: Boris Epstein
    The Soviet Army had libraries and had an interlibrary loan.

    Not only in the army. I used it all the time both in Penza and in graduate school in Kuibyshev ... But nobody canceled the library now.
  • BAI
    BAI 3 October 2020 22: 19 New
    +8
    1. If we are talking about the pre-war period, then where is the picture with Stalin in uniform.
    2. The photo shows not a model, but a full-fledged Christie tank (M1931).
    1. BAI
      BAI 3 October 2020 22: 36 New
      +8
      PS. Saw the T-37 alive. You just wonder how you can fight on it. Dimensions - quite a lot of passenger cars are large.
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx 4 October 2020 06: 23 New
    +2
    Stalin didn’t understand anything. As any dictator loved the wunderfafli. Oh well. The most interesting thing that can be seen from this article is that Stalin invented these things. And he reacted with great attention to new products. And the Germans did not put their super-car into service.
    Enough to pour slop on the person, thanks to whom heavy industry appeared in our country and people who could manage all this.
    1. Selevc
      Selevc 4 October 2020 08: 00 New
      -2
      Quote: mmaxx
      Stalin didn’t understand anything.

      In the USSR, before the 2nd beginning of the Great Patriotic War, samples of the best armored vehicles in the world at that time were developed and mastered !!! And even the brazen Saxons and their habit of belittling all Soviet achievements at the sight of the T-34 respectfully take off their hats !!!
      1. mat-vey
        mat-vey 4 October 2020 11: 13 New
        0
        Quote: Selevc
        Quote: mmaxx
        Stalin didn’t understand anything.

        In the USSR, before the 2nd beginning of the Great Patriotic War, samples of the best armored vehicles in the world at that time were developed and mastered !!! And even the brazen Saxons and their habit of belittling all Soviet achievements at the sight of the T-34 respectfully take off their hats !!!

        Have you tried to read the comments completely?
  • kalibr
    kalibr 4 October 2020 12: 07 New
    +1
    Quote: Siberian54
    and not having the same with Tokyo?

    I just had. Non-aggression pact ...
  • Iskazi
    Iskazi 4 October 2020 16: 07 New
    +2
    a somewhat incomprehensible article, but it will do for the people ..., popular, patriotic, moderately critical, but on the whole everything is correct ...
  • kalibr
    kalibr 4 October 2020 16: 17 New
    0
    Quote: Fitter65
    the truth is, a lot turned out to be, as it were, not quite documents, but the type of evidence shot up Polish prisoners in Katyn. Many different documents appeared during perestroika ...

    Historical documents are ONE, and EVIDENCE is quite DIFFERENT. The difference is obvious. Don't write something you don't understand.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • nnz226
    nnz226 9 October 2020 21: 08 New
    0
    They chased after tanks, abandoned vehicles for refueling, ammunition delivery, repairs ... The result: thousands of abandoned tanks due to lack of fuel or minor breakdowns in the summer of 1941. And the infantry rushing under the tanks with grenades near Moscow. Fuck it !!!