"Breaches of production technology": modern research of museum tank armor

One of the unique exhibits of the museum in Verkhnyaya Pyshma. Source: ugmk.com

Museum relics

Techniques from military museums are unique carriers not only historical memory, but also excellent objects for a thorough study of wartime technologies.

You just need to find enthusiasts and professionals in their field. It seems that something similar happened in the Museum of military equipment of the Ural Mining and Metallurgical Company in Verkhnyaya Pyshma (a private cultural institution "Museum Complex"). To study the armor presented in the exposition of armored vehicles, two serious research institutes were involved - Physics of Metals and History and Archeology, as well as the Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin.

Research institutes are located in Yekaterinburg and belong to the structure of the Ural Branch of the Academy of Sciences. Judging by the articles published so far, a whole team of doctors and candidates of sciences - B.A. Gizhevsky, M.V. Degtyarev, T.I. Chashchukhina, L.M. Voronova, E.I. Patrakov, N.N. Melnikov, you. V. Zapariy, S.V. Ruzaev and Vl. V. Zapariy.

Museum in Verkhnyaya Pyshma. Source: sputnik8.com

The relevance of the work is not in any doubt - at the moment there are not so many materials about the composition in the public domain tank armor and production technologies during the Second World War.

Most of them belong to the period 70-75 years ago and are either based on an openly imperfect analytical technique, or even on theoretical calculations that have no real basis. In fact, the only source that sheds light on the intricacies and difficulties of the production of domestic tank armor during the war years was the NRC Kurchatov Institute - TsNII KM "Prometheus". That is why the Urals research is so valuable.

First of all, from the exposition of the museum in Verkhnyaya Pyshma, it is necessary to highlight authentic specimens actually produced during the Great Patriotic War. Some of the Soviet armored vehicles are either modern replicas or are collected bit by bit from the available spare parts.

Of the greatest interest, of course, for scientists were the variants of the T-34 tank, which endured the main hardships of the war. In the exposition and storage rooms of the largest private museum, thirteen tanks are collected at once - eight T-34-76, one T-34-57 and four T-34-85.

The tank turret was used to determine the manufacturer. Only by the shape of the tower can one reliably indicate the enterprise from which the car left the gate. With a certain degree of convention, you can even determine the year of issue. In the case of self-propelled guns based on the T-34, everything is much simpler - armored vehicles were produced exclusively by the Sverdlovsk Uralmashplant.

SU-85 in Verkhnyaya Pyshma. Source: kargoteka.info

As a result, a group of researchers selected five vehicles: the T-34 of the 1940 model from Kharkov, the T-34 of the Stalingrad tank plant of 1941-1942, and three self-propelled guns SU-122, SU-85 and SU-100. The oldest self-propelled gun was the SU-122 (1943), then the SU-85 (1943-44) and the SU-100 (1944 - the first post-war period).

The researchers set themselves the main goal - to find out to what extent it was possible during the war years to withstand the requirements for the composition and manufacturing technology of 8C armored steel. Of course, it is impossible to draw far-reaching conclusions on just five museum exhibits, but now it is no longer possible to find a suitable sample for large-scale research. It remains to be content with carefully preserved exhibits of the museum in Verkhnyaya Pyshma.

Research on SU armor

Let's go directly to the objects of research and start with self-propelled guns.

The staff of the Institute of Physics of Metals set the main goal to investigate the type of armor fracture and to determine the quality of workmanship. This required the selection of samples, the use of sophisticated techniques, and the observance of many scientific rituals. Previously, the armor plates from which the samples were taken were subjected to chemical analysis by a non-destructive method using a portable optical emission spectrometer PMI Master Smart. To perform the measurement, a 30x30 mm surface area was cleaned from paint.

Measurements were made directly on the copies of the self-propelled guns presented in the museum's exposition. The study of the chemical composition of the armor of the SU-100 gun mask was not carried out due to the difficulties in using the PMI Master Smart device on rounded surfaces. For the frontal protection of the SU-100, armored steel 75 mm thick was used, the composition of which was different from steel 8C.

The chemical composition of the armor plates, according to optical emission analysis. Source: Article "Fractographic study of armored steel of self-propelled artillery installations of the Red Army"

The main problem for the researchers was to carefully take samples of armor in different places of self-propelled guns and not spoil the appearance of the authentic equipment.

As a result, it was decided to "pinch off" small samples (1x1x3 cm each) from the inner surfaces of armored vehicles. Further, to obtain a fracture, the samples had to be destroyed. Briefly about the technique firsthand:

“Specimens with notches made by the electrospark method were destroyed by shock loading with a hammer and chisel.

The application of this method required making cuts on opposite sides of the sample.

Loading of samples No. 1 and No. 4 (SU-85 board and SU-100 gun mask) was carried out at room temperature, samples No. 2 and No. 3 (SU-100 board and SU-85 edge of the hole) after cooling for 15 min under a layer liquid nitrogen.

The temperature of the samples under loading was not measured.

Cooling in liquid nitrogen makes it possible to embrittle steel with a body-centered cubic lattice and to minimize the plastic component of deformation at the fracture surface.

As a result, it becomes possible to reveal on the surface of the destruction of micropores, microcracks that have arisen in the steel in the process of making armor.

Tests at room temperature are close to real conditions of destruction (on the battlefield).

The fracture surface was investigated by scanning electron microscopy on an Inspect F device (FEI) with an EDX spectrometer. "

The attentive reader will notice that in one of the cases of the SU-85, the armor for research was removed from the edge of the projectile hole in the frontal part. However, the data presented in the table of chemical composition by a kink show a slightly different composition of self-propelled armor.

Chemical composition in fractures of the studied steels. Source: Article "Fractographic study of armored steel of self-propelled artillery installations of the Red Army"

In particular, molybdenum, nickel, phosphorus and sulfur are absent.

And morphological analysis with a scanning microscope showed that the sample did not belong to the SU-85 frontal armor at all. As a result, an assumption was made about the origin of the projectile of the selected sample.

At the time of sampling, the researchers very unsuccessfully captured a piece of melted German shell steel. Why they did not take the sample again, history is silent. It can be assumed that the surface of the projectile "injury" is completely covered by enemy projectile surfacing and this makes the selection senseless.

What conclusions did the Ural researchers come to?

Despite the fact that technologists and steelmakers managed to preserve the brand composition of the legendary 8C in general terms, there were violations of the production methodology.

On the surface of the armor plates, a significant decrease in the proportion of carbon was observed, presumably due to improper heat treatment of the steel. The content of phosphorus and sulfur in the fractures of the studied steels significantly exceeds the indicators of the grade composition, which inevitably should increase the fragility of the armor.

In addition, the steel contains a noticeable amount of oxide slag inclusions. However, it is worth repeating, this did not lead to a critical decrease in the quality of the armor - the steel is quite ductile and intergranular destruction was not observed in any sample. And this, without exaggeration, is a real feat of the Soviet home front workers.

Now it seems impossible to withstand the composition of the 8C armor, which is very difficult to manufacture, in the face of evacuation and the titanic efforts of resuming armor production in Siberia and the Urals.

The ending should ...


Sources:

1. Article "Fractographic study of armored steel of self-propelled artillery installations of the Red Army" in the journal Diagnostics, Resource and Mechanics of materials and structures Issue 2, 2020. Authors: B.А. Gizhevsky, M.V. Degtyarev, T.I. Chashchukhina, L.M. Voronova, E.I. Patrakov, N.N. Melnikov, you. V. Zapariy, S.V. Ruzaev and Vl. V. Zapariy. 2020 g.

2. The article “Armored steel of medium tanks and self-propelled artillery installations of the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War” in the magazine “Ural Industrial. Bakunin readings ". Authors: B.A. Gizhevsky, M.V. Degtyarev, N.N. Melnikov. 2020 g.

3. The article "Historical memory and armored vehicles: military museums as a source of new data on the period of the Great Patriotic War" in the collection "The Great Patriotic War in the historical memory of the people: study, interpretation, lessons of the past." Author N.N. Melnikov. 2020 g.

Comments

[Alien From]

Ah Eugene, Eugene! Lured and intriguing) thanks, interesting, we are waiting for the continuation

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

I join the comment above! Although I can not resist adding - ay-yes Evgeny, ay-yes well done !!!

[Civil]

That's all for a light breakfast ... the author is waiting for a full article! Intrigue.

[Undecim]

Full articles can be read at the link
https://dream-journal.org/DREAM_Issue_2_2020_Gizhevskii_B.A._et_al._026_037.pdf,
https://elar.urfu.ru/bitstream/10995/94477/1/ubich_2020_1_61.pdf

[Vladimir_2U]

However, it is worth repeating, this did not lead to a critical decrease in the quality of the armor - the steel is quite ductile and intergranular destruction was not observed in any sample. And this, without exaggeration, is a real feat of the Soviet home front workers.

The creators of the C8 steel should also not be forgotten, because it is not easy to create something that is tolerant to the violation of technology!

this is the armor of the MZ-2 brand (Mariupol plant), the authors of which were G.F. Zasetsky, G.I. Kapyrin, A.T. Larin, I.F. Timchenko, N.V. Shmidt. This steel, indexed 8C, was used for the armored hulls and turrets of the T-34 tank.

[antivirus]

you can't drink the skill, if you have it ........................................

[Niko]

Thanks for the article, it is interesting to read not the fantasies of alternatives and dreamers of various kinds, but the results of RESEARCH.

[Akuzenka]

Was on a business trip, specially stopped at the museum in Verkhnyaya Pyshma. Not as pretentious as in "Patriot". But there you really feel pride for the USSR and the Soviet people who created such equipment and defeated the West in the Great Patriotic War! The impression of touching the heritage is amazing !!!!

[BAI]

One of the unique exhibits of the museum in Verkhnyaya Pyshma.

This tank has a strange gun mask.

[Avior]

With the D5T gun, it seems

But questions still arise. It looks like some kind of pre-production copy

[Undecim]

But questions still arise. It looks like some kind of pre-production copy

This is indeed a variant of the T-34-85 with the D-5T cannon. About 300 of them were produced, they were produced only by the Krasnoye Sormovo plant. These tanks were used for the tank column "Dimitry Donskoy", which was built with funds from the Russian Orthodox Church.

[Avior]

yes, I heard about this party.
Slightly embarrassed by the protruding sleeve at the barrel attachment point, the museum version does not have it.
And the sharp edges of the front of the tower, the museum one looks like a welded one, but in the photo they look more like cast

[Undecim]

The museum tank was assembled from various parts from several vehicles, including those not from Sormovo.

[svp67]

Quote: Undecim

The museum tank was assembled from various parts from several vehicles, including those not from Sormovo.

But not a turret with a gun. Most of these tanks came from the Staratel training ground ...
And from the wreckage and parts of several T-34s, this tank was assembled, with a stamped turret from the UDC

[Blacksmith 55]

Good morning .
Off-topic .
I read a lot about the museum in Verkhnyaya Pyshma, just great. Collect so much military equipment in one museum, how much work was done, how much money was invested?
Unfortunately, I myself have not been there, and it is unlikely that it will work out, but I am sure I would have climbed everything, looked at everything.
This is a museum not only of technology, but also a museum of the Victory of the Soviet people.
Schools need to take students there so that they know and do not forget history, do not forget the heroes of those times.
KEEP IT UP .

[svp67]

Quote: Blacksmith 55

Unfortunately, I myself have not been there, and it is unlikely that it will work out, but I am sure I would have climbed everything, looked at everything.

Every year it becomes more and more difficult to do this, as the exposition is more and more extensive. Already now one day is enough only to run through all the expositions "at a gallop across Europe"
They already have Wehrmacht equipment on display, previously they did not want to do this.

[geniy]

Excuse me please - I accidentally pressed the minus key by mistake - on the contrary I wanted to + put ...

[Avior]

highlight authentic copies actually produced during the Great Patriotic War. Some of the Soviet armored vehicles are either modern replicas or are collected bit by bit from the available spare parts.

The T34-85 was produced until 1958, and the post-war tanks, of course, differed from the military production. And just the post-war chances were greater.

[svp67]

Quote: Avior

The T34-85 was produced until 1958 and the post-war tanks, of course, differed from the military production.

But most of these tanks were already produced outside the USSR and they had structural differences.

[Avior]

You are right.
But in the USSR, authenticity was also released, as an end in itself, during operation it did not really care.

[svp67]

Quote: Avior

But in the USSR, authenticity was also released, as an end in itself, during operation it did not really care.

End in itself? Of course not. But the quality of the tower casting, the absence of a frontal beam, the presence of a telephone socket ... it's difficult to change

[Avior]

I, in fact, originally wrote this

post-war tanks, of course, differed from military production

[besser best]

And that in our archives there are no documents left for the manufacture of tanks?

[Avior]

They studied not how it should be according to the documents, but how it was in reality

[Free wind]

Strangely, with this amount of carbon, steel should be soft as plasticine, and steel with such a carbon content does not heat up. At least that's what the textbooks say. However, everyone noted that when the shells hit, a large number of fragments were formed, that is, the steel is quite fragile.

[old dilettante]

Alexander, pre-euctoid (low-carbon) steel is "hot". Hardness is certainly not ice. But units 30-35, according to Rockwell, "is gaining". Roughly like a stainless steel table knife. Periodic reinforcement is made from steel 8GS, which is close in composition to steel "35C". With hardened and tempered "fittings" with a diameter of 15 mm, they "grooved" (grooved grooves for hidden wiring) concrete walls during the period of work in the student "construction brigade". And from the smooth "twenty" a local blacksmith forged crowbars with heat treatment of the "blade" and "point".
After hardening, the parts are always tempered. The austenite of the cast (rolled sheet) during quenching turns into quenched martensite, but then, with the so-called. high tempering - hardening martensite "passes" into temper sorbite. After such tempering, internal stresses are almost completely removed, and the impact strength is significantly increased. At the same time, strength and hardness decrease, but remain higher than during normalization (annealing). High tempering creates the best combination of strength and toughness of steel and completely eliminates the possibility of brittle fracture. It is not for nothing that heat treatment of steel, consisting of hardening and high tempering, is also called an improvement. And alloying elements (nickel, molybdenum) in the composition of the alloy affect the preservation of the fine grain of the steel product during heating.
For those unfamiliar with the terminology of metallurgy - Google to help.

[Vovk]

A very serious question was raised - what kind of armor was on tanks in the USSR in reality.
And this one rises on this site more than once. I am very glad that the quality of the armor of tanks and self-propelled guns of the USSR will be shown in real numbers.
After reading many memoirs of both the tankers of the USSR and Germany, realizing that much is unsaid and embellished in them, I made a number of interesting conclusions for myself.
1) The Germans actively used captured T-34-76 tanks from 1940-1941 ... because in most cases they were abandoned due to poor training of Soviet crews. The Germans did not reflect this in their combat statistics.
2) Most of the German anti-tank artillery could not penetrate the nose armor of the T-34-76.
3) In 1942, another one already surfaced, suddenly, the frontal armor of the T-34-76 begins to break through not with anti-aircraft guns, not with large-caliber anti-tank artillery, not with cumulative shells ... but with ordinary shells ... which in 1941 the armor of the T-34-76 did not take.
4) After the disastrous offensive near Kharkov, a large number of T-34-76 tanks, both serviceable and faulty, came into the hands of the Germans ... and here a rather strange thing arises. Serviceable tanks were sent to the remnants of the KhTZ and what is most interesting, even serviceable ones were not transferred to their allies and were not used by the Germans - all then went to melt down to Germany - the quality of the T-34-76 tanks produced in 1942 was terrible compared to those released 1941 g.

[Jager]

in what "memoirs" do German tank crews "cut through" the T-34/76? I met only one mention, but there the case quickly ended in panic in the ranks of the infantry and a captured tank knocked out by its own artillerymen.

[Vovk]

in what "memoirs" do German tank crews "cut through" the T-34/76?

In the memoirs of conscientious artillerymen. In 1941, Soviet soldiers were not awarded for knocked out German captured T-34-76 ...

[kytx]

photo by the way is also enough with German symbols and with Finnish

[voyaka uh]

The mechanized division of the SS Das Reich was fully equipped in 1942 with T-34 tanks. In them she entered the battle in the Battle of Kursk.
A commander's cupola was added to the tanks, changing the stowage of shells in the hull to a safer one. German walkie-talkies have been supplied.
We were pleased with the tank as a means of supporting the infantry. 76 mm high-explosive shells easily suppressed firing points.

[Zug]

An interesting point, it seems strange to me about the SU-85 with its steel adhered to by the German shell. I read that sometimes the place of the armor plates was driven by the usual one, for lack of armor. I wonder if this is so? (armor) osnavit. Maybe just experts just came across this kind of "armor plate"?

[kytx]

very interesting
it is clear that the composition of the armor "strongly walked" from the production possibilities
wartime t34 is generally a "child of war" in its purest form
I'm surprised that the original T34-57 has survived somewhere else
I'm waiting for the sequels

[DWG1905]

All museum workers, to a certain extent, are a little hacky, in the sense that they do not do it themselves, but order certain restorers who sculpt the humpback according to the principle and so it will do. They do not even suspect that tanks and other equipment can be restored from the preserved CD. You can find out the manufacturer and the date of issue by the number on the case, in most cases they have been preserved. Not entirely accurate, but the date of manufacture and the plant can be recognized by the numbers on the armored parts, where the drawing number, serial number, OTK and VP stamp were affixed.

[kytx]

ha in the USA there is a whole company that is engaged in the reconstruction of BB2 armored vehicles in non-stop mode
whole tanks are brewed from which metal rolling stock according to the pictures
externally of course authentic
about some kind of armor? Well, who needs it? :)

[Jager]

We also have such offices. I saw these "crafts". Plus or minus a meter is not a skew. The maximum for which such mock-ups are suitable are targets on the training ground or in paintball / airsoft.

[Dzafdet]

Armored steel for the T-34 was supplied to us by the Americans under Lend-Lease. We cooked something ourselves ...

[Jager]

maybe the Red Army also gave birth in America?

[unhappy]

Alloy additives for steel, not armor.

[Zug]

Wow! -Is it true? And they probably brought it by means of camel caravans - here in the USSR the first camel with an armor plate goes and from the USA the last one comes out, closing, in the tail of the GREAT COLUMN

[old dilettante]

They brought in, brought in .. According to data taken from "Report on War Aid Furnished by the United States to the USSR", prepared. Department of the US Government for the period from 22.06.1941/20.09.1945/8117 to 2/365/1941. - armor steel, in sheets, delivered 1945 tons in total. For four years. Liberty-class ships. And alloying additives (molybdenum and nickel) were also supplied. Molybdenum, after the loss of the Tyrnyauz deposit (North Caucasus), is almost all imported. Nickel - imports, about a third of the need. With the total production of "armor" in the USSR, for the four war years, XNUMX XNUMX thousand tons (reference book "The National Economy of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War of XNUMX-XNUMX.")

[Zug]

So what? Does it say that ALL BRONESTAL FOR T-43 was delivered from the USA? I know without you what and how much was supplied

[old dilettante]

The man is wrong. I lied. It happens. Knowledge is power! Happy for you! .

[Kostya Lavinyukov]

For the T-43 it is possible.

[Mikhail3]

Quote: Zug

So what? Does it say that ALL BRONESTAL FOR T-43 was delivered from the USA? I know without you what and how much was supplied

If all 8000 tons are used on T 34 tanks, it will turn out, very roughly, 800 tanks, no more. Not bad, but not a significant part)

[old dilettante]

Mikhail, about "not bad". 800 vehicles in four years - with an average monthly production of T-34 (also roughly) 7-12 thousand units - this is a drop in the bucket. The armor plate received from the allies, in accordance with the order of the State Defense Committee, was used as an addition to the main range of armored products. Used in the manufacture of T-70, T-80 tanks and, possibly, in the repair of Lend-Lease generals "Lee" and "Grant".

[Mikhail3]

I struggled to flatter our dear allies. Of course, their armor could not be used in our tanks at all, since for this it was necessary to completely "alter" the technology of making the tank) Starting with the electrodes used and then everywhere.
Fans of the almighty Lend-Lease are usually illiterate, stupid to amazement and indestructiblely confident in their genius and incredible education. My fingers are itching to explain exactly what Lend-Lease was most useful in terms of the supply of materials, but it's impossible.
I've been waiting for many years for suuupergenies to catch up on their own. Maybe they will never catch up? I will wait yet))

[old dilettante]

Mikhail, first of all, we must not forget that the allies HELPED not with advice, but financially. Yes, most of the items in the Protocols under which the deliveries were made were not critical, but not all. Without American molybdenum (at that time the world's largest supplier) there would be no armor. Without aluminum and duralumin - especially in 1941-42 - a sharp drop in the production of V-2 engines and aircraft parts. Lead, nickel, toluene and other "chemistry". Drilling rigs, special machines, rails, dump cars. Moreover, the machines are, perhaps, in the first place. And all this is for rent.
Secondly, for some reason, when discussing Lend-Lease, opponents on both sides "forget" that the deliveries were not gifts that "do not look in the mouth." The nomenclature and quantity of "rented military equipment and materials" were chosen and approved by the Soviet side, and the terms and sequence of deliveries were agreed with the allies. Therefore, we must honestly thank the allies for their help. Yes, not free. But the payment is only for what was not used and with a deferred payment. Yes, not everything that they could supply, the Allies agreed to include in the Protocols. But at the expense / thanks to supplies, resources were saved, the health of our home front workers and the lives of Red Army soldiers at the front.
As for the "catch-up". Some will understand - they will be replaced by "young growth". Since there is a war, informational however. So the recruiting process is not interrupted. Bulk is only one of the "options" ...
In short, the Chinese version with a sitting on the priest exactly and the corpse of the enemy, which sooner or later will float by on the river - not our option.

[Mikhail3]

I didn't understand at all what you wanted to say with this sheet. Or is your task simply to list the lend-lease nomenclature more often in order to increase the return of search engines? You didn’t say anything at all, didn’t explain anything, you just stuck nonsense about "irreplaceable" molybdenum and the like. What for? Do you work out this way? Good path ...

[old dilettante]

Mikhail, there are at least two participants in a misunderstanding. Ask about what is not clear! Formulate the question (s), not the complaint - and perhaps an understanding and / or answer will appear. What is the reason for the dissatisfaction? Are there many letters? Well, the topic is vast ... And brevity is not always the sister of talent, more often just a "neighbor" ..
Do you have something more serious than stupidity ".. stuck raving about" irreplaceable "molybdenum and the like."? Share, don't be greedy. Desirable with links to the source. Why did you write about molybdenum? As one of the proofs of the statement about the importance of the assistance of the allies in the anti-Hitler coalition for the entire USSR and the Red Army in particular.
Don't you believe in an ordinary, free exchange of opinions? "..Oh times, about morals .."
Have a nice one you too.

[Mikhail3]

Quote: old layman

Mikhail, there are at least two participants in misunderstanding. Ask about what is not clear! Formulate the question (s),

I shouldn't do this. I have to make a claim, which I did. It is you who comment on my posts, and not vice versa.)

[Francini Caldeno]

I've been waiting for many years for suuupergenies to catch up on their own. Maybe they will never catch up? I will wait yet))

This is about you:

illiterate, stupid to amazement and indestructible confident in their genius and incredible education

I'll go for the time being the "second front" stew, or I'll die of hunger if I eat only bread with sawdust.

[Mikhail3]

Smishno) Noble Don hit in the heel. But as you did not understand the question, you still do not understand. Shall we continue the search? Will you mention everything that was supplied under Lend-Lease, or use something from NLP technologies? For those who know how to gurgle beautifully from NLP, I even answer sometimes. To make them think technology is working)
You see, information is not knowledge. There is a huge difference between them, and clever language is not an assistant here. Hehe ...

[geniy]

How many beautiful chatter-and-just-that-investigated the chemical composition of the armor-several 75-year-old tanks-and what conclusion? -Detected the discrepancy between the specifications (without giving the data of these specifications and the permissible error) -and what will they do with this discrepancy, apparently, they will complain about the manufacturers Lawrence?

[geniy]

My previous post is actually not my text at all, but I put it at the request of a friend who is not able to speak at VO. But I do not agree with him in this assessment, so now I will raise my objection. So don’t get the idea that I have a split personality and that I’m arguing with myself.
So, we investigated the chemical composition of the armor of 75-year-old tanks - what is wrong with this study? Do historians really need to study the armor of modern tanks? It's like a historian to investigate the chemical composition of the metal of an ancient Germanic ax or an ordinary modern ax of any Russian peasant.
And what to do with the discrepancy - whether to complain to Beria? Yes, do nothing, but just keep in mind that due to the difficulties of military production, metallurgists were far from always able to maintain an ideally accurate chemical composition, and German metallurgists also probably did not succeed in this.

[DWG1905]

Specifically for the T-34-85 with the "D5T-85 cannon", they turned out so crookedly, because the S-53 had the barrel axis higher than the axle of the trunnions, like the F-34 and ZiS-5 (the F-34 and ZiS -5 by 88 mm), while the D5T-85 is lower. Regarding the T-34-76 with a stamped turret, you have to think of attaching the F-34 mask from the pre-war car to this turret. The front plate of this mask has a concave shape and a curved bottom end repeating the geometry of the frontal part of the cast or welded pre-war tower (i.e. the cone), otherwise it will not move. For the stamped tower, the F-34 mask plate is the same as that of the "nut", only cut from the bottom, because the axis of the F-34 pins at the stamped tower is lowered down due to the rounding of the joint of the frontal part and the roof. Well, further down the list, you can make out almost all of their creations. Museum workers, like filmmakers, think that people are eating, tk. does not understand. People understands and does not want to hawk hack.

[hohol95]

The tower at the T-34-85 plant # 112! But it is possible that they took the turret for the S-53 gun. D-5T was inserted and instead of the gunner's MK-4 device, a PTK-5 was installed.

[Dzafdet]

Quote: Zug

So what? Does it say that ALL BRONESTAL FOR T-43 was delivered from the USA? I know without you what and how much was supplied

T-43s were not produced during the war. Now a wave of articles has gone out, refuting the lend-lease deliveries.
https://hotdoc-71.livejournal.com/19110.html
However, Zhukov said clearly about the supply of steel for the production of tanks. I trust him more than the scribes. Since he served in the General Staff and fought.
By the way, the Americans made gunpowder for missiles for us. These missiles were BETTER than the ones we produced for Katyusha ourselves.

[Dzafdet]

Quote: Zug

Wow! -Is it true? And they probably brought it by means of camel caravans - here in the USSR the first camel with an armor plate goes and from the USA the last one comes out, closing, in the tail of the GREAT COLUMN

the camel was called "Liberty" Three pieces a day were made ... 8117 tons of armor steel, tens of thousands of tons of additives. 400 thousand cars. gunpowder .. Gasoline and additives in gasoline .. On five routes were transported ...

[old dilettante]

Sergei, nitro powder (ballistic powder or ballistite), which was used as fuel for the M-13 and M-8 projectiles, came from the allies. "Report on War Aid Furnished by the United States to the USSR" for the period 1941-1945. Under the Lend-Lease program, the allies in the USSR supplied:
Gunpowder.
smokeless (smokelless powder) - 129 667 American tons,
plus 2 210 tons - in granules (stick powder)
ballistic (cordit powder) - 1 tons
If translated into metric tons, this is 120 660 tons;
For comparison, the volume of gunpowder produced by the gunpowder factories of the USSR in 1942-44 was 307 tons. Moreover, due to the increased content of potassium salts in the American pyroxylin powder, the corrosion of the metal of the gun barrels increased sharply during firing. Therefore, our cartridge areas were forced to mix "their" gunpowder with Soviet.
If we go back to ballistic, the Americans delivered (roughly) 914 tons of ballistic powder in four years. Well done. True, nitro powder was produced in accordance with the recipe developed by the "Special Bureau" No. 98 of the Molotov (Perm) gunpowder plant and in accordance with the technology developed by the factory workers (the recipe and technical documentation were given to the Americans when placing an order). Such is the franchise.
The powder charge of the M13 rocket (mines) for the "Katyusha" was made initially from gunpowder "N", and then from gunpowder "NDK", "NM-2", "NM-4Sh". The mass of the charge was set equal to 7 kg, more precisely (7050 ± 35) g, and for NM-2 and NM-4Sh propellants - 7130 ± 35 g. For the M-8 projectile - 1,18 kg (1180 ± 10 g).
914 tons supplied by the allies is about 130,5 thousand M-13 charges. And there were also M-8, M-20 and M-30 shells.
For reference. The GKO assignment for plant number 98, for December 1941, was 8 thousand units for charges for the "M-170". , for "M-13" - 100 thousand units. Photo from the site of the UMMC museum in V. Pyshma.

[Kostadinov]

Here is one of the answers to theories about the indispensability of Lend-Lease for the USSR. The armor turned out to be quite good and with a lot less additives.
For SPGs, no epaulettes and special machines are needed.
BBs could be made with much less toluene, and so on.

[Francini Caldeno]

The armor turned out to be quite good and with a lot less additives.

There are no miracles in the world, for the T-34 there was no concept of good / bad armor, or an insufficient engine resource simply because it was scrapped very quickly.

Here is one of the answers to theories about the indispensability of Lend-Lease for the USSR

Aha, there are no irreplaceable ©, I'll go wash the bandages better.

ACS does not need any epaulettes and special machines

An SPG needs a large cannon, which requires special machines ...

BB could do with a lot less toluene, and so on.

Yeah, you can see right away the Leningrad proprietary recipe, though there are no calories, well, it will do ...

[Tram]

Once upon a time, while doing military service in the tank forces, I and several other soldiers were preparing targets at the range for firing a regular projectile. Not far from the targets in the pit there was an ACS from the Great Patriotic War. The self-propelled guns had a trail of hitting a practical projectile in the center of the side armor plate of the cabin. The entire armor plate was slightly dented from the impact of the blank and was covered with small cracks. It seemed that from the second hit, the armor would simply crumble. In the future, we fired at the same self-propelled gun with practical shells and instead of holes in the armor, we observed gaps of about 50 cm in diameter. They shot 125 mm practical cumulative projectiles from a distance of 800 meters.

[Francini Caldeno]

Quote: Mikhail3

Smishno) Noble Don hit in the heel. But as you did not understand the question, you still do not understand. Shall we continue the search? Will you mention everything that was supplied under Lend-Lease, or use something from NLP technologies? For those who know how to gurgle beautifully from NLP, I even answer sometimes. To make them think technology is working)
You see, information is not knowledge. There is a huge difference between them, and clever language is not an assistant here. Hehe ...

Stop carrying this confusion, and drink plenty of water so as not to cough, otherwise you seem to want to establish a discussion, but everything does not work out, the emergency does not let go.

[Bobik012]

Quote: Avior

With the D5T gun, it seems

But questions still arise. It looks like some kind of pre-production copy

The tower, not only is welded, it looks like a slightly different design, and the commander's turret has been moved back (perhaps just the angle) Is this not from the first series of Sormovsky T-34-85 with a two-man turret? There was, it seems, such a small amount. Although on those, it seems, there were cast "nuts".

[Bobik012]

Quote: Tram

practical cumulative projectiles

So practical or cumulative !?

[Tram]

Would you understand what kind of shell we are talking about if you write just practical?