Military Review

"Jagdtiger". Too heavy to fight

223

"Jagdtiger", a render from the game War Thunder


"Jagdtiger" became the crown of the development of the class of fighters tanks Nazi Germany.

A large, hulking vehicle, created on the basis of the Tiger II heavy tank, had a large, well-armored wheelhouse, in which it was possible to place a large-caliber gun. As in the case of the heavy Tiger tanks, the German designers turned their attention to anti-aircraft artillery, focusing on the 128-mm FlaK 40 anti-aircraft gun.

The resulting combat vehicle was practically invulnerable in a head-on duel with all Allied tanks. At the same time, the "Jagdtiger" itself could easily hit enemy tanks from very long distances, thanks to the monstrous power and armor penetration of its 128-mm gun with a barrel length of 55 calibers. However, this opportunity had to pay with the huge combat mass of the vehicle - more than 70 tons. The weight negatively affected the running gear and mobility of the Jagdtigr, which evil tongues call not a tank destroyer, but a mobile bunker.

Ultimate weapon


The Jagdtiger tank destroyer was developed in Germany between 1942 and 1944. on the chassis of a heavy tank "King Tiger" or (as it is also called) "Tiger II". The main purpose of the self-propelled gun was the fight against the armored vehicles of the allies. On the one hand, it was an attempt to create a miracleweapon... On the other hand, it is a promising anti-tank weapon capable of effectively holding back armada of enemy tanks during retreat.

Throughout the second half of the war, the Germans were balancing between the creation of rather interesting units of armored vehicles and projects of extremely dubious value and labor costs. Jagdtiger was somewhere in between these two extremes.

A feature of the self-propelled gun was originally supposed to be a weapon that would not leave a chance to any tank of the allies. And the German designers coped with this task. As in the case of the Tiger heavy tanks, the designers turned to existing anti-aircraft guns, raising the stakes. As a basis, a 128-mm FlaK 40 anti-aircraft gun was chosen, converted into a PaK 44 L / 55 anti-tank gun with a barrel length of 55 calibers. The self-propelled version received the StuK 44 index.

"Jagdtiger". Too heavy to fight
128-mm anti-aircraft gun FlaK 40

The 28-kilogram armor-piercing projectile of this gun pierced the frontal armor of all Allied tanks and did not lose its relevance until 1948. At least, it is these assessments that appear today among a number of specialists.

An armor-piercing projectile of this gun with a ballistic cap, even at a distance of two kilometers, penetrated 190 mm of armor at an encounter angle of 30 degrees from the normal. The first tank to withstand shelling from it was the IS-7.

For the most massive American tank of the Second World War, the Sherman, this weapon did not leave any chances. American tanks were hit at a distance of 2,5 to 3,5 kilometers. And here it was not so much the armor penetration of the 128-mm projectile that played a role, but the very possibility of making a direct shot at such a distance. This shell did not leave any chances for the heavy Soviet tank IS-2.

The rifled 128-mm gun was rather bulky and had a large mass. For this reason, the designers did not implement the most common design, abandoning the classic gun mount for anti-tank self-propelled guns. The 128-mm cannon was installed inside the wheelhouse on a special pedestal, which was located on the floor of the fighting compartment.

The gun possessed great power and high recoil, which negatively affected the Jagdtiger's chassis, which was already a weak point of the vehicle. For this reason, the shooting was carried out mainly from the spot. The gun's ammunition consisted of 38-40 shells, both armor-piercing and high-explosive fragmentation.


According to the memoirs of the famous German tanker Otto Karius, the 8-meter barrel of a tank destroyer cannon loosened up after a short off-road trip. After that, it was extremely problematic to aim properly with the gun, the Jagdtiger needed maintenance and repair.

In his opinion, the design of the stopper, which fixed the 128-mm gun in the stowed position, was also unsuccessful. The stopper could not be disabled from inside the ACS. Therefore, some of the crew members had to leave the combat vehicle for a while.

Difficulty with being overweight


The "King Tiger", on the basis of which the "Jagdtiger" was designed, was not itself a successful car in terms of chassis and dynamic characteristics. In the version of the tank destroyer (with enhanced armor and a powerful cannon), the chassis felt completely lousy, and the Jagdtiger itself naturally suffered from obesity.

The combat weight of the self-propelled gun could reach 75 tons. For such a mass, the Maybach »HL 230 engine with a capacity of 700 hp. with was definitely not enough. But the Germans had nothing else at that time. For comparison: the Germans installed the same engine on the Panther, the combat weight of which was almost 30 tons less.

It is not surprising that the mobile bunker turned out to be clumsy, had poor dynamics and did not accelerate over rough terrain faster than 17 km / h. At the same time, the engine consumed a huge amount of fuel at a time when it was already in short supply in Germany.

The Yagdtigra's cruising range on the highway did not exceed 170 km, on rough terrain - only 70 km. Another problem was that not every bridge could withstand a self-propelled gun weighing more than 70 tons.


Hulls of unfinished tank destroyers "Jagdtiger"

The "obesity" of the combat vehicle was caused not only by the use of a weapon of monstrous power, the anti-tank version of which weighed more than 9 tons, but also by the most powerful armor. The hull went almost unchanged to the self-propelled gun from the "Royal Tiger". Its upper frontal plate, 150 mm thick, was installed at an angle of 40 degrees. The lower armor plate had a thickness of 120 mm and was installed at the same slope.

The best armored cabin was made by pre-war armor plates intended for the Kriegsmarine. The thickness of the frontal armor was 250 mm, while the angle of inclination was 15 degrees. Allied tanks and anti-tank artillery were not able to penetrate this armor.

The armor and the gun partly compensated for the low mobility of the combat vehicle, as well as the unreliability of the chassis, which simply could not cope with such a weight. If the self-propelled gun had time to take a position, it could confidently hit the enemy's armored vehicles, not worrying much about maneuverability.

At the same time, the car did not belong to unobtrusive ones, the height of the "Jagdtigr" was almost three meters. Covering the self-propelled gun on the ground was a real problem, which was used quite well by the American assault aviationdominating the battlefield. Even the anti-aircraft self-propelled guns Wirbelwind, Flakpanzer and Ostwind, which were attached to the Jagdtigers battalions, did not help much.

Combat application


Tank destroyers "Jagdtiger" were mass-produced from 1944 to 1945. almost until the very end of World War II. At the same time, this anti-tank self-propelled gun turned out to be very difficult and expensive to manufacture.

In conjunction with the destruction of factories by air bombing of the Allied aviation and interruptions in the supply of parts and materials due to the increasingly catastrophic state of affairs at the front for Germany, the industry managed to produce an extremely small number of Jagdtigers. According to various estimates, from 79 to 88 giant self-propelled guns were produced.


All "Jagdtigers" built and accepted by the troops fought in two separate heavy anti-tank battalions. These were the 512th and 653rd heavy tank destroyer battalions, which operated mainly on the Western Front in the late winter of 1944 and the spring of 1945.

These combat vehicles could not make any significant contribution to the course of hostilities due to their small number. Despite this, in a number of battles, the Jagdtigers proved their effectiveness, inflicting significant damage on the advancing Allied forces.

The commander of the second company of the 512th heavy tank destroyer battalion was the German tank ace Otto Carius. In March 1945, six Jagdtigers of his tank company successfully proved themselves in the defense of the bridge over the Rhine in the Remagen area. Without losing a single self-propelled gun, the Germans repelled the attacks of the Allied tanks, destroying a significant number of armored vehicles.

In these battles, the power of the 128-mm gun was once again confirmed, which did not leave a single chance for the Sherman tanks, successfully hitting them at a distance of 2,5 and even 3 km.

For other tanks, the Jagdtigers were practically invulnerable. It was extremely problematic to hit them head-on, especially from distances at which the Germans could already conduct effective fire.

It is known that most of the losses of the 653rd battalion were not caused by the impact of enemy tanks, but were the result of airstrikes and artillery shelling (30 percent). Another 70 percent of self-propelled guns were out of order for technical reasons or as a result of defects. And they were blown up by the crews. Destroyed "Jagdtigers" and due to the use of fuel and ammunition.

At the same time, one "Jagdtigr" of the 653rd heavy battalion of tank destroyers was nevertheless attributed to Soviet tankers.

May 6, 1945 "Jagdtiger" of this battalion was shot down in Austria while trying to break through to American troops. The tank destroyer crew was unable to undermine the self-propelled gun under the fire of the Soviet troops, as a result of which it became a legitimate trophy of the Red Army.

Today, everyone can see this self-propelled gun in the exposition of the armored museum in Kubinka.


"Jagdtigr" in the armored museum in Kubinka. Photo: Mike1979 Russia, wikipedia.org

It can be noted that the Germans themselves understood all the vulnerabilities of the Jagdtigr and its weak points, immediately equipping the combat vehicle with stationary subversive charges for self-destruction. Agree, not the most common practice.

The standard charges were placed under the engine and under the breech of the gun. The crew was supposed to use them in the event of a technical malfunction and the impossibility of evacuating the self-propelled gun to the rear.

On the one hand, the explosive charges helped not to hand over the unique military equipment to the enemy in working order. On the other hand, the charge of explosives under the breech of the gun hardly added optimism to the crews of anti-tank self-propelled guns, many of which were poorly prepared.

Along with technical difficulties, the poor training of German tankers who fought on the Jagdtigers at the end of World War II became a serious problem for the Reich's tank forces.
Author:
223 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 17 March 2021 04: 50
    +13
    "Jagdtiger" became the culmination of the development of the class of tank destroyers in Nazi Germany.
    The crown that broke the necks of the Panzerjagans!
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 17 March 2021 05: 00
      +4
      Pay attention to the width of the tracks - 75 tons of weight!
    2. Civil
      Civil 17 March 2021 12: 46
      +7
      I saw it in Kubinka, it's impressive ... but alas, it's just a technical dead end.
  2. Thomas N.
    Thomas N. 17 March 2021 04: 56
    +22
    A quote from "YagdTIGER" and other tank destroyers "(Baryatinsky MB), which, in my opinion, characterizes this combat vehicle in the best way:
    The Jagdtiger did not justify the hopes placed on it, becoming the same redundant and virtually useless combat vehicle like the Royal Tiger: “The opponents of Hitlerite Germany did not have targets worthy of a 128-mm cannon. one "Jagdtiger", it was possible to make four "Hetzer" - the best light anti-tank SPGs of the war, from which was much more use! "
    1. LiSiCyn
      LiSiCyn 17 March 2021 06: 04
      -16%
      Quote: Thomas N.
      Jagdtiger "did not live up to the hopes placed on him

      The Germans, throughout the war, tried to copy and modify our tanks. Shock from KV-2, gave birth to Tiger. Su-152 - Jagdtiger. They were very impressed by the armor breaks from 152 mm.
      1. Thomas N.
        Thomas N. 17 March 2021 06: 34
        +12
        Quote: LiSiCyn
        Shock from KV-2, gave birth to Tiger.

        I think not from the KV-2, but from the KV-1.
        1. LiSiCyn
          LiSiCyn 17 March 2021 07: 00
          +6
          Quote: Thomas N.
          I think not from the KV-2, but from the KV-1.

          Of course KV-1. good
          It's me, hastened. laughing
      2. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 08: 21
        +14
        Quote: LiSiCyn
        The Germans, throughout the war, tried to copy and modify our tanks

        Of course not. The Soviet government had ideas for 70-ton vehicles - KV-3 and beyond - but did not have time. Lucky for that.
        Quote: LiSiCyn
        Shock from KV-2, gave birth to Tiger

        Nonsense popular in Runet. TK for the Tiger was approved in May 41st. The need to fight tanks with anti-cannon armor became urgent in the spring of 40, but the Germans relaxed somewhat after France.
        Quote: LiSiCyn
        Su-152 - Jagdtiger

        Su-152 has nothing to do with PTSau. It is a hybrid of an assault gun and a self-propelled howitzer. The Germans had vehicles of both classes, including the 15cm caliber.
        1. LiSiCyn
          LiSiCyn 17 March 2021 09: 03
          +1
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          TK for the Tiger was approved in May 41st.

          But adjustments were made. And not an unimportant role was played by familiarization with Soviet technology.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 09: 31
            -1
            Quote: LiSiCyn
            role played by familiarization with Soviet technology.

            The Porsche Commission is late autumn 41st. I do not know that the basic parameters of the tiger were corrected according to her findings.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 17 March 2021 12: 26
          +4
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Su-152 has nothing to do with PTSau. It is a hybrid of an assault gun and a self-propelled howitzer.

          Self-propelled howitzer it is only formally. Remember the elevation angles of the SU-152. Not to mention the fact that there were no structures for issuing data for firing from PDO to tsap. So - pure assault ACS.
          Otherwise, the T-34 can be attributed to self-propelled guns: Grabin mentioned several cases of using tanks in artillery preparation. smile
          In general, Ginzburg wanted a "bunker fighter" with a 152-mm BR-2 cannon. But, in the absence of free barrels and opportunities for their production, I had to agree to ML-20.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 12: 53
            -7
            Quote: Alexey RA
            SU-152 vertical guidance angles

            +18. Not rich, of course.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            the T-34 can be referred to as self-propelled guns

            At one time, I was greatly surprised by the fact that the howitzer Sherman, which I considered an assault vehicle, was mainly used with the PDO.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            there were no structures for issuing data for firing from the PDO to the tsap

            Yes, details and organization have always been the weak point of the Red Army.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 17 March 2021 16: 08
              -3
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              Yes, details and organization have always been the weak point of the Red Army.

              The materiel and personnel were the weak point. The USSR self-propelled guns could do it. But to mechanize the "body kit" of the division (KShM, spotter vehicles, TZM) and provide normal communication - is no longer there. So they gave the self-propelled guns to the tankers - let them work with direct fire.
              At the same time, they saved money on the rear and rembats for heavy equipment - there was no need to make parallel structures in the GAU. smile
          2. yehat2
            yehat2 17 March 2021 14: 29
            +5
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Su-152 has nothing to do with PTSau

            she had to, because the su-122 cumulative shells were not always sufficient and a larger caliber was required, and in addition, simple bombardment with land mines proved to be effective.
        3. avm_24
          avm_24 18 March 2021 17: 30
          +1
          The Su / Isu-152 is more of an assault gun, since the ML-20 is a howitzer cannon.
      3. Hermit21
        Hermit21 17 March 2021 10: 12
        +5
        In fact, the "Tiger" began to develop back in 1937. This "Panther" was the answer to the T-34 and KV-1
        1. kytx
          kytx 20 March 2021 01: 10
          0
          in
          both the tiger and the panther were conceived before the war
          tiger - heavy
          panther - mbt
          but it didn’t grow together, it didn’t fail
      4. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 17 March 2021 12: 14
        +2
        Quote: LiSiCyn
        The Germans, throughout the war, tried to copy and modify our tanks. Shock from KV-2, gave birth to Tiger.

        I wonder where the Germans met the KV in May 1941? smile
        The final specification for the "Tiger" was issued on May 26, 1941.
      5. yehat2
        yehat2 17 March 2021 13: 51
        +3
        Quote: LiSiCyn
        Shock from KV-2, gave birth to Tiger.

        that's funny
        the tiger project was started in 1939, when the Germans had no idea what the KV-2 was.
        But, due to the fact that they believed that there were enough light tanks, the project went slowly and was dramatically accelerated.
        just at the end of 41, when messages came from the troops about the kv-1 and t-34. The Germans considered the Kv-2 to be a powerful, strange, but not particularly dangerous tank.
        in the middle of '42, 2 prototypes of Henschel and Porsche were already tested, and at the end of '42, the first tigers hit the front near Leningrad. At about the same time, the first su-122 and su-85 began to arrive at the front.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 14: 54
          +3
          Quote: yehat2
          At about the same time, the first su-122 and su-85 began to arrive at the front.

          Sorry.
          Su-122 is an attempt to make a self-propelled howitzer 42nd year. The Su-85 is an emergency solution to reinforce the tank destroyer; instead of a howitzer, an anti-aircraft gun was installed on the same vehicle. Accordingly, in August 43, they finished making the Su-122 and started the Su-85. The T-34-85 is not yet available, but the penetrating gun is needed immediately.
          1. yehat2
            yehat2 17 March 2021 17: 14
            +3
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            in August 43, we finished making the Su-122 and started the Su-85

            the first part, equipped with a su-122, came to the front in December 42 of the year
            as for the "penetrating gun", in 90% of cases the su-76 gun was enough. The problems began precisely by the summer of 43, because it was then that the benefit performance began in significant quantities of heavily armored vehicles. And the t34-85 had already been developed by this time.
            And it is not clear why you say that "t34-85" is not yet available. It is there, but production has just begun.
            And there is no point in changing the T34-85 to the Su-85 - the difference is 2 months, rather other factors played a role here.
            and the last one. Su-122 was rearmed not because there was not enough penetration, quite the opposite - the 122mm gun was more dangerous. The problem was the rate of fire.
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 18: 48
              +2
              The point is that after Kursk, a more penetrating gun is needed NOW. Naturally, it is easier to put it into the wheelhouse than into a new type of turret with a new shoulder strap. As for the T-34-85, the volume of its production reached a serious level in April 44th. By this time, the Su-85 had already been made in the region of 1300 units, not so few. And then another 1300 of these machines, produced in the 44th plus to the T-34-85, were useful. No one changed the T-34-85 for a self-contained one, it was produced in addition to the tank as a simpler vehicle.
              Quote: yehat2
              quite the opposite - the 122mm cannon was more dangerous

              For whom is it more dangerous? It seems that someone is confusing the heavy ISU-122 with the A-19 cannon, and the average Su-122 with the M-30 howitzer. She didn't even have BB, and the cumulative is a rare and capricious beast.
              1. yehat2
                yehat2 17 March 2021 20: 43
                +1
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                1300 pieces, not so little

                and I saw a different number on the network - only a little more than 700
                that's why I am so skeptical about this car. For the sake of such a series, the fuss no longer looks so justified
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 21: 15
                  0
                  756 is the release of the 43rd year, and the T-34-85 in January 44th appeared only in pre-production versions. Tagil reached volumes only in April. The car was produced until November 44, before the transition to the Su-100. In addition, let me remind you that the car was produced at a self-propelled plant in Sverdlovsk, and not at a tank plant in Tagil, Gorky and Omsk.

                  Regarding the hustle and bustle, for the summer of the 43rd of the machines with an 85mm cannon, only the KV-85 appeared, also in August and literally a piece. The date of the start of mass production of the T-34-85 and IS-2 is unknown, everyone remembered the torment with the launch of the T-34 and KV series.
                2. Alf
                  Alf 17 March 2021 22: 08
                  +1
                  Quote: yehat2
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  1300 pieces, not so little

                  and I saw a different number on the network - only a little more than 700
                  that's why I am so skeptical about this car. For the sake of such a series, the fuss no longer looks so justified

                  A total of 85 SU-2661s were produced. Here is a breakdown by month-year.
              2. yehat2
                yehat2 18 March 2021 01: 07
                +2
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                She didn't have a BB, and the cumulative is a rare and capricious beast

                the su-122 cumulative was very unsuccessful, however, thanks to the caliber, it still pierced enough, but due to the howitzer specificity, the accuracy was not very good.
                But the land mine just turned out to be quite effective - both we and the Germans noted that even a fall nearby (and this is a mandatory standard today for every shooter on a 100mm bpm-3 cannon, that is, fairly affordable accuracy) put the tanks out of action. T4 was flogged into the side by shrapnel and other damaging factors, and the tiger was simply affected by the impact of the shock. Direct hits simply broke through the armor, even the frontal of the panther could not stand it - I saw the photo. If my memory serves me right, 3 su-122s knocked out one of the first tigers - just shells fell nearby.
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 07: 54
                  +1
                  Quote: yehat2
                  however, thanks to the caliber, it still punched enough

                  After Kursk, they tried to figure out the anti-tank capabilities of the Su-122. As a result, a cross was put on them and a decision was made to switch to an anti-aircraft gun. Su-122 stupidly did not hit anything.
                  Quote: yehat2
                  3 su-122s knocked out one of the first tigers - just shells fell nearby.

                  Howitzer shells can immobilize a tank, but naturally they cannot "knock out" it with shrapnel, especially if we are not talking about the T-60. With wild luck, it is possible either a direct hit to the roof of the car, or damage by a fragment of something important, for example, a turret rotation mechanism. But this 99,9 percent belongs to the category of tales, soldier's or journalistic. Like the case of the defeat of two T-70 Panthers, which was once launched by EMNIP, Svirin, widely known in the Internet.
                  Quote: yehat2
                  even the frontal of the panther could not stand it - I saw the photo.

                  I don’t know which photo you saw, but I’m almost sure that we are talking about a case duplex, and not about the M-30.
            2. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 17 March 2021 19: 27
              +1
              Quote: yehat2
              as for the "penetrating gun", in 90% of cases the su-76 gun was enough.

              In theory, with perfect shells.
              In practice, the BR-350A would regularly split when meeting armor. And there were very few of them even in 1942:
              In view of the lack of the required number of kamor armor-piercing shells in artillery units, the shooting of German tanks from 76,2-mm divisional guns with projectiles of other types is common ...
              © Report "The defeat of the armor of German tanks." July 1942 NII-48.
              Quote: yehat2
              And it is not clear why you say that "t34-85" is not yet available. It is there, but production has just begun.

              Because the first SU-85s are in August 1943, and the first T-34-85s are only at the end of January 1944.
            3. Alf
              Alf 17 March 2021 22: 02
              +1
              Quote: yehat2
              And the t34-85 had already been developed by this time.

              T-34-85 with D-5T went into production only in January 44th.
              Quote: yehat2
              And there is no point in changing the T34-85 to the Su-85 - the difference is 2 months, rather other factors played a role here

              And who changed?
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 17 March 2021 16: 13
          +1
          Quote: yehat2
          the project was going slowly and was dramatically accelerated
          just at the end of 41, when messages came from the troops about the kv-1 and t-34.

          Nope, work on the "Tiger" was accelerated in May 1941. More precisely, the final specification and terms were issued (submit the machines for testing in the summer of 1942). And already in July, Henschel and Porsche were ordered 3 experimental and 100 pre-production cars each.
          And at that time they were making "Tiger" not against us - for July 1941 illusions "defeat Russia before the cold weather"were still strong.
      6. militarist63
        militarist63 4 June 2021 00: 40
        0
        What does the SU-152 have to do with it ??! In fact, the SU-152, unlike the Jagdtir, is not an anti-tank self-propelled gun, but a heavy assault gun, it has a different purpose!
    2. Free wind
      Free wind 17 March 2021 06: 24
      +1
      And the crews to clone? Where to get the crews?
    3. Dmitry V.
      Dmitry V. 19 March 2021 11: 12
      +1
      Quote: Thomas N.
      “The opponents of Nazi Germany did not have targets worthy of a 128-mm gun. From the metal needed to make one Jagdtiger, four Hetzer could be made - the best light anti-tank self-propelled guns of the war, which were much more useful! "


      Experienced crews for 4 Hetzer can also be made?
      Hetzer's vulnerability is several times higher - as soon as he opened fire, revealed his location - that's all, read a prayer. Who will survive from the crew after breaking through the hull with such a dense layout is a big question.
      1. Thomas N.
        Thomas N. 20 March 2021 08: 44
        0
        Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
        Quote: Thomas N.
        “The opponents of Nazi Germany did not have targets worthy of a 128-mm gun. From the metal needed to make one Jagdtiger, four Hetzer could be made - the best light anti-tank self-propelled guns of the war, which were much more useful! "

        Experienced crews for 4 Hetzer can also be made?
        Hetzer's vulnerability is several times higher - as soon as he opened fire, revealed his location - that's all, read a prayer. Who will survive from the crew after breaking through the hull with such a dense layout is a big question.


        Here are two quotes that answer your questions well.

        Karius O. "Tigers" in the mud "pro"experienced crews of "Jagdtigers" and "who will survive from the crew after breaking through the hull ..." with a loose layout and very thick armor:
        "The commander of the Jagdtigr, who had no front-line experience as a staff sergeant major, wanted to get down to business himself. Approaching from the safe side, I first led him on foot to the height. I showed him the enemy and told him the distance, so in fact there should be no mistake It was like a training ground. ”Then the Feldwebel went to his car, and I stayed to watch.
        The loser then made a fatal mistake. He did not lower the cannon down to get it into the correct position until he almost drove into the hill. The Americans, of course, heard the noise of the engine and reacted accordingly. Two tanks left, but three others opened fire. The self-propelled gun of the staff sergeant major soon got hit in the frontal armor, but did not manage to shoot itself. Instead of finally firing, the abnormal turned around at a height where he could simply roll back. When the Yankees appeared in all their glory "jagdtigr", they set the heat to our car. She was immediately engulfed in flames. Other hits followed, and none of the six crewmen were able to escapeprobably because everyone was interfering with each other. This example clearly shows that the best weapons and the greatest enthusiasm are useless if the basic training is not carried out."

        The well-known story about the first meeting with the German tank destroyer "Hetzer" by the guard of Captain S. Maslennikov. from the book by M. Svirin "Light tank destroyer" Hetzer "about" Hetzer's vulnerability is several times higher - as soon as he opened fire, opened his location - that's all, read a prayer. ":
        "It was already beyond the Tissa. Our battalion, just replenished with materiel and personnel, was in a hurry to catch up with the retreating Germans and Magyars. It was about ten kilometers to the front edge and we, frankly, hung up our ears, passing through some village. Along the road In parallel with our column, infantrymen in fresh uniforms were striding briskly, trying to shout down the rumble of the tracks with a song. collision, and at the same moment her tower was enveloped in a cloud of black smoke.The infantrymen scattered after the first explosion, and we, left alone with an unknown enemy, began to slowly crawl behind the houses, rotating our towers like blind kittens.
        The most unpleasant thing was that armor-piercing shells flew out, seemingly out of nowhere., and before we noticed the enemy, two more of our "thirty-fours" froze in the middle of the village. I noticed the Germans only after a ricocheted blank rumbled against the turret of my car, like a sledgehammer. These were three small self-propelled guns, similar to coffins, which quickly flew out from behind a high stone fence, and, spitting a blank at us, just as quickly hid behind it again. It seemed that the seven remaining "thirty-fours" would quickly split the armor of these tiny cuttlefish with their eighty-five-millimeter paper, but they again and again jumped out from behind cover and, sending another shell at us, just as quickly hid behind it.
        After a half-hour duel, on the outskirts of the village, four burned-out skeletons of our tanks remained, half a kilometer from which one knocked-out "coffin" with open hatches froze. This is how I met for the first time a new German combat vehicle, which we called "wasp" and which I consider to be the best among German self-propelled guns. It's so good that she appeared only at the very end of the war and did not manage to do a lot of misfortunes ... "

        This is what the dimensions mean and, accordingly, the probability of detection and hitting it, for an anti-tank self-propelled gun.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 20 March 2021 11: 19
          +2
          Quote: Thomas N.
          This is what the dimensions mean and, accordingly, the probability of detection and hitting it, for an anti-tank self-propelled gun.

          )))
          After all, you are not quite talking about that. In the case of Jagdtigr, Karius clearly writes that the vehicle commander was incompetent and essentially killed himself. As long as he was turned to face the Shermans, nothing threatened him.

          But essentially you are right.
          1. The Germans very often could not provide their strongest weapon with good control; the devils often found themselves behind the levers. Perhaps most clearly, this manifested itself with the Kursk panthers.
          2. Hetzer did not just go for 5 jagdtigers in terms of weight. It was a production car, in contrast to the fierce Austrian hand-made. It is not surprising that during the difficult times of winters 44-45, the Czechs collected 400 cars a month, while the Austrians - no more than 20.
          3. If the fascination of the Germans with wunderwaves raises serious doubts, then in the light and middle weight they had successful, sometimes extremely successful cars.
          4. One of these machines was a Hetzer, with a convincing cannon even for the 45th year and armor, impenetrable (with conditioned metal) neither for Sherman 76, nor for T-34-85. Among the machines of its weight - Hellcat, Archer, Su-76 - it looks extremely advantageous. It was a big setback for the Nazis (and good luck for everyone else) that such a glorious machine appeared in noticeable quantities only by the fall of 44, and not 42, for example, of the year.
  3. apro
    apro 17 March 2021 05: 12
    +5
    Today, one can condemn the decisions of German engineers and the tank commanders who set them the task, but the creation of a highly protected vehicle with enormous firepower, with greater combat resistance than the enemy's armored vehicles, required not simple decisions, and certainly engineering skill, and was applied competently. against the background of the enemy's strategic superiority, this did not play a decisive role, and indeed it could not.
    1. Thomas N.
      Thomas N. 17 March 2021 05: 40
      +6
      Quote: apro
      ... but the creation of a highly protected vehicle with tremendous firepower, greater than that of enemy armored vehicles combat resistance...

      With such a size of the car, we cannot talk about it. combat stability... Even then, during the Second World War, attack aircraft could not be ignored, which is what the article says:
      Quote: Yuferev Sergey
      At the same time, the car did not belong to unobtrusive ones, the height of the "Jagdtigr" was almost three meters. Covering the self-propelled gun on the ground was a real problem, which was quite well used by the American assault aviation, dominating the battlefield. Even the anti-aircraft self-propelled guns Wirbelwind, Flakpanzer and Ostwind, attached to the Jagdtigers battalions, did not help much.
      1. apro
        apro 17 March 2021 05: 44
        0
        Quote: Thomas N.
        With such a vehicle's dimensions, one cannot speak of its combat stability.

        And it was possible to hit it with available anti-tank weapons ???
        Once I read the memoirs of Soviet tankmen about the confrontation with a simple tiger. I climbed a hillock. Everything is visible to everyone. But there is no way to approach him at a real distance of destruction. He will burn immediately.
        1. Thomas N.
          Thomas N. 17 March 2021 06: 23
          +6
          Quote: apro
          Quote: Thomas N.
          With such a vehicle's dimensions, one cannot speak of its combat stability.

          And it was possible to hit it with available anti-tank weapons ???

          Self-propelled anti-tank gun in defense is designed for shooting from ambush! If the tank destroyer cannot be camouflaged / hidden, as in the case of the Jagdtiger, then tank armament will not be needed to defeat it - the best anti-tank weapon smile the means against it are a dive bomber, an attack aircraft and target designation artillery, as it was in reality. Those. if a tank destroyer can easily detect its advantage over tanks in effective firing range, it no longer matters - aviation / artillery (of which the attacking side should always have a lot) will always have a greater range.
          Quote: apro
          Once I read the memoirs of Soviet tankmen about the confrontation with a simple tiger. I climbed a hillock. Everything is visible to everyone. But there is no way to approach him at a real distance of destruction. He will burn immediately.

          In the memoirs of German tank crews, I came across a curious directive from a higher headquarters, reminding me that the Tiger tank is now (there was a date, but I don’t remember it now) can no longer be unconditionally considered a “life insurance society” (this is about that the most "climbed the hillock") and it's time to remember the need to comply with all tactical rules for conducting a tank battle. What kind of book of memoirs it was now I did not find on Google, but leafing through real books for a long time, if I find it, I indicate.
          1. apro
            apro 17 March 2021 06: 59
            -3
            Quote: Thomas N.
            then tank armament will not be needed to defeat it - the best "anti-anti-tank" means against it are a dive bomber, attack aircraft and target designation artillery, as it was in reality.

            As well as the artillery of battleships and heavy cruisers ... it is clear that by pulling forces tens of times greater than the enemy, you can achieve success, which does not implore the advantages of a well-defended self-propelled gun. The reasons for the failure are different. In the maneuverable nature of the war. the lines become pointless. and strikes are applied to the means of material supply and in critical situations of the battle, the equipment is well protected to remain without ammunition and fuel. The Germans simply threw equipment without fuel. Without being able to evacuate.
            Quote: Thomas N.
            In the memoirs of German tank crews, I came across a curious directive from a higher headquarters, reminding me that the Tiger tank is now (there was a date, but I don’t remember it now) can no longer be unconditionally considered a “life insurance society” (this is about that the most "climbed the hillock")

            It is clear that a weapon appeared that can stop the tiger. And the date probably after the beginning of 44 years. When both t34 from 85. And drying from 85 went massively. And large drying took place. Time goes on, everything changes. But on the Kursk arc it was not rosy for the Soviet army.
            1. Sanichsan
              Sanichsan 17 March 2021 23: 36
              +2
              Quote: apro
              And also the artillery of battleships and heavy cruisers ...

              like this convertible made without battleships wink

              "Jagdtigr" # 134, destroyed by the M-36 installation on the outskirts of Rimlen
              Quote: apro
              it is clear that by pulling together forces exceeding the enemy dozens of times, you can achieve success.
              of course with shovel cuttings ... somewhere I saw it ... in some kind of movie "according to secret documents" ... wassat
              By the way, where and when did the anti-Hitler coalition have a tenfold superiority over the defending Germans, which made it possible to defeat the Jagdtigers?
              Quote: apro
              the reasons for the failure lie in the other, in the maneuverable nature of the war.

              right! but what next?
              Quote: apro
              when breakthroughs are carried out in many directions. and holding the prescribed lines becomes pointless. and strikes are applied to the means of material supply and in critical combat situations, the equipment is well protected to remain without ammunition and fuel. the Germans simply threw equipment without fuel.

              do you mean to say all the games are thrown? there is a photo of the destroyed M-36. The problem of the game is not that there was not enough fuel, but that it is a clumsy barn not suitable for mobile warfare. His main task was to get to the diving center and there to heroically rest, but even this was often not possible due to the clumsiness, the large mass and, as a result, the critical vulnerability of the chassis.
              Quote: apro
              unable to evacuate.

              another sensible thought, why not developed? What is the fate of a jagdtiger with a damaged chassis? junk! because during the retreat, and the Germans were retreating with these self-propelled guns, this is definitely a lost technique. it cannot be dragged to the rear for repairs. and what can damage the running game tiger? whatever! shelling, close explosion of a bomb, even a 45-50mm cannon or grenade.
              1. yehat2
                yehat2 18 March 2021 01: 12
                0
                Quote: SanichSan
                By the way, where and when did the anti-Hitler coalition have a tenfold superiority over the defending Germans, which made it possible to defeat the Jagdtigers?

                the Americans outnumbered the Germans in France by about 4-5 times in number.
                And if we take into account the difference in logistics and the impact of aviation, then on the directions of the offensive, the superiority was often 1 in 10-20.
                And in Africa, at the final stage, there was also the superiority of the allies by several times.
                True, they like to talk about epic battles, indicating the number of destroyed tanks is much more than the African corps had at all at the disposal of.
                for example, a lone tiger from Bovington, number 213, was damaged by shelling from 5 (or 7 - I don’t remember exactly) Churchills.
                1. Sanichsan
                  Sanichsan 18 March 2021 01: 32
                  0
                  Quote: yehat2
                  the Americans outnumbered the Germans in France by about 4-5 times in number.

                  but not at 10.
                  Quote: yehat2
                  And if we take into account the difference in logistics and the impact of aviation, then on the directions of the offensive, the superiority was often 1 in 10-20.

                  however, the defending side has exactly the same opportunities for maneuver, but not on the jagdtiger wassat the Germans, by the way, quite mastered the tactics of counterattacks ...
                  Quote: yehat2
                  And in Africa, at the final stage, there was also the superiority of the allies by several times.

                  Well, then, in the Berlin operation, we had 3-5 times superiority in various types of troops, but again not 10.
                  Quote: yehat2
                  True, they like to talk about epic battles, indicating the number of destroyed tanks is much more than the African corps had at all at the disposal of.

                  Well, the Germans loved this business, for which they paid. according to all calculations and reports from the front, the mobilization resource of the USSR should have ended in 1941, maximum in 1942, but something went wrong ...
                  1. yehat2
                    yehat2 18 March 2021 01: 36
                    -1
                    Quote: SanichSan
                    Well, then, in the Berlin operation, we had 3-5 times superiority in various types of troops, but again not 10.

                    we had superiority only in technology and experience of the troops, and numerically the Berlin garrison, together with the Volkssturm, was almost larger than the attackers.
                    and as for the superiority of 5 times, and even under the condition of strong superiority in maneuverability, it is very unpleasant. So much so, the Germans were forced to regularly abandon their equipment, not having time to maneuver.
                    In addition, you forgot that the Allied aircraft almost completely paralyzed movement during the day.
                    1. Sanichsan
                      Sanichsan 18 March 2021 02: 00
                      0
                      Quote: yehat2
                      we had superiority only in technology and experience of the troops, and numerically the Berlin garrison, together with the Volkssturm, was almost larger than the attackers.

                      in principle, I approximately also meant it. superiority in the number of artillery, aviation and tanks.
                      Quote: yehat2
                      and as for the superiority of 5 times, and even under the condition of strong superiority in maneuverability, it is very unpleasant. So much so, the Germans were forced to regularly abandon their equipment, not having time to maneuver.

                      hmm .. probably the technique was thrown not quite because "they did not have time to maneuver." these are fascists, not blondes who are "oh all!" laughing threw something that there is no way to evacuate for repair, for example, the same tigers in which half of the losses are "destroyed by their own crew." in this context, yes. For example, the Americans, having learned about the arrival of a division with tigers on some sector of the front, began to create tension in remote sectors of the front, forcing the Germans to drive the tigers back and forth. we rode back and forth like this, you see half of the division is gone.
                      Quote: yehat2
                      In addition, you forgot that the Allied aircraft almost completely paralyzed movement during the day.

                      don't .. don't forget. but this is on the western front. there, with the Luftwaffe, the campaign was sad, so much so that when the Luftwaffe finally took part during the Ardennes operation, the German anti-aircraft gunners had become so unaccustomed to German aircraft in the sky that they covered their aviators with anti-aircraft fire with all their hearts.
          2. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 08: 45
            0
            Quote: Thomas N.
            Self-propelled anti-tank gun in defense is intended for ambush shooting

            You are confusing a tank destroyer and a tank destroyer. In the class of fighters, the Germans had a nashorn.
            Quote: Thomas N.
            the best "anti-tank" means against it is a dive bomber

            In reality, the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition did not have aircraft of this class in Europe, let me remind you.
            Quote: Thomas N.
            attack plane

            Doesn't work against tanks.
            Quote: Thomas N.
            artillery on target designation, as it was in reality

            Bingo.
            The Allies had a lot of it. With the help of concentrated howitzer fire, the car was immobilized, and then smoke shells were enough to neutralize it. Even if the crew did not flee - and it was the most reasonable decision to flee - any tank and anti-tank gun of the end of the war, except for the Soviet 2mm, was amazed into the side of the Tigr76.
            Quote: Thomas N.
            aviation / artillery (of which the attacking side should always have a lot) will always have a greater range.

            It is the American division that has aviation and artillery, so in this part you are right. And in the east, both of them appeared in noticeable numbers in the case of a large - army or front - operation. For Tiger 2, a car, with Soviet money, units of the RGK, this should not be a problem - this is a problem of German aviation and German artillery.
            Quote: Thomas N.
            with a reminder that the Tiger tank is currently

            The command is fighting against the hatchet and the hussars. At any time, the Tiger could catch 122 or 152 mm, so asking the crews to behave reasonably was never superfluous.
            1. Foul skeptic
              Foul skeptic 17 March 2021 09: 26
              +3
              attack plane

              Doesn't work against tanks.

              Somehow very categorical. It's just that at that time the effectiveness of such work is doubtful, it is problematic to get there. Moreover, the British concept of attack because of the love of hanging PCs on fighters had blurred boundaries.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 09: 34
                +1
                Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                Somehow very categorical. It's just that at that time the effectiveness of such work is questionable.

                So I'm talking about WWII and I'm not talking about Desert Storm.
                1. Foul skeptic
                  Foul skeptic 17 March 2021 10: 07
                  0
                  But this does not mean that armored targets were not stormed from the air and that there were no armored targets destroyed by attack aircraft. In any case, airwar.ru indicates the hit of his tank with a missile from an aircraft as the cause of Wittmann's death. Although, we must make a reservation that there is another version.
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 11: 17
                    0
                    Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                    Although, we must make a reservation that there is another version.

                    Uh-huh. PT to board, as usual.
            2. DesToeR
              DesToeR 17 March 2021 09: 34
              +2
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              You are confusing a tank destroyer and a tank destroyer. In the class of fighters, the Germans had a nashorn.

              Is there a difference? I always believed that the so-called. "PT ACS" concept is narrower, and is included in the broader concept of "tank destroyer". Revelation however!
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              Doesn't work against tanks.

              Are you sure? The attack aircraft could not attack tanks with the use of cumulative bombs or rockets? It's hard to hit the target ... so increase your power outfit!
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 09: 50
                +1
                Quote: DesToeR
                I always believed that the so-called. "PT ACS" concept is narrower, and is included in the broader concept of "tank destroyer".

                For me, a tank destroyer differs from a tank destroyer in the absence of armor. But you are right, these are purely my troubles.
                Quote: DesToeR
                Are you sure? The attack aircraft could not attack tanks with the use of cumulative bombs or rockets?

                It makes no sense. Stormtroopers were helpful, knocking out the rear, delivering ammunition and fuel, repairs, etc. Against directly armored vehicles they are of little use.
                Quote: DesToeR
                so increase the outfit of powers!

                Some kind of American approach.

                In reality, if you have unlimited airplanes, they were simply given to accompany the divisions, on duty in the air. With regard to the fight against tanks, the main thing that they provided was ambush reconnaissance. But this is the P-47, the Il-2 cannot be on duty in the air.
                1. DesToeR
                  DesToeR 17 March 2021 13: 18
                  +1
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  It makes no sense.

                  It makes sense if you understand that a tank spends a maximum of 10% of its "life" on the battlefield.
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  Against armored vehicles directly, they are of little use.

                  If "direct" armored vehicles mean a tank on the battlefield, then yes. But if this same tank is on a railway platform, in a tank column and / or in a cluster before an attack, then no. In addition to PTAB, of which even the IL-2 could take dozens in one flight, there were also bombs of a very decent caliber and ampoules with an incendiary mixture. Those. a weapon that could easily cover area targets. This is what the tanks were in the above situations.
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 13: 24
                    0
                    Quote: DesToeR
                    If "direct" armored vehicles mean a tank on the battlefield, then yes

                    Exactly.
                    Quote: DesToeR
                    This is what the tanks were in the above situations.

                    You describe the work of aviation to suppress communications. Yes, she was very helpful. It was simply not "anti-tank", but had a broader meaning.
                    1. Sanichsan
                      Sanichsan 18 March 2021 00: 12
                      +2
                      Quote: Cherry Nine
                      It was simply not "anti-tank", but had a broader meaning.

                      hmmm ...? and what's that?

                      in the first days of use, these babies gave 20% of the losses of German armored vehicles in the Kursk Bulge. then the Germans realized that they needed to defuse their orders and the efficiency decreased slightly.
            3. yehat2
              yehat2 17 March 2021 14: 34
              0
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              asking the crews to behave reasonably was never superfluous.

              and was never sufficient - clearly seen from the results of the counterattack of the Hitler Youth division in France
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 14: 49
                0
                Quote: yehat2
                and was never enough

                Well, the Germans were weird too, it happened.
            4. Sanichsan
              Sanichsan 18 March 2021 00: 04
              +1
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              Quote: Thomas N.
              attack plane

              Doesn't work against tanks.

              oh is it? Whitman, who exploded in his Tiger after meeting with stormtroopers (whether British or American), would not share your optimism.

              Quote: Cherry Nine
              With the help of concentrated howitzer fire, the car was immobilized, and then smoke shells were enough to neutralize it.

              if you read Karius's memoirs, you suddenly find out that he considered mortars to be one of the main dangers ... not only do they cut off the infantry from the tank, they can also get into the engine compartment. even 82mm can disable the Tiger once it gets into the engine compartment.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 01: 39
                -1
                Quote: SanichSan
                and what's that?

                This is PTAB, which made 16, perhaps, million for an unknown, but clearly a small number of disabled enemy tanks. In particular, during the Battle of Kursk, about 500 thousand of such bombs were used, which led to a loss - how much did you say, 20%? Let there be 20-260 units of enemy equipment, on average 10 sorties per lost vehicle.
                Quote: SanichSan
                Whitman, who exploded in his Tiger after meeting with stormtroopers

                Wittmann's case has already been discussed, including in this thread.
                Quote: SanichSan
                if you read Karius's memoirs, you suddenly find out that he considered mortars to be one of the main dangers ... not only do they cut off the infantry from the tank, they can also get into the engine compartment

                If you read the article under discussion, you will suddenly find out that we are talking about a jagdtiger in berserk mode, the infantry is no longer relevant there. As far as the engine compartment is concerned, a howitzer shell can handle it just as well as a mine, I assure you.
                1. Sanichsan
                  Sanichsan 18 March 2021 02: 21
                  0
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  how much did you say, 20%? Let there be 20-260 units of enemy equipment, on average 10 sorties per lost vehicle.

                  well, how did you want? it is only in the tales of uncle rudel 5 tanks per flight. As far as I remember, aviation, of the total number of destroyed tanks, accounts for slightly more than those destroyed by other tanks. the main losses of tanks from anti-tank equipment and mines. but the fact that on the western front of the Allied aviation was able to strongly restrain the daily movement of equipment, including tanks, is a historical fact. finally understand that when retreating, the same tiger with a damaged bomb or rocket undercarriage is a lost tiger.
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  As far as the engine compartment is concerned, a howitzer shell can handle it just as well as a mine, I assure you.

                  so yes, yes, only a howitzer is not always there, but mortars are much more common wink
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 08: 08
                    +2
                    Quote: SanichSan
                    Well, how do you like?

                    I wanted a tank destroyer available at the rifle / infantry division level. The summoning of the Il-2 regimental raid does not apply to such means.
                    Quote: SanichSan
                    finally understand that when retreating, the same tiger with a damaged bomb or rocket undercarriage is a lost tiger.

                    I fully understand that. Moreover, I fully understand that the garbage constantly flying in the sky greatly complicates the life of tanks without any ATBs, even with machine guns, even just by their presence. Especially if it is such a small, wretched and unarmed ... artillery spotter, and in a minute and a half tons of iron will arrive.
                    I only point out that in the realities of WWII in battle aviation is not an anti-tank weapon. In the 80s, when the American division had its own helicopter brigade, it did, but in the 40s it did not.
                    Quote: SanichSan
                    mortars are much more common

                    More often, but also less sense from them. And complaints about the hard life of German tankers should be taken critically.
            5. yehat2
              yehat2 18 March 2021 01: 15
              -1
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              At any time, the Tiger could catch 122 or 152 mm

              not at any time. The tiger had a very good view and it was not easy for an unnoticed machine with such a barrel to get close to it. Acting on the defensive or on a local counterattack, the tigers were rarely so substituted. There are repeated descriptions of situations where several self-propelled guns could not cope with a tiger, which simply shot those who tried to crawl out for direct fire.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 08: 11
                0
                Quote: yehat2
                Acting on the defensive or on a local counterattack, the tigers were rarely so substituted.

                There are few tigers, a lot of trunks, and tiger crews need to solve a combat mission, and not test their luck. I think the thesis is that under the slogan "dementia and courage!" the crew can ditch the tank without the enemy's influence at all, no need to justify.
          3. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 17 March 2021 12: 32
            +3
            Quote: Thomas N.
            In the memoirs of German tank crews, I came across a curious directive from a higher headquarters, reminding me that the Tiger tank is now (there was a date, but I don't remember it now) can no longer be unconditionally considered a "life insurance society" (this is about that the most "climbed the hillock") and it's time to remember the need to comply with all tactical rules for conducting a tank battle.

            September 1944. Report from the Tigers company commander on a collision with the IS-2.
            1. When the Tigers appear, most IS-2s retreat and avoid engaging in a tank duel.
            2. In many cases, the IS-2 allows you to enter into combat contact with them only at a great distance (more than 2000 meters), and also only if they are in a more advantageous position (at the edge of a forest, village, or under the cover of a natural terrain).
            3. IS-2 crews tend to abandon their tank immediately after the first hit by a Tiger shell.
            4. In all cases, the Russian crews try to prevent the serviceable IS-2 from falling into our hands. They are either towed or explode.
            5. The IS-2 can be hit at long distances even if there is no penetration of the frontal armor (a report from another Tigers unit shows that the Tiger can penetrate the IS-2's frontal armor only from a distance of less than 500 meters).
            6. The best results are achieved with a massive shelling of the sides and rear of the IS-2.
            7. In addition, you should join a tank duel with the IS-2 unit of at least a platoon of Tigers. A separate “Tiger” in such a duel is doomed to destruction.
            8. It has been tested in practice that it would be useful after the very first hit in the IS-2 to blind him with a high-explosive projectile shot.

            And Heinz's notes on it:
            1. This report confirms those from other Tigers units and appears credible.
            2. Regarding point 4: all our crews should be guided by the same principles, an intact "Tiger" should never fall into the hands of the enemy.
            3. Regarding points 5 and 6: if the enemy has 122-mm and 57-mm anti-tank guns on the Eastern Front and 92-mm guns on the Western Front and in Italy, "Tigers" can no longer ignore tactical methods of warfare defined for other types of tanks... Just like other tanks, Tigers no longer have the right to advance on a hill for reconnaissance. In one of these situations, three Tigers received direct hits from 122-mm shells and were destroyed. As a result, two members of their crews died. The principles of tank tactics are as follows: tanks can only cross hills as part of a subunit, quickly and under cover of artillery fire. If it is impossible to comply with these conditions, the hill should be bypassed, and this rule is well known in the heavy tank battalions of the "Tigers".
            Formulations such as "thick-skinned", "invulnerable" and "safe", used by the crews of the "Tigers", and entered with their light hand in the everyday life of other tank units should be excluded from use. Instead, the crews of the Tigers need to pay close attention to adhering to the basic battle rules that apply to tank duels.
            4. Regarding point 7: This conclusion is correct, but, nevertheless, three "Tigers" should not retreat in front of five IS-2 just because they cannot enter into battle with them as part of a full platoon. In many cases, a full platoon may simply not be in such a situation. In many cases, the results of such a battle do not depend on the number of tanks, but on the higher tactical training of the crews.
            5. Regarding paragraph 8: according to the above report, it seems possible that the IS-2 can be hit in the side or stern not only by the Tiger and Panther tanks, but also by the Pz-IV and StuG.
        2. yehat2
          yehat2 17 March 2021 14: 08
          0
          Quote: apro
          Once I read the memoirs of Soviet tank crews about the confrontation with a simple tiger.

          the Germans did the same on the T-4 from the end of 42. Its 75mm cannon penetrated the T-34 at a distance of 800-1500m, and the T34 could confidently penetrate or just hit only at distances of about 500m,
          which often made it possible to get out insolently and fire on our advancing tanks.
          But the difference with the tiger was that the T-4 had such thin sides that it was sensitive to close explosions of high-explosive shells.
    2. nemez
      nemez 17 March 2021 06: 30
      0
      Soviet engineers turned out to be smarter. Rational tilt, light weight and a fairly powerful and unpretentious engine. Yes, there was a problem with the cannons, there were excellent ZIS-3s, D-10s were, but they did not adapt well to tanks and self-propelled guns.
      1. apro
        apro 17 March 2021 07: 11
        -1
        Quote: nemez
        Yes, there was a problem with the guns, there were excellent ZIS-3, there were D-10

        Everything from the possibilities. And the wishes of the customer, and with this problemmy. You did not mention the F22 Grabina cannon. The Germans considered the best PT gun until 42, and after German modernization with a new projectile. Remained relevant until the end of the war.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 08: 27
          +2
          Quote: apro
          gun f22 Grabin. The Germans considered the best PT weapon up to 42 years

          F-22 - anti-tank gun? Is this some kind of black humor thread?
          1. apro
            apro 17 March 2021 08: 39
            0
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            F-22 - anti-tank gun? Is this some kind of black humor thread?

            Yes ... yes ... especially on the mardere. And the nickname viper does not mean anything.
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 09: 35
              0
              Are you talking about Pak 36 (r)? Are you deliberately passing off F22 for Cancer, or don't you see the difference?
              1. apro
                apro 17 March 2021 09: 39
                0
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                Are you talking about Pak 36 (r)?

                Deliberately, the Germans used it in its original form, and I see the difference in the military and engineering approach to weapons between the Germans and the Soviet military. Grabin intended to immediately create such a weapon.
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 17 March 2021 13: 49
                  0
                  Quote: apro
                  Grabin and intended to immediately create such a weapon.

                  That's just the question "where to get copper for the production of a mob reserve of more powerful shots for the F-22"Comrade Grabin did not give an answer. But a more powerful shot required 2-3 times more copper.
                  Well, before the war, the question of transferring divisional artillery to the ballistics of the 1931 3-K anti-aircraft gun arose several times.
                  But it didn't work!
                  Sleeve 76mm guns arr. 1902/1930 (as well as subsequent divisions of this caliber) weighed 830-850 grams.
                  But the anti-aircraft gun sleeve of the 1931 3-K model weighed 2 kg 760 grams already.
                  Those. 3,1 times more copper.
                  The 85mm anti-aircraft gun barrel weighed 2,85-2,92kg and was slightly thicker, but in geometric terms it was almost identical to the 1931 3-K gun barrel.
                  1. apro
                    apro 17 March 2021 13: 56
                    +1
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    Here are just the question "where to get the copper for the production of mobilization of more powerful shots for the F-22" Comrade Grabin did not answer.

                    Yes, we corrected it according to the 02 year round, the requirement of the military, they saw it that way, and a divisional gun with a high elevation for anti-aircraft firing. It is also their whim. It is clear that a lot of brass is needed. But increasing the power of the weapon. Transferring to a new level required costs.
                    1. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 17 March 2021 16: 55
                      +1
                      Quote: apro
                      Yes. Corrected according to the 02 year cartridge. Requirement of the military. They saw it this way

                      The military simply guessed that apart from this shot they would receive nothing more from the industry. smile
                      And on this shot, you can't make a powerful cannon, no matter how much you pull out the svol. EMNIP, the advantage in armor penetration of the F-22 over USV was within the margin of error - 5 mm.
                      Quote: apro
                      and a divisional gun with a high elevation for anti-aircraft fire. Also their whim.

                      During the design of the F-22, the main anti-aircraft gun of the military air defense was a field three-inch gun on the Ivanov machine. Against this background, even the F-22 is an antiaircraft gun.
                      As for 3K, we now know that. that she got into the series. And after all, the plant number 8 could and fill it up - like a German anti-aircraft machine gun. In addition, the army team could have feared that the release of 3K for the army would not be enough.
                      Quote: apro
                      it is clear that a lot of brass is needed. but increasing the power of weapons. transfer to a new level required costs.

                      In real history, the real industry of the real USSR before the war could not make a mob reserve even for 85-mm anti-aircraft guns (the shot sleeve is identical to the "big" sleeve of the 75-mm anti-aircraft gun) - only 1 ammo per barrel was fired in a year. Or 10% of the need. And this is at the end of the 30s.
                      The transition to 85-mm caliber in armored vehicles during the war was ensured by Lend-Lease (Chilean copper, imported equipment factories, imported components for gunpowder).
                  2. Alf
                    Alf 17 March 2021 22: 13
                    0
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    Here are just the question "where to get copper for the production of more powerful shots for the F-22" Comrade Grabin did not answer. But a more powerful shot required 2-3 times more copper.

                    Maybe brass after all?
                    1. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 18 March 2021 10: 17
                      0
                      Quote: Alf
                      Maybe brass after all?

                      So sleeve brass is, roughly speaking, two-thirds of copper and one-third of zinc. smile
                      1. Alf
                        Alf 18 March 2021 22: 12
                        +1
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        Quote: Alf
                        Maybe brass after all?

                        So sleeve brass is, roughly speaking, two-thirds of copper and one-third of zinc. smile

                        Well, tady Oh!
      2. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 08: 26
        0
        Quote: nemez
        were excellent ZIS-3

        Cannon from the Su-76? Is this a joke?
        Quote: nemez
        were D-10

        Who? The fleet?
      3. mr.ZinGer
        mr.ZinGer 17 March 2021 08: 28
        0
        Engineers develop a design based on technical specifications, and the military gives them.
      4. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 17 March 2021 13: 45
        0
        Quote: nemez
        Yes, there was a problem with the guns, there were excellent ZIS-3s, there were D-10s, but they did not adapt well to tanks and self-propelled guns.

        The ZIS-3 is an IVV with a muzzle brake on a ZIS-2 gun carriage. The tank version of the USV is the F-34, the most massive and technologically advanced 76-mm tank gun.
        The ZIS-3 got on the SPG without any problems - see SU-76.
        There was never an excellent ZIS-3 - it was a budget gun for the capabilities of the USSR industry. Its counterparts in other countries have already left the scene - even the Yankees abandoned 75-mm divisional guns, replacing them with 105-mm ones. In the USSR, they tried to replace the predecessor of the ZIS-3 (USV) even before the war - but they did not pull it.

        And what about the D-10 - why adapt tank a cannon for a tank or an SPG? what
        1. Sanichsan
          Sanichsan 18 March 2021 00: 30
          +1
          Quote: Alexey RA
          An excellent ZIS-3 has never been - it was a budget gun for the capabilities of the USSR industry.

          that's why she was great. the technique must meet the capabilities of the industry and requirements for mass production weapons are "best" and "for war". As practice has shown, in the event of war, what is "for war" wins. request so the ZiS-3 was definitely great! soldier
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 08: 18
            +1
            Quote: SanichSan
            the technique must meet the capabilities of the industry and requirements for mass production

            Quote: SanichSan
            so the ZiS-3 was definitely great

            So the vaunted Soviet defense industry, which literally ate people, had such modest capabilities that it could not provide the army with artillery at the level of other countries participating in the war, with the exception of Japan. Naturally, she couldn’t provide enough artillery for the troops with artillery according to the fantastic pre-war states (the Soviet pre-war division should have had a lot of artillery).
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 18 March 2021 11: 26
            0
            Quote: SanichSan
            that's why she was great. the technique must meet the capabilities of the industry and the requirements for mass.

            If we are guided only by these criteria, then for the army it is necessary to produce spears.
            Quote: SanichSan
            weapons are "best" and "for war". As practice has shown, in the event of war, what is "for war" wins.

            "For the war" we had a perfectly mastered "Maxim". But for some reason they decided to do the SG. Was cured of most of the "childhood diseases" T-34-76. But for some reason they decided to make the T-34-85, which, moreover, could not be produced on the old equipment. And also these aviators, who constantly demanded new models and modifications of aircraft ... they had an I-16 "for the war", until 1943 they fought. smile
            Quote: SanichSan
            so the ZiS-3 was definitely great!

            To be excellent, technology and simplicity alone are not enough for weapons.
            As a regimental cannon, the ZIS-3 may have been quite good (only the weight is too big). As a divisional or even more so an anti-tank gun - definitely not.
            1. Sanichsan
              Sanichsan 18 March 2021 20: 08
              0
              Quote: Alexey RA
              If we are guided only by these criteria, then for the army it is necessary to produce spears.

              do not exaggerate wink an excellent weapon which is sufficient to defeat and which can be released in sufficient volumes. Let me remind you that a lot of tanks (cannons, aircraft, machine guns, etc.) of average quality are much better than a little of excellent quality. the war proved it request over there the Germans with their wunderwafe finished badly wink
              Quote: Alexey RA
              To be excellent, technology and simplicity alone are not enough for weapons.
              As a regimental cannon, the ZIS-3 may have been quite good (only the weight is too big). As a divisional or even more so an anti-tank gun - definitely not.

              excuse me, but against what tank? can not cope with European tanks? or with the German PZ-2,3,4? Did you take the shtug on board? or maybe Sd.Kfz. 251 did not break through? Or, in your opinion, everything is bad that the tiger does not pierce the forehead, and of course it is so important because there were only tigers in the panzerwafe? laughing
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 19 March 2021 08: 09
                +1
                Quote: SanichSan
                can not cope with European tanks?

                No.
                Quote: SanichSan
                everything is bad that the tiger does not pierce the forehead

                Poor anti-tank gun, which is one and a half times heavier than Pak 38, but has one and a half times less armor penetration BB. The theoretical BB, the real one punched even worse.

                This is mainly due to the fact that the ZiS-3 is not an anti-tank gun at all.
    3. Konnick
      Konnick 17 March 2021 06: 46
      +5
      The engineers silently carried out the damp plans of the generals, who did not fight in tanks, but who knew for sure that without a miracle they would lose the war, so Jagdtiger and Mouse dreamed of a "miracle of technology." But it turned out that the larger the tank, the easier it is to get into it from an airplane or with mounted artillery fire across the squares.
    4. Doccor18
      Doccor18 17 March 2021 07: 23
      +3
      Quote: apro
      Today, one can condemn ... but the creation of a highly protected machine with huge firepower, with more combat resistance than the enemy's armored vehicles, required not simple decisions, and certainly engineering skill, and was applied competently.

      But they were designed already in 1942-1944 ...
      Not 1938 or even 1941 ...
      We already got it on the nose, seriously, several times ... It became clear to everyone (even, probably, to Hitler) that the war would be long and costly ...
      What is the point of "giving birth" to an expensive and non-serial car? 80 pieces - this is practically an "experimental batch", for good tests, no more ...
      Whatever one may say, a gross strategic miscalculation of the German command is on the face.
      In the USSR, on the contrary, they thought strategically. Only functional, simple to manufacture and operate, truly massive types of weapons. This approach was 100% justified, including in tank building. The mass release of the T-34 is a vivid confirmation of this ...
      Even the Germans were unable to establish a truly mass production of the PzKpfv IV.
      1. apro
        apro 17 March 2021 07: 32
        0
        Quote: Doccor18
        Whatever one may say, a gross strategic miscalculation of the German command is on the face.

        Germany's major strategic miscalculation is in the wrong direction of attack. To the east.
        Quote: Doccor18
        In the USSR, on the contrary, they thought strategically. Only functional, simple to manufacture and operate, truly massive types of weapons

        There was no need to pass off poverty as a virtue. The Soviet economy had enough problems. And the Soviet engineering school was rather weak compared to the Germans. The Soviet economy worked as possible. Increasing its strength throughout the war. The strength of the Soviet economy is that it switched to the rails of total war. somewhat earlier than Germany. and much fuller.
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 17 March 2021 08: 33
          +11
          I do not agree with you.
          Quote: apro
          ... the Soviet economy had enough problems. and the Soviet engineering school was rather weak compared to the Germans ...

          There are enough problems in any economy ...
          But with the Soviet engineering school, or rather with its "weakness", you turned it down ... In 1940, the 57-mm was created. PTP ZiS-2, which was so powerful that there were simply no decent targets for it ... But it was also not cheap in production. Temporarily, the release of this gun was stopped in order to give the army more anti-tank guns. The "brilliant" German engineers were never able to design anything of the kind ...
          Self-loading rifles SVT-38/40. The "poor" Red Army was able to supply its infantry with self-loading weapons. During 1940-42, about 1,3 million units were produced, then production was curtailed in favor of simpler, mass and cheaper weapons. The "rich" Wehrmacht did not have such a scale ...
          And the T-34, and rocket artillery ... And there are a lot of examples ...
          So about the "genius of German engineers" and "the weakness of the Soviet engineering school" can only be told about "victims of the exam" hi
          Quote: apro
          the strength of the Soviet economy lies in the fact that it switched to the rails of total war a little earlier than Germany. and much more completely.

          And how was this possible?
          Isn't this a strategic mistake of the German generals?
          The Germans had already fought for 2 years before the battle with the Union ... But everyone dreamed that half the world would pass through a "parade march" ...
          They fought for years, but were not ready for a serious war ...
          1. strannik1985
            strannik1985 17 March 2021 08: 38
            +2
            PTP ZiS-2, which was so powerful that there were simply no decent targets for it ... But it was also not cheap in production

            The 45-mm gun with caliber armor-piercing penetrated the German 40-mm armor Kts = 2400 from a distance of 150 (one hundred fifty) meters. The objectives of the Zis-2 were the sea, but in the conditions of urgent armament of the 821th equivalent of the division, until December 31, 1941, the alignment was 1 Zis-2 or 3-4 76-mm divisional guns.
            1. Doccor18
              Doccor18 17 March 2021 08: 51
              +3
              Quote: strannik1985
              The Zis-2 had a sea of ​​goals ...

              The BR-271M projectile could break through 140 mm of homogeneous armor when hit along the normal at a distance of 500 meters ...
              Many tanks in 1941 had a forehead of 140 mm.?
              You can hunt for a hare and shoot from a machine gun. And for sure the hare will not leave ... What's the point?
              Quote: strannik1985
              ..the deployment was 1 Zis-2 or 3-4 76-mm divisional guns.

              About that and speech ...
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 09: 54
                0
                Quote: Doccor18
                The BR-271M projectile could break through 140 mm of homogeneous armor when hit along the normal at a distance of 500 meters ...
                Many tanks in 1941 had a forehead of 140 mm.?

                You'd better write how many such shells were in 1941.
                Quote: Doccor18
                About that and speech ...

                This is a great honor for the USSR. In reality, the release of 73klb of barrels was the wildest problem. Let me tell you that the British - who were not afraid of difficulties in terms of artillery - at first cut their 6lb PT cannon to 43 calibers. We could not quickly set up the production of a full-size barrel, but it was also 50kb, not 73.

                It should be noted that after the ZiS-2, the USSR was not fond of such barrels. And he did the right thing.
                1. Foul skeptic
                  Foul skeptic 17 March 2021 10: 31
                  0
                  It should be noted that after the ZiS-2, the USSR was not fond of such barrels. And he did the right thing.

                  This is true for the period "after the ZIS-2 and until the end of the war", and not for the "after the ZIS-2". After all, there were Ch-26 and D-48.
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 11: 32
                    0
                    You are right, but the industry and the situation of the 50s are still not about the Second World War. In 45 and the first years after WWII, there was a surge of interest in the streets, but mostly quickly passed.
                2. Doccor18
                  Doccor18 17 March 2021 10: 38
                  +2
                  Quote: Cherry Nine

                  You'd better write how many such shells were in 1941.


                  It should be noted that after the ZiS-2, the USSR was not fond of such barrels. And he did the right thing.

                  Judging by the statistics
                  1941, 310 thousand 57-mm rounds were delivered to the troops; - in 1942 - another 82 thousand shots; - on January 1, 1943, there were still 220 thousand rounds in stock.

                  Source: https://m.fishki.net/2884338-rasskazy-ob-oruzhii-57-mm-protivotankovaja-pushka-zis-2.html © M.fishki.net

                  with shells, everything was not so bad ...

                  But with the trunks (here you are right) there were certain difficulties.
                  However, already in 1943, their serial production was mastered and almost 2 thousand barrels were produced. Then 2,5 thousand in 1944 and over 5 thousand in 1945, as well as later (2,5 thousand in 1946 - which speaks about the quality of this artillery system).
                  A little, of course, but not so much that it is completely "piece" ...
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 11: 40
                    -3
                    Quote: Doccor18
                    The BR-271M projectile could break through 140 mm of homogeneous armor

                    I see you didn't get the hint. Specify the date of adoption of the particular projectile about which you are writing.

                    I will also add that the USSR in 41 had huge quality problems even with those shells that were available.

                    Quote: Doccor18
                    However, already in 1943, their serial production was mastered and almost 2 thousand barrels were produced.

                    I will assume that you are taking data from the Wiki. It also says what the circumstances were in 43, which made it possible to start relatively mass production. In 41, these circumstances did not exist.
                    1. Doccor18
                      Doccor18 17 March 2021 12: 27
                      +1
                      Quote: Cherry Nine
                      Specify the date of adoption of the particular projectile about which you are writing.

                      Yes, yes, I was wrong a little, sorry hi
                      By release, I had in mind the BR-271 of the 1941 model.

                      What's wrong with the series?
                      Different sources give the same figures: less than 10 thousand in 1943-45, of which more than half in 45.
                      1. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 12: 40
                        +2
                        The initial thesis of this branch - the ZiS-2 was removed from service at the beginning of the war due to the lack of targets. Here comrade political instructor is lying as usual. The toughest target of the outbreak of the war was stug 3. Even the early shtug, 50mm armor with a slight angle, could not be penetrated by almost anything from the mass guns.

                        So the problem with the ZiS-2 is that the USSR in 41 could not afford this.
                3. Alf
                  Alf 17 March 2021 22: 30
                  +1
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  In reality, the release of 73klb of barrels was the wildest problem.

                  The Germans, by the way, too. Out of five blanks of 8,8 / 71 barrels, 4 (!) Were rejected. But the Germans did not shout about it, they thought it was so normal.
          2. apro
            apro 17 March 2021 08: 51
            -4
            Quote: Doccor18
            There are enough problems in any economy ...

            Et ... for sure. But if you compare, then some have more problems.
            Quote: Doccor18
            In 1940, the 57 mm was created. PTP ZIS-2,

            Yes, the Germans did not set a task for their engineers at that moment. But the need forced them. So the guns surpassed the Soviet ones. KVK42 with 42.48 calibers. And also the advantage in shells. The sub-caliber Germans did better. And camouflage too.
            And the cannons with tapered barrels. Their data was decent.
            Quote: Doccor18
            you can only tell "victims of the exam"

            And urapatriots.
            Quote: Doccor18
            Isn't this a strategic mistake of the German generals?

            No, not a mistake. The Vermakh coped well with the tasks. The factor of the Soviet mobilization economy, which was able to restore in a short time, and then increase the power of the Red Army, was not taken into account. Nobody expected and did not predict this.
            1. Doccor18
              Doccor18 17 March 2021 08: 57
              +5
              Quote: apro
              ... the factor of the Soviet mobilization economy, capable of quickly restoring and then increasing the power of the Red Army, was not taken into account. This was not expected or predicted by anyone.

              This is a serious strategic miscalculation.
              Attack a state with an incredible territory of 22 million square meters. km. and a very large population of 180 million people and ... do not thoroughly study its capabilities ...
              1. apro
                apro 17 March 2021 09: 16
                0
                Quote: Doccor18
                Attack a state with an incredible territory of 22 million square meters. km. and a very large population of 180 million people

                The territory is not an insurmountable factor, all the more for highly mechanized compounds, and the population must first be put on, put on, and taught to arm. to organize to put together subdivisions. to give at least a minimum of military professional experience. to deliver to the place. not everything is so simple.
                Quote: Doccor18
                do not thoroughly study its capabilities ...

                They studied, but the level of the Soviet army was not set high. Based on the experience of the First World War. The Polish and Winter Wars. The Soviet army reached the German level only by 1944. They predict the future based on past events.
                1. Doccor18
                  Doccor18 17 March 2021 10: 17
                  +2
                  Quote: apro
                  They studied, but the level of the Soviet army was not set high. Based on the experience of the First World War. The Polish and Winter Wars. The Soviet army reached the German level only by 1944. They predict the future based on past events.

                  And what about the Ural industrial region?
                  Magnitka and Kuznetsk met. the factories were working with might and main. In 1941, the foundation was laid for the Chelyabinsk giant. How could this pass by the German strategists.
                  Even with the defeat of the industrial potential of the Ukrainian SSR and the central region, the Urals remained ...
                  The Germans did not take into account a lot of things. And this is not an afterthought at all. Everything has already happened.
                  "Dizziness from victories", as one great ruler just said, though on a completely different occasion ...
                  1. apro
                    apro 17 March 2021 10: 48
                    -5
                    Quote: Doccor18
                    And what about the Ural industrial region?
                    Magnitka and Kuznetsk met. the factories were working with might and main. In 1941, the foundation was laid for the Chelyabinsk giant. How could this pass by the German strategists.

                    Dokor. I least of all think the Germans are stupid and narrow-minded. And there are reasons. All of the above the Germans had in several large volumes. And more qualitatively. Compare the indications of the industry of Germany and the USSR.
                    German industry was formed. And the Soviet one was still experiencing problems of growth and quality. In addition, the quality of the population of Germany and the USSR is somewhat incomparable. The Soviet ones have not yet fully emerged from the peasant civilization.
                2. Alf
                  Alf 17 March 2021 22: 33
                  +1
                  Quote: apro
                  Territory is not an insurmountable factor, especially for highly mechanized formations.

                  Is the term "motor resource" familiar?
                  1. apro
                    apro 18 March 2021 01: 51
                    -1
                    Quote: Alf
                    Is the term "motor resource" familiar?

                    Is the term motor resource restoration familiar?
                    1. Alf
                      Alf 18 March 2021 22: 14
                      +1
                      Quote: apro
                      Quote: Alf
                      Is the term "motor resource" familiar?

                      Is the term motor resource restoration familiar?

                      Will the repairs take place on the move?
                      1. apro
                        apro 19 March 2021 02: 39
                        0
                        Quote: Alf
                        Will the repairs take place on the move?

                        The Germans were constantly engaged in this. They had repair facilities.
              2. EvilLion
                EvilLion 17 March 2021 09: 45
                0
                But Russia has never in its history deployed armies corresponding to its size and population. Resources were scarce in our climate and on our soils.
                1. Doccor18
                  Doccor18 17 March 2021 09: 48
                  +1
                  Quote: EvilLion
                  But Russia has never in its history deployed armies corresponding to its size and population ...

                  This is yes.
                  But at the same time, more than once, she managed to defeat the united armies of several countries ...
                  1. EvilLion
                    EvilLion 17 March 2021 11: 38
                    +1
                    As well as regularly raking from the same Poles, simply because Poland is still a more favorable region for living and in the 16-17 centuries was clearly richer than Russia.
          3. EvilLion
            EvilLion 17 March 2021 09: 51
            0
            ZiS-2 that was so powerful


            For its caliber it is quite, but it cannot be compared with a 17-pounder or akht-aht. Most importantly, the production turned out to be garbage, and when in the 43rd EMNIP was able to make such long barrels on Lend-Lease equipment, then the 80-100 mm lobsters of German tanks already demanded something more serious.

            The "poor" Red Army was able to supply its infantry with self-loading weapons. During 1940-42, about 1,3 million units were produced.


            The same PPSh produced 6 million units. If the Red Army were really rich, it would have finished the Second World War with SVT for every soldier of the first line, and so, during the WWII, only the United States could solve the problem of creating a self-loading rifle and mass equipping troops with it.
            1. Doccor18
              Doccor18 17 March 2021 10: 07
              +4
              ZiS-2 from 1000 m. Pierced the side of the Tiger.
              She did not take the forehead, but left such dents (up to 60 mm.) That even the seams diverged here and there ...
              Quote: EvilLion
              If the Red Army were really rich, then every fighter of the first line would have finished the Second World War with SVT ..

              Naturally, there were problems, but in the USSR they knew how to prioritize and solve complex problems.
              The economy of the USSR fought with the economies of almost all of Europe, and ... won.
              Quote: EvilLion
              ..so, during the WWII, only the United States could solve the problem of creating a self-loading rifle and equipping troops with it on a large scale.

              Still would...
              No enemy divisions were stationed near Washington, and Detroit was not bombed ...
            2. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 12: 11
              +3
              Quote: EvilLion
              Each soldier of the first line has SVT, and so, during the WWII, only the United States could solve the problem of creating a self-loading rifle and mass equipping troops with it.

              I am forced to note that it was with self-loading rifles that the Soviet government was good, as little with anything. But as it turned out, even too good - too complex and demanding to maintain a weapon for the WWII army, in fact, the militia.

              The United States was distinguished, among other things, by the very high quality of the conscript contingent. If an American conscript has already rolled girls in a car, then the Soviet one did not always, but very often saw a steam locomotive for the first time in his life in the army (and the townspeople were drafted into technical branches of the military). Naturally, this affected the dexterity of handling all sorts of pieces of iron.
              1. DesToeR
                DesToeR 17 March 2021 20: 52
                0
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                I am forced to note that it was with self-loading rifles that the Soviet government was good, as little with anything. But as it turned out, even too good - too complex and demanding to maintain a weapon for the WWII army, in fact, the militia.

                The USSR had no difficulty with self-loading. Few note that by 1942, the USSR and the 3rd Reich had a stable understanding of the shortcomings of this type of weapon. In the USSR, self-loading is being abandoned in favor of automatic machines (AVT). Those. there is a forced rollback to the ABC-36 concept, which was considered flawed back in 1938. In Germany, a scanty amount of FG-42 is produced, and the Wehrmacht hacked to death this Goering wunderwolf in the bud and adopted the 43rd Gever infantry. The Germans also consider the G-1943 a palliative and in every possible way force the work on the machine gun under the industrial cartridge. By 300, both in the USSR and in Germany, there was a final understanding of the need for automatic weapons with an effective firing range of XNUMXm in bursts.
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                The United States was distinguished, among other things, by the very high quality of the conscript contingent.

                Are you serious? Do you really think that an American boy from an Alabama farm or a hard worker from Detroit was very different from a Soviet boy from Ryazan or Chelyabinsk?
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                Naturally, this affected the dexterity of handling all sorts of pieces of iron.

                Have you seen an incomplete disassembly of the SVT-40? Do you think the skills of "driving girls in a car" were necessary there?
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 21: 40
                  +3
                  Quote: DesToeR
                  Do you think the skills of "driving girls in a car" were necessary there?


                  Wouldn't hurt. Moreover, the emphasis should be placed not on girls - the old people say there was no shortage with them under the Soviet regime, (an amazing thing!) - but on the car. Even an American car of the 30s required a close acquaintance with all sorts of difficult pieces of iron.
                  Quote: DesToeR
                  Do you really think that an American boy from an Alabama farm or a hard worker from Detroit was very different from a Soviet boy from Ryazan or Chelyabinsk?

                  Yes of course. With a very high probability, he had a complete school education and experience in driving a car. In the technical branches of the military, primarily in aviation, the Americans conscripted almost exclusively students.
                  The Soviet conscript had experience driving a mare. This is also important, given the situation with the thrust in the Red Army, but a little different. Urban residents with a full school education as a priority went to the technical branches of the military.

                  Do you have any doubts that the mass American conscript of the 40s was more familiar with the achievements of technology than any other, or what?
                  Quote: DesToeR
                  USSR abandon self-loading in favor of automatic machines (AVT)

                  Well done what. And how did it go, with automatic machines? You want to prove that the refusal of self-charging in favor of the three-line is even good, I understand correctly?
                  1. DesToeR
                    DesToeR 17 March 2021 23: 21
                    -2
                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    Wouldn't hurt.

                    Is this incomplete disassembly of the SVT-40 in your opinion? You never cease to amaze me! Incomplete disassembly of SVT-40 includes 4 (four) operations, for which it is not necessary to have the title of CTN.

                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    Yes of course. With a very high probability, he had a complete school education and experience in driving a car.

                    Today's young people, after 11 years of school, surrounded by an incredible amount of "gadgets" more difficult than cars of the 40s, manage to make such a thing as the AK-74M unusable. Maybe it wasn't about education there. Or do you think that the Marines were taken exclusively with the university behind them?
                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    The Soviet conscript had experience driving a mare.

                    And tell me, did the American conscript have experience in "driving" troops, completed a full course of fire training? Was the boy from Alabama familiar with the tactics, did he go through military co-operation at the level of at least a company BEFORE mobilization? Did you know the Charter perfectly? Not? Well, how was he fundamentally different for the army from the Ryazan lad?
                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    You want to prove that the refusal of self-charging in favor of the three-line is even good, I understand correctly?

                    The refusal went not in favor of the three-line, but in favor of the AK. True, before the AK had to give the army 11 million. Mosin rifles, 250 thousand AVT and 6 million PPSh. But this is because of poverty.
                    1. Cherry Nine
                      Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 23: 53
                      +2
                      Quote: DesToeR
                      Is this incomplete disassembly of the SVT-40 in your opinion?

                      Not. Did I write about an incomplete disassembly?
                      Quote: DesToeR
                      did the Marines take exclusively with the university behind their shoulders?

                      I wrote about the pilots, please be more attentive. As for the present - in terms of the relationship of people with iron, the reverse process is now going on, people are gradually weaning to work with their hands. There are complaints that M2 is already too complicated.
                      Quote: DesToeR
                      tactics, did he go through combat knitting at the level of at least a company BEFORE mobilization?

                      Of course not. He had, as a rule, everything about all 8 months of preparation in the States. So the Americans combined the high quality of conscripts with the low quality of most of the soldiers relative to the same Wehrmacht or the IJA of 42. However, by the 44th it was not so noticeable.

                      And the Soviet, by the way, how are things with this, with the preparation?
                      Quote: DesToeR
                      so how was he fundamentally different for the army from the Ryazan lad?

                      It seems that I already wrote about this, if you can carefully. The American conscript is, on average, significantly better educated and, on average, much more familiar with various mechanical engineering and metalworking products. Oh yes. He is generally young and generally well fed.
                      Quote: DesToeR
                      The refusal went not in favor of the three-line, but in favor of the AK. True, before the AK had to give the army 11 million. Mosin rifles, 250 thousand AVT and 6 million PPSh. But this is because of poverty.

                      Do you see any difference between the 42nd year and the mid-50s? Oh well.
                      1. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 18 March 2021 00: 06
                        -2
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Not. Did I write about an incomplete disassembly?

                        my comment related to this:
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        I am forced to note that it was with self-loading rifles that the Soviet government was good, as little with anything. But as it turned out, even too good - too complex and demanding to maintain a weapon for the WWII army, in fact, the militia.

                        ...
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        I wrote about the pilots, please be more attentive.

                        I carefully read the comments (see above).
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Of course not. He had, as a rule, everything about all 8 months of preparation in the States.

                        Q.E.D. Eight months of training is a lot, even by modern standards (see the training course in the US NG). Those. taught the boys from Alabama (and not only) everything. Including how to write correctly in the US Army.

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        It seems that I already wrote about this, if you can carefully.

                        It seems that you need to be more attentive. How could the skill of changing a radiator on a Ford be useful to a Marine on a sandy Normandy beach? When he looked with wide-shut eyes at the German machine-gun crew at 200m. And in his hands this "trained" boy was holding the "best in the world" Garand, though (why?) Packed in a plastic bag. What will the metalworking skill give this soldier? But the skills of tactics and fire training will come in handy for him. True, the boy will get them only in the army ... just like our Vanyusha from Ryazan.

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Do you see any difference between the 42nd year and the mid-50s? Oh well.

                        Do you know the history of the development of small arms of the USSR and the 3rd Reich even in "minimal salaries"?
                      2. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 01: 25
                        +3
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        my comment related to this

                        Your comment related to your implied thesis that self-loading does not require higher user training regarding the three-line.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Eight months of training is a lot, even by modern standards (see the training course in the US NG)

                        Eight months is unacceptably short by any measure, the US NG is basically the same school of janitors (more precisely, loaders), like the RF Armed Forces,
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        taught the boys from Alabama (and not only) everything. Including how to write correctly in the US Army.

                        Naturally, they knew how to write after school, and for the notorious months they did not have time to really learn even officers - also, for a minute, civilians. It's ridiculous to talk about sergeants and even more so privates. So the American l / s certainly had their drawbacks, these are not current professionals with five-year contracts. Only the ILC differed for the better.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        But the skills of tactics and fire training will come in handy for him. True, the boy will only get them in the army ... just like our Vanyusha from Ryazan

                        It seems that you learned about the preparation of the l / s from the movie "The Lord of the Rings". From shit hatched - and immediately a demolition.

                        The desire to raise the topic of fire training, and even more so tactics in relation to Soviet rifle divisions - not to be confused with the assault groups of the end of the war - is difficult to explain. There is nothing good for the Red Army. The stories about a poor boy from Alabama with a plastic bag also look incredibly touching. on the head - The losses of Americans in Omaha are not too higher than the losses of Soviet tourists in Shumsha in August 45, and in other areas, they are much less.

                        By the way.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        How could the skill of changing a radiator on a Ford be useful to a Marine on a sandy Normandy beach?

                        The ILC was not involved there.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Do you know the history of the development of small arms of the USSR and the 3rd Reich even in "minimal salaries"?

                        In outline. But enough to appreciate your story about the abandonment of SVT-40 in favor of AK.
                      3. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 18 March 2021 08: 56
                        -2
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Your comment related to your implied thesis,

                        My comment related to your specific comment. Of which I mean "soldiers in bast shoes" from a plow who are not even able to sign, I read a lot on VO. The problem with such writers is that they cannot answer a simple question: why does a soldier need the skills to read and write in order to disassemble-clean-assemble the SVT?
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        It seems that you learned about the preparation of the l / s from the movie "The Lord of the Rings".

                        Well, it's more like FMJ.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        The desire to raise the topic of fire training, and even more so tactics in relation to Soviet rifle divisions - not to be confused with the assault groups of the end of the war - is difficult to explain.

                        It is difficult to explain why to see in my comments something that is not there. I do not compare the tactics of the US and USSR OP from the word at all. An American boy from Alabama and a Soviet boy from the Vologda region for the army, both the USSR and the USA, are absolute ZERO. The most that an American could have is the skill of handling firearms. But somehow you, apparently, forget about the pre-conscription military training of young people in the USSR ... Why? Probably you really do not want to give at least some real but not imaginary advantage to the USSR? Is that so? Or do you think that the sniper business in the Red Army was born out of a vacuum in the Second World War? The "Voroshilovsky shooter" badge, do you know what it was issued for? I doubt it ... And I was also for skydiving ...
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        In outline. But enough to appreciate your story about the abandonment of SVT-40 in favor of AK.

                        Unlikely. For there would be no fasting about the 50s. For the 3rd Reich, this is a maximum of 1942, for the USSR - 1944. These are the years of the appearance of the first samples of weapons for industrial cartridges. An American with a self-loading rifle in his hands in 1944 did not surprise anyone, because by the standards of the USSR and Germany - this soldier was armed "the day before yesterday" day. Yesterday for them was a soldier with AVT and FG-42.
                      4. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 10: 34
                        +2
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        My comment related to your specific comment.

                        Quite a funny thread. On the one hand, you do not dare to say directly that a 9-year-old graduate and a graduate of the field education courses, that is, from the strength of a three-year program, are the same for a sergeant. Fortunately, such fighters come across even now, reviews are easy to find. On the other hand, you are trying to somehow get rid of this. Either come up with bast shoes, then about the guys from Ryazan.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        pre-conscription military training of youth in the USSR ... Why?

                        Because it covered a minimum of conscripts, and mainly in cities, from where they were called up first, not into the infantry.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        sniper business in the Red Army was born out of a vacuum in the Second World War?

                        The sniper business in the Red Army was born in newspapers, and there it also existed in the form of "Voroshilovsky shooter" badges. There are many lies in the war, but the "reports" of snipers are an extravaganza by any measure.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        An American with a self-loading rifle in his hands in 1944 did not surprise anyone, because by the standards of the USSR and Germany - this soldier was armed "the day before yesterday". Yesterday for them was a soldier with AVT and FG-42.

                        Are you, I see, from the altistorians? The days before yesterday, of course, are interesting, but today the German had a carbine, and the Soviet fighter had a huge contraption, which was sawed down to more adequate dimensions only in the 44th year.
                      5. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 18 March 2021 13: 01
                        -2
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        On the one hand, you do not dare to say directly that a 9-year-old graduate and a graduate of the field education courses, that is, from the strength of a three-year program, are the same for a sergeant.

                        And where does 9 years and 3 years have to do with it? Yes, at least 11 classes. I asked you one simple question: what skills were necessary for the army so-called. US "alumni / conscripts" needed for a soldier or sergeant? You are silent, hiding behind the general educational level, because there is nothing to say in essence. For a sergeant, that for a private, the level of school education for the infantry is ZERO.

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Because she covered a minimum of conscripts and mainly in cities

                        Do you have tsiferki to support this very controversial statement? Especially in comparison with the degree of coverage of primary military training of young people in the United States. I think no.

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        The sniper business in the Red Army was born in newspapers, and there it also existed in the form of "Voroshilovsky shooter" badges.

                        Fu, how incredible it was! But not everyone will agree with you. To put it mildly.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Are you, I see, from the altistorians?

                        Not. Just the facts.
                      6. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 13: 48
                        +1
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        the level of school education for the infantry is ZERO.

                        Continue to practice demagoguery. 9 classes is zero, and three classes are, respectively, minus 6. No, you can, of course, fight with minus 9, many are quite engaged, even now.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Do you have tsiferki to support this very controversial statement?

                        13 million reported. There were also collective farm cells, so to speak, they taught collective farmers to shoot, yeah.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Especially in comparison with the degree of coverage of primary military training of youth in the United States.

                        In the states, the National Guard worked in the format of "army on weekends". But Roosevelt rewrote it into the career army back in the 40th year, approx. million people.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        But not everyone will agree with you

                        Of course. News from the cycle "Amazing Nearby" about snipers and now often come from one former brotherly country, what can we say about the Second World War.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Not. Facts only

                        The facts are that the only WWII army with massive self-loading small arms, apart from the PP, is the American one.
                      7. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 18 March 2021 19: 25
                        +1
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Continue to practice demagoguery.

                        Dear dear, you are engaged in demagoguery, but I'm not interested in idle reflections, but in numbers:
                        VNO (1920)
                        CCO (1926)
                        ODVF (1923)
                        OSOAVIAKHIM (1927).
                        "In total, from 1930 to 1941, OSOAVIAKHIM gave a ticket to the sky for 121 thousand pilots, 27 thousand glider pilots and 122 thousand parachutists. By 1941, the association trained 80 percent of all military personnel of the country's Armed Forces. The number of people who joined OSOAVIAKHIM grew steadily. . its members were 1938 million people, after a year and a half - already over 7 million. "
                        Your favorite American metallurgist in a car with girls is just meat compared to this. Amazing is really close by.
                        And if you have the knowledge that 34,5 million people passed through the Red Army during the Second World War, it becomes obvious that at least every second person came to the army not with knowledge of metallurgy, but with initial military training.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        The facts are that the only WWII army with massive self-loading small arms, apart from the PP, is the American one.

                        The fact is that it doesn't matter what and who is armed. It is important who makes the decisive contribution to the fire defeat. And here "self-loading" costing as much as half a light machine gun or a company mortar will easily and naturally merge into the cost / efficiency criterion.
                      8. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 19 March 2021 08: 25
                        +2
                        I will add to the previous speaker.

                        OSAVIAKHIM is a typical Soviet public organization that, in addition to bullshit, sometimes did something useful. However, I consider it rather impudent to say that 13 million people of its nominal number had CWP. A considerable percentage of its members were, for example, in the city chemical wrestling brigades (an example of their activity is described, for example, in the novel "The Golden Calf").

                        With regard to shooting training.
                        1. Badges "Voroshilovsky shooter" issued about 6 million.
                        2. Basically, naturally, in the cities - in the 34th year there were about the same number of badges in the Leningrad region as in the entire Ukrainian SSR. In Moscow, of the conscripts of the 40th year, about every first was a badge. This topic was included in the package of the pioneer-Komsomol bodyagi.
                        3. Naturally, not all badges were called up: the USSR was promoted in sabotage, there were quite a few badges among the girls. There were also a lot of them among the workers, including later defense industries.

                        Now about the icons themselves.
                        They were categories I and II. The second is the shooting from a three-line, there were only a few thousand of them. The first one is a small baby lying from 25 meters. School shooting range as it is. The requirements are fairly moderate, considering at least the number of badges. So it's good, of course, that the kids were holding a rifle in their hands. TOZ, of course, is not SVT. But to drown for this as for the CWP - well, that is.
                        no matter what and who is armed.

                        And, here is the argument "shooter is not important", great, it was not for a long time. One and a half million gold SVTs were caused by pests.
                      9. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 19 March 2021 09: 29
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        However, I consider it rather impudent to say that 13 million people of its nominal number had CWP.

                        Whose statement do you consider impudent? And why only 13 million? Especially if you know, of course, that over the years of the Second World War, this organization passed through itself another 9 million. person.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        With regard to shooting training.

                        Why do you limit yourself to such a narrow term as "shooting training"? I'm "losing weight" with such statements in the 21st century. Have you heard anything about the TRP sign?

                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        The requirements are fairly moderate, considering at least the number of badges. So it's good, of course, that the kids were holding a rifle in their hands. TOZ, of course, is not SVT.

                        Are there any differences in the basic principles of shooting from TOZ, SVT, Barrett? We pay attention to the TRP and tactical training:
                        "Since 1938, the ability to assemble and disassemble a small-bore rifle has become compulsory for adolescents, as well as knowledge of the general principles of shooting from different types of weapons. In 1940, the list of requirements for applicants of all ages was expanded, adding, The public action more and more resembled targeted combat training of young people. According to statistics, 92% of the draftees in 1940 had the title of "Voroshilov shooter" and the corresponding badge. The exact number of awarded is unknown. Called a figure from 6 to 9 million people. "
                        We take into account that until 1941, 6 million people received the TRP badge.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        But to drown for this as for the CWP - well, that is.

                        Do you offer to "drown" for knowledge in metallurgy and the ability to carry girls in a car?
                      10. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 19 March 2021 18: 26
                        +1
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        the organization passed through itself another 9 million. person.

                        One more sketch. During the Second World War, this organization was engaged in the organization of civil defense, it was necessary, but different. I have to remind you that during the Second World War, most Soviet citizens were a little busy at their main job.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        have you heard anything about the TRP sign?

                        Everyone is ready for a glorious feat.
                        Athletes? Yes, about the same 6 million people, the same Pioneer-Komsomol movement.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        According to statistics, 92% of the 1940 conscripts had the rank of "Voroshilov shooter" and the corresponding badge.

                        Did you specifically omit the words "in Moscow" in relation to 92%?
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Do you offer to "drown" for knowledge in metallurgy and the ability to carry girls in a car?

                        I propose to admit that in the preparation of the militia - both the Red Army after 41 and the USArmy were essentially militia - the quality of the input material is of great importance (as in most other cases). I propose to recognize that the average level of education is one of the important characteristics of the conscript contingent. And the USSR was clearly not a champion here. As with most other components.
                      11. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 19 March 2021 22: 32
                        -1
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        I propose to recognize that the average level of education is one of the important characteristics of the conscript contingent.

                        On what basis do you propose to recognize this? Especially for the infantry, which exploited the same "self-loading"? Just because you want to? Do you have arguments why a machine gunner or a shooter should know perfectly mathematics, physics, chemistry or geography? Or do you want to say that in combat, an infantryman needs these disciplines more than physical training, theoretical principles of shooting and tactics? Have you studied the "chronicles" of the Nazis at least? Do you know the main advantages that they distinguished from our Vanyushs over their Hans? For disassembly-assembly-cleaning of the SVT-40, the reading skill was sufficient, the writing skill was not required.
                        Why write all this nonsense in the 21st century, if the real story is much more interesting? Including about SVT-38/40.
                      12. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 20 March 2021 05: 43
                        +1
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Do you know the main advantages that they distinguished from our Vanyushs over their Hans?

                        Yes, we have arrived.

                        Ok, education is unnecessary, let's fix this position.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        is the real story much more interesting?

                        Real story? Is it about Garand - the day before yesterday for the Red Army in 42? Oh well.

                        The funny thing is that you are partly right. Garand really is the day before yesterday. The American infantrymen already had automatic hand-held small arms in WWI, but the incredible stupidity of American staff officers is almost 50 years - fifty years, Karl! - kept the American rifleman in the realities of the Boer War. After WWII, American inadequacies were able to slow down the European shooter, which made it possible for such shit as the AK-47 to earn a reputation as a wunderwaffe.

                        But no, you need to rush between the absurd theses "the three-line is even better", "there is no need for a rifleman, mortars rule", and "the visionaries from the Red Army did not exchange for backward decisions and boldly looked into the future." Found time to look into the future, the visionaries are lousy.
                      13. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 20 March 2021 13: 22
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Yes, we have arrived.

                        Where did you come from? Into the dead end of their idle reflections. Today, in the 21st century in my country, the main screenings are for physical fitness and health. And only in the background is education.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Ok, education is unnecessary, let's fix this position.

                        Education in the infantry of the 40s, which exploited the "self-loading", was on the third priority. It really isn't needed at grade 8 ... 11 in high school. Enough and 3.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        The American infantrymen already had automatic hand-held small arms in WWI, but the incredible stupidity of American staff officers is almost 50 years - fifty years, Karl!

                        The Americans did not have any stupidity, tk. BAR did not fully meet the requirements for INDIVIDUAL handguns.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        But no, you need to rush between the absurd theses "the three-line is even better"

                        I am amazed at you sometimes! In 1941 alone, the mobilization system of the USSR called for 8 million people, most of whom served in the Red Army with a Mosin rifle. What do you propose to arm them with? Considering that since 1936, the industry has produced only 1,5 million units of auto / reloading rifles, and 22 million units are in warehouses. "three lines".
                        That's the whole secret with the SVT-40.
                      14. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 20 March 2021 15: 03
                        +1
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Today, in the 21st century in my country, the main screenings are for physical fitness and health.

                        Arguments are each better. Closed this topic.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        BAR did not fully meet the requirements for INDIVIDUAL handguns.

                        And I'm not talking about the BAR, which was not the most successful light machine gun. I'm talking about a weapon on an intermediate cartridge, Winchester Model 1907. It should be added that in the original it was semi-automatic, it was converted by the French for burst fire.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        most of whom served in the Red Army with a Mosin rifle. What do you propose to arm them with? Considering that since 1936, the industry has produced only 1,5 million units of auto / reloading rifles, and 22 million units are in warehouses. "three lines".

                        Well, the Americans armed them with self-loading, which they tried to implement in the pre-war Red Army, but the Red Army itself cost a three-line, because it will do it anyway. What is the dispute about?
                      15. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 20 March 2021 18: 39
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Well, the Americans armed them with self-loading, which they tried to implement in the pre-war Red Army, but the Red Army itself cost a three-line, because it will do it anyway.

                        The funny thing is that the people of the sect "the first in the world" forget that for the rearmament of the entire US Army from 1941 to 1945, as many as 4 (four) million of these rifles were produced. I recommend comparing this number with the production of Mosin rifles and Mauser carbines in the USSR and Germany over the same period. Much more Americans have released another self-loading weapon - the M1 carbine (6 million units) chambered for 7,62x33mm. If in 1941 the US Army had numbered something of the order of 50 thousand people in the infantry, then rearmament on Garand would not have had to wait until 1943.
                      16. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 20 March 2021 21: 44
                        +2
                        Some kind of regular illiterate sketches that are irrelevant to the case.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        people of the sect "the first in the world"

                        Who am I? I constantly vilify the American military. Such recklessness in relation to their own soldiers is rarely found. The figure of Pershing, in comparison with von Seeckt, causes disgust, and MacArthur should have been shot at all in the 30s.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        as many as 4 (four) million of these rifles.

                        For those who are especially memorable, let me remind you that there are about 3 thousand riflemen in a three-regimental infantry division, and in a small Soviet one, and in a normal German or Western one. The rest are group weapon operators who don't need to carry a paddle. In general, an infantry division of the WWII is an artillery regiment, which is protected by three infantry regiments. In the regiment, in turn, machine gunners and mortarmen are fighting, and the rest carry them, feed them, serve cartridges, and approximately every third protects them with rifle fire.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        I recommend comparing this number with the production of Mosin rifles and Mauser carbines in the USSR and Germany over the same period.

                        I recommend comparing how many of them, good friends, remained in the dark, near an unfamiliar village, at an unnamed height. Additional Mausers will be found with them.
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        If in 1941 the US army had something of the order of 50 thousand people in the infantry,

                        In 41, they have about 30, EMNIP, divisions, so there are a few more riflemen there. And as for rearmament in 43 - it seems that they started to fight in earnest in November 42, no?
  4. Alf
    Alf 18 March 2021 22: 38
    +1
    Quote: DesToeR
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    Because she covered a minimum of conscripts and mainly in cities

    Do you have tsiferki to support this very controversial statement? Especially in comparison with the degree of coverage of primary military training of young people in the United States. I think no.

    There is such an interesting fact, the ratio of the urban and rural population of the USSR to the beginning of the war.

    Those who were literate were taken, first of all, into technically complex troops, what then was left for the infantry? Why did the Marines call the SVT capricious, while the Marines respected her very much? Many of the marines did not know how to tune the gas regulator.
  • Alf
    Alf 17 March 2021 22: 37
    0
    Quote: DesToeR
    In the USSR, they abandon self-loading in favor of automatic machines (AVT)

    Translate this passage.
    1. DesToeR
      DesToeR 17 March 2021 23: 22
      0
      Quote: Alf
      Translate this passage.

      AVT - Tokarev automatic rifle. I agree, the word "automata" should have been put in quotation marks.
      1. Alf
        Alf 17 March 2021 23: 41
        +1
        Quote: DesToeR
        Quote: Alf
        Translate this passage.

        AVT - Tokarev automatic rifle. I agree, the word "automata" should have been put in quotation marks.

        Then the transition to submachine guns.
        1. DesToeR
          DesToeR 17 March 2021 23: 48
          -1
          Quote: Alf
          Then the transition to submachine guns.

          So it is - PPSh green light. But the understanding that an individual automatic weapon with twice the effective firing range was needed remained ... AVT was born not in Tokarev's design bureau, but on the fields of war. The plant only fulfilled the wishes of the front-line soldiers and made it possible to fire in automatic mode as standard. The effectiveness of hitting targets from the AVT with automatic fire is about zero, but psychologically it was scary to attack the fighters with ersatz machine guns. If they do not hit anyone, then at least the enemy's attack will drown, or the chain will fall over. And then mortars and machine guns "shoot".
        2. Alf
          Alf 18 March 2021 00: 04
          +1
          Quote: DesToeR
          The plant only fulfilled the wishes of the front-line soldiers and made it possible to fire in automatic mode as standard.

          Burst shooting was allowed for AVT-40 only in critical cases, the main mode was single fire.
        3. DesToeR
          DesToeR 18 March 2021 00: 10
          0
          Quote: Alf
          Burst shooting was allowed for AVT-40 only in critical cases, the main mode was single fire.

          Undoubtedly!
  • Alf
    Alf 17 March 2021 22: 35
    0
    Quote: EvilLion
    If the Red Army were really rich, then every fighter of the first line would have finished the Second World War with SVT,

    Compare the level of development of our soldier and the American one.
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 17 March 2021 14: 57
    0
    Quote: Doccor18
    But with the Soviet engineering school, or rather with its "weakness", you turned it down ... In 1940, the 57-mm was created. PTP ZiS-2, which was so powerful that there were simply no decent targets for it ...

    The ZiS-2 is just an example of the problems of the Soviet engineering school: an artillery system was created that could be mass-produced with great difficulty. By the way. EMNIP, a fragmentation projectile for the ZiS-2 in 1941 was never made. But more than half of the consumption of divisional anti-tank vehicles for us and for the Germans is fragmentation.
    And they removed it from production because the capacity for the production of divisional 76-mm guns was urgently needed. Because the army blocked all the norms for the loss of weapons, plus the formation of new divisions, unplanned by the mob-plan, began, and it was necessary to sharply increase the production of divisions. For the basis of a division's firepower is an artillery regiment, without which a given division cannot be sent to the front at all - in terms of combat power it will be equivalent to a regiment.
    Quote: Doccor18
    Self-loading rifles SVT-38/40. The "poor" Red Army was able to supply its infantry with self-loading weapons. During 1940-42, about 1,3 million units were produced, then production was curtailed in favor of simpler, mass and cheaper weapons.

    Production was curtailed because the level of training of an ordinary soldier did not allow the use of this rifle. It was shitty in the Red Army with the preparation of l / s ...
    In parts of 97 SD rifles manufactured in 1940. , which were on hand for no more than 4 months, up to 29% are reduced to a state of rust in the barrel, machine guns "DP" manufactured in 1939 to 14% also have a deterioration of the barrel channels.
  • Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 08: 46
    +1
    Quote: apro
    she switched to the rails of total war a little earlier than Germany

    In 1928
    1. apro
      apro 17 March 2021 08: 54
      -4
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      In 1928

      Write already since October 1917 ... what to be ashamed of.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 09: 38
        +1
        Well, in the 17th there was some carelessness. But in the 27th military wake-up and in the 28th the 1st five-year plan.
        1. apro
          apro 17 March 2021 10: 00
          -3
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          1st five-year plan.

          Industrialization solved, first of all, the nation-wide tasks of mechanization with the creation of its own manufacturing industry, petrochemistry and other useful things. In reality, after 1939, re-equipment and an increase in staff began to go over to the military track.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 12: 12
            -1
            Quote: apro
            Industrialization solved, first of all, national tasks

            As if the USSR of the 30s had some other national tasks besides preparation for war.
            1. apro
              apro 17 March 2021 12: 25
              0
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              As if the USSR of the 30s had some other national tasks besides preparation for war.

              As I understand it. Your utterance. That the USSR was a militaristic state created for war ???? I do not understand your idea.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 12: 44
                +1
                Quote: apro
                The USSR was a militaristic state created for war ??

                Didn't raise so many question marks. Is this news?

                If in the 20s and from the beginning of the 60s there were some zigzags of the general line, then under Comrade Stalin, the general line is straightforward.
                1. apro
                  apro 17 March 2021 12: 54
                  +1
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  then under Comrade Stalin the general line is straightforward as the truth.

                  Today this truth is perceived in a peculiar way, including you.
                  News for me, ready-made solution for you.
                2. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 13: 17
                  +1
                  Not understood. Do you have any doubts that the Soviet government started industrialization primarily for military purposes, that is, for defense purposes, as it itself called it?
                3. apro
                  apro 17 March 2021 13: 22
                  0
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  Do you doubt that the Soviet government started industrialization primarily in the military

                  There is no doubt, there is confidence that for the purpose of nation-building.
          2. Sanichsan
            Sanichsan 18 March 2021 01: 17
            +1
            Quote: apro
            As far as I understand, your statement is that the USSR was a militaristic state created for war?

            hmmm .. and which state after the First World War did not prepare for the second? "this is not peace, this is a truce." remember that? or "we need to go through what others walked 10 in 100 years, otherwise they will crush us!" ... I can not vouch for the accuracy, but something like this.
            I do not really understand what is ashamed of here. Yes, the country's leadership understood that war was inevitable, which tells us that the country was led by quite far-sighted people. hence collectivization and industrialization, because how do you plan to fight when there is nothing to eat? how in 1905?
            1. apro
              apro 18 March 2021 01: 21
              0
              Quote: SanichSan
              I don't really understand what is ashamed of here

              There is nothing to be ashamed of, but there is no need to exaggerate. Apart from the army, there was where to direct resources, and up to a certain point, even to the detriment of the military.
            2. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 08: 44
              +1
              Quote: SanichSan
              what state after the first world war did not prepare for the second?

              So, everything for the front, everything for victory? Anyone except the USSR and Japan.
              Quote: SanichSan
              I don't really understand what is ashamed of here

              Be ashamed? There is definitely nothing, living the whole country in paranoid delirium is very exciting. Little people, however, suffered, and the dog is with them.
              Quote: SanichSan
              the country was run by quite far-sighted people. hence collectivization and industrialization, because how do you plan to fight

              Yeah. That is why I consider the victims of the Soviet regime in the 30s to be victims of the Second World War. In another way, these far-sighted people did not know how to do anything, and did not want to.
              Quote: SanichSan
              the country's leadership understood that war was inevitable

              Naturally inevitable. The Reich was the only country that managed to attack the USSR first. Every single one of the neighbors of the USSR did not have time for 1928, comrade. Stalin defended himself against them preemptively. With the Turks, a bummer, perhaps, they fled to the Americans. And on comrade. Stalin is a hole.
              Quote: SanichSan
              how in 1905?

              There is no need to give undeserved compliments to the Soviet leadership. To Kuropatkin they are as to the moon. In the Winter War, it managed to put in one and a half times more people in 3 months than Nikolai the Bloody in a year and a half.
            3. Sanichsan
              Sanichsan 18 March 2021 12: 34
              -2
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              So, everything for the front, everything for victory? Anyone except the USSR and Japan.

              forgot to add France, Germany Poland and the rest of Europe wink
              And when did this slogan appear "Everything for the front, everything for victory!"? in the 20th? or maybe in the 30s? oh, at 41 ... then why are you lying about the militarized economy?
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              Little people, however, suffered, and the dog is with them.

              kulaks in a terrible gulag? really do not care about the suffering of this scum, but unfortunately this is not so ... in fact, the fact that the Soviet government showed excessive humanism and became the cause of repression in 37 years.
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              Yeah. That is why I consider the victims of the Soviet regime in the 30s to be victims of the Second World War. In another way, these far-sighted people did not know how to do anything, and did not want to.

              amazing darkness. Are you familiar with the Yezhov case? who and why gave him the powers that he used in the 37th do you know?
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              Naturally inevitable. The Reich was the only country that managed to attack the USSR first. Every single one of the neighbors of the USSR did not have time for 1928, comrade. Stalin defended himself against them preemptively. With the Turks, a bummer, perhaps, they fled to the Americans. And on comrade. Stalin is a hole.

              how interesting .. that is, when the Entente attacked the RSFSR is this normal? when, under tough military pressure, vast territories of Russia were seized, is this normal? when the Poles captured part of Ukraine is this normal? but when the USSR began to restore territorial integrity it was "ah ah ah! Russian invaders attacked !!!" Are you generally Russian or so, in Canada on a salary?
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              There is no need to give undeserved compliments to the Soviet leadership. To Kuropatkin they are as to the moon. In the Winter War, it managed to put in one and a half times more people in 3 months than Nikolai the Bloody in a year and a half.

              in your demagoguery there is a serious problem .... RI lost the war with Japan, and the USSR defeated the Japanese at Khalkhin Gol, defeated Germany, much more powerful than Japan, and in 1945 unleashed the Kwantung group. Are you seriously going to argue that all this is only due to the fact that all Stalin intimidated and the NKVD overwritten? Well, you read your colleague a lie. even this scum writes that no one knew anything about the repression. request
            4. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 13: 15
              0
              Quote: SanichSan
              forgot to add France, Germany Poland and the rest of Europe

              No, I haven't forgotten. They had nothing of the kind and close.
              Quote: SanichSan
              and when this slogan appeared

              The first five-year plans were treated with different slogans, business is alive.
              Quote: SanichSan
              don't really care about the suffering of this scum

              Yeah, I totally agree. I, however, have a different list of scum, but these are details.
              Quote: SanichSan
              Are you familiar with the Yezhov case?

              I love it. The LGBT movement really lacks such people.
              Quote: SanichSan
              who and why gave him the authority

              )))
              Oversight
              Yezhov is a scoundrel! Ruined our best shots. A decomposed person. You call him at the People's Commissariat - they say: he left for the Central Committee. You call the Central Committee - they say: he left for work. You send him to his house - it turns out that he lies dead drunk on the bed. He killed many innocent people. We shot him for this

              Quote: SanichSan
              that is, when the Entente attacked the RSFSR

              I don’t remember.
              Quote: SanichSan
              when, under tough military pressure, vast territories of Russia were seized, is this normal?

              Did you decide to recall the Bolsheviks' treaty with Germany? So the Entente annulled it and handed over almost all the liberated territories back to the Bolsheviks. Who did not have time to fight back himself.
              Quote: SanichSan
              when the Poles captured part of Ukraine

              Liberated part of Ukraine from the Bolsheviks, did you mean?
              As far as I am aware, Ukraine did not have claims against the Poles during that period.
              Quote: SanichSan
              but when the USSR began to restore territorial integrity

              "Restore Integrity" is the original call. Well, we will discuss the accounts from the citizens of the countries that were restored to the USSR another time, but now I will just note that the USSR got a little carried away with the restoration of integrity, in the Chernivtsi region, which was one of the reasons for the growing misunderstanding on the part of German friends.
              Quote: SanichSan
              RI lost the war with Japan

              What a misfortune.
              Quote: SanichSan
              The USSR defeated the Japanese at Khalkhin Gol,

              And what was there, on Khalkin-Gol? A divisional skirmish? And won - what do you mean?
              Quote: SanichSan
              defeated Germany, much stronger than Japan

              Umm, long talk. But Comrade Stalin, unlike Nikolai, was not dismissed by the front commanders due to incomplete correspondence from his post, in this he really prepared very well.
              Quote: SanichSan
              1945 rolled out the Kwantung gang

              I do not remember such a case. You mean the Emperor's order to the forces in Manchukuo to surrender to the USSR, and not wait for MacArthur?
              Quote: SanichSan
              all this just because all Stalin intimidated and the NKVD overwritten?

              Not. Comrade Stalin, thanks to the NKVD, survived the 41st year, when he received a bill for his almost 20 years of effective management. And then the poor preparation of the Reich for war and the disgusting strategic situation for Germany began to affect.
              Quote: SanichSan
              no one knew anything about repression.

              They lived in the same house, worked in the same People's Commissariat, but no one knew anything? Kalinin and Poskoebyshev did not know about their own wives? And what's cool is even better. How did you put it there?
              Quote: SanichSan
              don't really care about the suffering of this scum
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 17 March 2021 15: 03
    +2
    Quote: apro
    Industrialization solved, first of all, national tasks of mechanization with the creation of its own manufacturing industry, petrochemistry and other useful things.

    Comrade Voroshilov at the XNUMXth Congress of the CPSU (b) directly and unequivocally named the goals of the First Five-Year Plan and industrialization:
    1. The five-year plan of the national economy must proceed from the inevitability of an armed attack on the USSR and, consequently, from the need, to the extent of material resources, to organize such a defense of the Soviet Union, which would ensure a victorious rebuff to the combined forces of our potential adversaries.

    2. The industrialization of the country predetermines the defense capability of the USSR. But this is precisely why military considerations must make their own adjustments to specific plans for industrial construction. In particular: a) the regionalization of the industry must comply with the requirements of strategic security; b) metallurgy, ferrous and especially non-ferrous, in the coming years should meet the minimum defense needs; c) the general plan for the deployment of industry should provide for the investment of sufficient funds in those sectors that are the bottlenecks in our economy and defense (auto and tractor construction, chemistry, etc.).
    9 Simonov N.S. The military-industrial complex of the USSR in the 1920s-1950s: the rate of economic growth, structure, organization of production and management.
  • stalkerwalker
    stalkerwalker 17 March 2021 10: 23
    +6
    Quote: apro
    Poverty should not be passed off as a virtue. The Soviet economy had enough problems. And the Soviet engineering school was rather weak compared to the Germans. The Soviet economy worked according to its possibilities.

    1. As the Second World War was a kind of continuation of the First World War, so it is necessary to compare the economic potential of the countries that took part in it at the time of the end of WWI. In this case, Germany and the USSR.
    2. Both the USSR and Germany, in the second half of the 20s of the last century, had their own developments. But both sides were actively interested in Lloyd-Cardin's products. As a result, we got the T-26, and the BT series, after the purchase of a "racing tank" originally from the United States.
    The Germans approached the British tank with skepticism, continuing their line of "light and heavy tractors".
    3. But there is no need to compare production capacities, because in the USSR they simply did not exist, unlike Germany, where almost all the enterprises of the military-industrial complex during the First World War remained in service. The result was the cooperation of both parties, expressed in training centers on the territory of the USSR. Tank center in Kazan, for example.
    4. In the USSR, factories produced armored vehicles in accordance with the technical specification issued by a military customer. In Germany, the well-known Knimpknampf also steered the entire road, and it was very amusing. It was he who in every possible way slowed down the mass production of the "four", pushing to the fore the "three", then the Panther, although the troops constantly reported that the Pz-IV was the best in the class of "medium" tanks.
    Quote: apro
    the strength of the Soviet economy lies in the fact that it switched to the rails of total war a little earlier than Germany. and much more completely

    Rezun's words have sunk into the memory of many. The only thing is that the USSR was forced to develop the economy in all directions. And also eliminated illiteracy.
    As a result, the country was saturated with trucks of the GAZ-AA type, which were the basis both in the army and in the economy. Tractors of type C with modifications were also the basis in the village. And in the army, as under-tractors.
    If we attach the Skoda and Renault factories to the German economy, we get a comparison of David and Goliath.
    Nevertheless, despite the confusion and chaos associated with the evacuation of military factories to the East, starting in 1943, samples of armored vehicles that reached Berlin began to appear on the stream.
    Summary.
    The Soviet economy worked in an emergency mode, not because the USSR wanted to conquer the entire globe, but simply caught up with the rest of the civilized world. This is what I. Stalin said that "if we do not cover the gap of 50 years in 10, then we will be crushed."
    But what was the reason for the lag is a completely different story ...
    1. apro
      apro 17 March 2021 10: 56
      -1
      Quote: stalkerwalker
      Rezun's words have sunk into the memory of many.

      What does the rezun have to do with it ??? Soviet preparation for war began at the turn of 1939. with a clear understanding that war is already inevitable, but thanks to the Soviet planning system, it took on a more purposeful and balanced view. when the pace is high and the opponents have it, then problems are possible.
    2. yehat2
      yehat2 17 March 2021 14: 43
      0
      Quote: stalkerwalker
      Tractors of type C with modifications were also the basis in the village. And in the army, as under-tractors.
      If we attach the Skoda and Renault factories to the German economy, we get a comparison of David and Goliath.

      Curiously, Germany by 44 had switched to its own gun transporters similar to our pre-war ones, the speed of which was no longer 40, but 15 km / h. Half-geese turned out to be too expensive for total war
  • Petrik66
    Petrik66 17 March 2021 10: 59
    +1
    Perhaps the question is profit? It is more profitable to build a mega expensive wunderwife than to bother with "Hetzers".
  • yehat2
    yehat2 17 March 2021 14: 41
    +2
    Quote: Doccor18
    Even the Germans were unable to establish a truly mass production of the PzKpfv IV.

    it was their most massive tank, in second place is the panther
    1. Doccor18
      Doccor18 17 March 2021 14: 54
      -1
      Quote: yehat2
      Quote: Doccor18
      Even the Germans were unable to establish a truly mass production of the PzKpfv IV.

      it was their most massive tank, in second place is the panther

      For them - yes, but in reality ... for SUCH war - less than 9 thousand, and another 6 thousand 5-ok ... Against 60 thousand T-34-76 / 85 ...
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 15: 52
        +1
        for SUCH war

        The most massive armored vehicles of the Reich - Sd.Kfz. 251 and StuG III.
        There was no analogue of the first car in the Red Army.
        An analogue of the second vehicle with very moderate success was the Su-76, and before it there were light tanks, also those wunderwafers.

        The release of armored vehicles in the USSR and the Reich - in pieces - is quite close, a little more and a little less than 100 thousand pieces, respectively.
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 17 March 2021 16: 24
          0
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          The most massive armored vehicles of the Reich - Sd.Kfz. 251 and StuG III.

          The release of armored vehicles in the USSR and the Reich - in pieces - is quite close, a little more and a little less than 100 thousand pieces, respectively.

          Still, Sd.Kfz. The 251 is far from a tank.
          Only the lazy didn't scold the Su-76.
          And if we count all the armored vehicles, then an interesting situation is observed. The Germans had different projects, there were three times more series-subseries (if I'm not mistaken) during the war than the Soviets.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 17: 30
            +2
            Quote: Doccor18
            Still, Sd.Kfz. The 251 is far from a tank.

            A third of Soviet equipment is T-60, T-70 and Su-76, against their background the 10-ton transporter is not so small.
            Quote: Doccor18
            Su-76 was not scolded only by the lazy

            I just didn't scold. The car is necessary and massive, and what is poor - what to do.
            Quote: Doccor18
            The Germans had different projects, there were three times more series-subseries

            Yes, they have their own troubles. On the other hand, T-34s of different dates and different factories were also very different, but separate series were not officially distinguished.
      2. yehat2
        yehat2 April 16 2021 17: 01
        -1
        Quote: Doccor18
        Against 60 thousand

        you forgot that the Germans reoriented significant power to the tank destroyer
        and all the chassis of light tanks, Czech38, part of the PzIV, part of the captured vehicles went there without reducing the speed, and now they managed to create a counterweight comparable to the number of t34. The production of Hetzer is a special place here.
        In 1944 alone, the Germans produced 18 thousand units of tanks and tank destroyers.
        moreover, about 2 thousand of them were panthers, almost all were armed with a new generation of 75 and 88 mm guns, which calmly pierced the T34 model of 43 from a kilometer
  • Thomas N.
    Thomas N. 17 March 2021 05: 16
    +5
    Quote: Yuferev Sergey
    The gun possessed great power and great recoil, which negatively affected the Jagdtigr's chassis, which was already a weak point of the vehicle. For this reason, the shooting was carried out mainly from the spot.

    Only for this reason shooting from a place? smile Without a stabilizer and with a barrel 8 meters long, it is generally impossible to shoot from the move! As far as I know, none of the tank destroyers of the Second World War had a stabilizer and they all fired from a standstill or from a short stop.
  • nivander
    nivander 17 March 2021 05: 43
    +1
    the same Carius recalled "... in my" 001 "something was always broken and more often I went into battle on a commander's gunmag than on an invulnerable jagdtiger"
  • Baron pardus
    Baron pardus 17 March 2021 06: 07
    +1
    Jagdpanthers had to be done. Akht Komma Akht in 71 caliber carried it into the lobeshnik, even the ISs. by the way, two Isa burned ONE Hezter and even managed to dump. In general, I read somewhere that the most effective killer of tanks was STUG3 with a 48-caliber cannon. Its a StuG life. I didn't choose the StuG life, StuG life chose me. A parody from American players World of Tanks. In the original "I didn't choose the thug life, the thug life chose me". Quote from the successfully banged gangsta rapper Tupac Shakur.

    By the way, you say that FLAK40 weighed 7 tons with a caliber of 128mm, A19, emnip weighed the same, with a caliber of 122mm and a lower muzzle velocity.
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 17 March 2021 09: 42
      +2
      Do not confuse the mass of the entire system and the actual implement. The A-19 artillery unit with an antiaircraft gun comparable in caliber was not even close. And the towed PaK 44 in combat position weighs more than 10 tons.
    2. Alf
      Alf 17 March 2021 22: 43
      +1
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      two Isa burned ONE Hezter and even managed to dump.

      Head-on ? On board? Distance?
      1. Baron pardus
        Baron pardus 18 March 2021 01: 06
        0
        As far as I read from 800 meters to both sides. They didn't even notice him. There were two more, but Commander Hetzter wisely decided to get rid of it for now. I understand him very much, 40mm sloped armor cannot be saved from 60kg ingots.
        1. Alf
          Alf 18 March 2021 22: 21
          +1
          Quote: Baron Pardus
          As far as I read from 800 meters to both sides.


          Airborne ISa 90 mm, and even tilted. He doesn’t know how to drink. The maximum was burned by the T-34.
  • Free wind
    Free wind 17 March 2021 06: 23
    +1
    And why not install the Rak-43 cannon, like Ferdinant's, it is also strong on penetration, the rate of fire is higher, it is easier, there is a muzzle brake, which greatly reduces the recoil. Moreover, in the tiger's jagds, the location of the felling is more successful than that of the ferdinant. Probably the Hans intended to fight the bunkers in the offensive. The engine, gearbox, final drives are almost identical to the Tiger 1, the controls are the same. And they were reliable enough. The same Cote on tests in Kubinka passed about 1000 km, and not on a rolled primer, it seems to me not the worst result for a war. But Fomin is dead, and figs with him.
    1. Thomas N.
      Thomas N. 17 March 2021 07: 14
      -1
      Quote: Free Wind
      And why not install the Rak-43 cannon, like Ferdinant's, it is also strong on penetration, the rate of fire is higher, it is easier, there is a muzzle brake, which greatly reduces the recoil.

      This was done - Jagdtiger 8,8 cm Pak 43 (https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdtiger)
    2. mr.ZinGer
      mr.ZinGer 17 March 2021 08: 33
      +1
      This is a jagdpanther, in my opinion, about 800 pieces were produced, a serious device.
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 17 March 2021 09: 37
        0
        2 times less. They were simply taken care of very much and were forbidden to send StuG-III into an attack, otherwise they would suddenly break the Rus-Ivans with a projectile into the bochin, and the "berry" is dear. So with a small release of "berries", quite a few survived until the end of the War.
      2. Alf
        Alf 17 March 2021 22: 45
        +1
        Quote: mr.ZinGer
        This is a jagdpanther, in my opinion, about 800 pieces were produced, a serious device.

        Jagdpanther was released in 372 copies.
    3. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 08: 49
      +3
      Quote: Free Wind
      Why not install the Cancer-43 cannon, like Ferdinant's

      There were, and in much larger numbers. Jagdpanther and nashorn. These are quite successful cars, even before the heyday of the gloomy Teutonic genius.
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 17 March 2021 09: 43
        +4
        "Nashorn" is still a very niche thing with zero resistance to hits, even 45 m farts.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 17 March 2021 10: 38
          +3
          Quote: EvilLion
          "Nashorn" is still a very niche thing with zero stability

          Yes. In fact, this is a self-propelled carriage. A towed gun is even more vulnerable, especially so huge.
          He is not supposed to come under fire. It is supposed to fight at the expense of superiority in distance. Naturally, in interaction with the rest of the forces.

          And this niche thing was the most massive object with this gun, after all.
    4. Alf
      Alf 17 March 2021 22: 45
      +1
      Quote: Free Wind
      The same Cote on tests in Kubinka passed about 1000 km,

      Tiger2 68 tons, Jagdtiger-75 tons. The chassis and transmission were clearly not happy with the extra seven tons.
  • BAI
    BAI 17 March 2021 08: 35
    +1
    Ferdinand became incredibly famous, but this car remained somehow unnoticed. Although both cars are comparable in terms of characteristics and the number of produced.
    1. mr.ZinGer
      mr.ZinGer 17 March 2021 08: 46
      +1
      Many German self-propelled guns were identified by our soldiers as Ferdinand, although about 90 of them were produced, and he fought, judging by reports from the Crimea to the Arctic.
  • CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz 17 March 2021 09: 09
    +2
    Dizaynerski smotritsa velikolepno.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 17 March 2021 09: 34
    0
    Interesting photo in Kubinka, "yaga" and next to "waffle". Straight WoT of some kind.
  • Oleg Aviator
    Oleg Aviator 17 March 2021 09: 48
    0
    This device is designed to operate from long-range ambushes. But not for agile combat. For his time, a very dangerous enemy, if they had brought to mind (engine, transmission, chassis), it would have been more bankrupt
  • Alien From
    Alien From 17 March 2021 10: 16
    +2
    Nemchura has twisted her neck on a giant menagerie. And the dog is with them!
  • Undecim
    Undecim 17 March 2021 14: 07
    +1
    The Jagdtiger tank destroyer was developed in Germany between 1942 and 1944. on the chassis of a heavy tank "King Tiger" or (as it is also called) "Tiger II".
    Panzerjäger Tiger Ausf. B was produced with two types of chassis. Part of the Henschel chassis, like the Tiger II, is part of the Porsche chassis.

    This is the Jagdtiger Museum in Kubinka (serial number 305083) on a Henschel chassis.


    And this is a Jagdtiger from the museum in Bovington (serial number 305004) on a Porsche chassis.
    1. yehat2
      yehat2 April 20 2021 15: 18
      0
      and who can tell you why some rods are welded on the side of the tower?
      I doubt that these are DZ holders. For Camouflage?
      1. Undecim
        Undecim April 20 2021 16: 16
        +1
        Spare tracks were attached to them.
  • Jager
    Jager 17 March 2021 14: 21
    +2
    Their own mistakes did not teach the Germans anything - why glue another Ferdinand if the Ferdinand's gun was more than enough.
  • Poltava
    Poltava 17 March 2021 20: 41
    0
    There is a good story about the Su-76, Self-propelled gun number 120
  • gla172
    gla172 17 March 2021 22: 19
    -1
    Nice article, short, clear, no frills .... thanks!
  • chicalo
    chicalo 18 March 2021 06: 05
    0
    the weapon does not make any sense, against the HIGHER CIVILIZATION
  • English tarantas
    English tarantas 18 March 2021 07: 46
    0
    128 mm FlaK 40 anti-aircraft gun.

    Forgive me, is this an antiaircraft gun too? I wonder how many and which of them were shot down ...
    We took a screen from the tundra, there, as in reality, this superfluous miracle of technology, if it appears in battle, it rarely, usually does not have time to get anywhere and catches it from my Sherman on board, or is waiting for its tandrebolt / corsair with 2 × 1000lb
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 18 March 2021 11: 34
      0
      Quote: English tarantass
      Forgive me, is this an antiaircraft gun too?

      And what to do - the heavy bombers got bigger and higher and higher. And there is no air defense system yet.
      We also made KS-19.

      And what's so strange about a 128-mm anti-aircraft gun? The Yankees in the Navy have had the 127mm standard anti-aircraft caliber since the late 20s.
    2. Alf
      Alf 18 March 2021 22: 45
      0
      Quote: English tarantass
      Forgive me, is this an antiaircraft gun too? I wonder how many and which of them were shot down ...

      The task of the air defense gun is not to shoot down the enemy's plane, but not to let him strike. If, as a result of air defense firing, not a single enemy bomber was shot down, but everyone was bombed in who where, and someone did not reach the target at all, then this means that the air defense gun fulfilled its task.
      Anti-aircraft guns of caliber 100, 105, 127, 128 mm are used only to combat high-flying targets, 99% of which are strategic bombers.
      Having received reports about the B-29, the Germans began to develop air defense guns with a caliber of 150, 170, 238 mm.
      The height reach for the 105-mm gun was considered 11 km, which was no longer a particular threat for the B-29.
      1. English tarantas
        English tarantas 20 March 2021 14: 12
        0
        Clearly flooding. I put a minus.
        1. Alf
          Alf 20 March 2021 21: 11
          0
          Quote: English Tarantas
          Clearly flooding. I put a minus.

          What is the flood? Or, in the absence of intelligible objections, there is nothing to say, but you really want to?
      2. English tarantas
        English tarantas 21 March 2021 05: 40
        0
        I was surprised that the Germans had 128mm only among the anti-aircraft guns. And he asked the inhabitants how many and which of them had been shot down ... And you tell me some banal and intuitive things, like a curriculum for elementary grades. I didn't see the answer to my question, here's a flood
        1. Alf
          Alf 21 March 2021 21: 50
          +1
          Quote: English tarantass
          128mm was found only among the anti-aircraft guns.

          In fact, the Hans 128 was also used as an anti-tank gun under the PAK-44 index. It's trite, of course, but suddenly someone doesn't know ...

  • Vadim Golubkov
    Vadim Golubkov 18 March 2021 09: 42
    -1
    Jagdtiger in WOT is a great car wink
  • Escobar
    Escobar 18 March 2021 13: 21
    0
    But I wonder if its power was too much to destroy tanks, could it be possible to shoot at sea targets from a 128 mm cannon in Normandy? I think a mine explosion of a couple of tens of kilograms would be nice for a crew that did not hide under armor, for example, anti-aircraft gunners
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 18 March 2021 13: 58
      0
      Quote: Eskobar
      it would be possible to shoot at sea targets from a 128 mm cannon in Normandy

      Of course. Until 406 mm arrives in response.
  • the same doctor
    the same doctor 18 March 2021 21: 36
    0
    having such a firing range - why did they need extra booking? For duels of 1.5 - 2 km, 80 mm would be enough. the defense had to be held by fours, and tigers and fighters had to give stability to this defense ...
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 19 March 2021 08: 00
      0
      In a real theater of operations, long range is not so easy to implement.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 19 March 2021 17: 52
    0
    The resulting combat vehicle was practically invulnerable in a frontal duel with all tanks of the allies.

    The tactical value of invulnerability in a "frontal duel" is close to zero.
    Krisha 40 mm is quite vulnerable at a long distance from all HE shells 120 mm and more and from all armor-piercing ammunition 85 mm and more. Several dozen vistrels 122-152 mm guns for 8-10 km, a direct hit on a krishu and that's it.
    The 80 mm side is a huge target and is vulnerable to all 76 mm and larger guns.
    1. Alf
      Alf 19 March 2021 19: 49
      +1
      Quote: Kostadinov
      Krisha 40 mm is quite vulnerable at a long distance from all HE shells 120 mm and more and from all armor-piercing ammunition 85 mm and more.

      How does an 85mm shell hit the roof?
      Quote: Kostadinov
      Several dozen vistrels 122-152 mm guns for 8-10 km, a direct hit on a krishu and that's it.

      Will Hans stand still at this time?
      Quote: Kostadinov
      The 80 mm side is a huge target and is vulnerable to all 76 mm and larger guns.

      The German stands at 1,5 kilometers and knocks out everything that goes against him. How to get close to him from the side in such a situation? Or do you think that there is only one nuclear fuel in the district for ten kilometers?
      In fact, the YAT was conceived as a mobile weapon between pillboxes in defense.
  • PROVINCIAL
    PROVINCIAL 20 March 2021 00: 34
    0
    Not in the subject. Not seriously. IN HERE Jagdtiger - the norm. in skillful hands))))
    1. Alf
      Alf 20 March 2021 21: 16
      +1
      Quote: PROVINCIAL
      IN HERE Jagdtiger - the norm. in skillful hands))))

      In THAT, tanks are being driven at the speed of a Ferrari ... THAT, like the Tundra, is, of course, proof ... fool
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 20 March 2021 23: 02
        +1
        Quote: Alf
        HERE, like Tundra, is, of course, proof ...

        There is one meaningless moment. The Belarusians have the Jagdtiger at the 9th level, and the Su-100 at the 8th, and the IS-2 at the 7th, and the Shermans with the T-34 at the 5th and 6th. Shermans with T-34s do not get into battle with him at all due to overkill.
        So if a jagdtigr turned out to be against even a dozen of these machines, it would have to act harmoniously, and it would hardly have done without losses.

        As in reality.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 21 March 2021 01: 25
    0
    How does an 85mm shell hit the roof?

    The SU-85 has an 85 mm cannon range of up to 13 km. At a long distance, the fall coal of an 85 mm projectile is 30 degrees or more from the horizontal and it passes through 40 mm of armor. Consumption of course will be several dozen shells, but this is insignificant in comparison with the cost of Jagdtigr.
    Will Hans stand still at this time?

    How many wistrels can a 122mm cannon division make in 2-3 minutes? While the gans in the defense will react to what is happening, there will be more likely a direct hit, or in the worst case, he does not see anything for a while.

    Quote: Kostadinov
    "The 80mm side is a huge target and is vulnerable to all 76mm and larger cannons."

    The German stands at 1,5 kilometers and knocks out everything that goes against him. How to get close to him from the side in such a situation? Or do you think that there is only one nuclear fuel in the district for ten kilometers?
    In fact, the YAT was conceived as a mobile weapon between pillboxes in defense.

    1. If the attacking tanks or self-propelled guns are 3-4 times more (equal to the cost), the nuclear fuel cannot but substitute the board for them.
    2. If the nuclear fuel in defense is blinded by PF or dimov grenades, he will not have time to beat anyone. In 5 minutes, the Su-85 will travel 1,5-2 km and go to the side of the German, since he will not be able to quickly run away in reverse.
    3. How will nuclear fuel move between the pillboxes without substituting the board?
    1. Alf
      Alf 21 March 2021 22: 04
      +1
      Quote: Kostadinov
      3. How will nuclear fuel move between the pillboxes without substituting the board?

      Are you familiar with the term "rock road"?
      Quote: Kostadinov
      1. If the attacking tanks or self-propelled guns are 3-4 times more (equal to the cost), the nuclear fuel cannot but substitute the board for them.
      2. If the nuclear fuel in defense is blinded by PF or dimov grenades, he will not have time to beat anyone. In 5 minutes, the Su-85 will travel 1,5-2 km and go to the side of the German, since he will not be able to quickly run away in reverse.

      And the neighboring pillboxes and pillboxes and the usual military filling will calmly watch how a dozen SU ​​or T will pass through the line of defense?
      Quote: Kostadinov
      The SU-85 has an 85 mm cannon range of up to 13 km.

      And the accuracy?
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 22 March 2021 19: 15
    0
    Are you familiar with the term "rock road"?

    And how will this rockad road help the nuclear fuel not substitute the board when it is in position or during movement? The most elementary problem is one nuclear fuel in the field against 2-3 SU-85s, how does he not substitute the board ??
    .
    And the neighboring pillboxes and pillboxes and the usual military filling will calmly watch how a dozen SU ​​or T will pass through the line of defense?

    And do you think that only the SU will attack and there will be no artillery barrage either, and the army will fill it up? I saw only YF and SU in a duel situation for a better understanding of only their capabilities.
    "Does the SU-85 have an 85 mm cannon range of up to 13 km"?

    And the accuracy?

    Will we feel sorry for a hundred shells to destroy one nuclear fuel? How many shells does one nuclear fuel cost?
    1. Alf
      Alf 23 March 2021 15: 52
      +1
      Quote: Kostadinov
      Will we feel sorry for a hundred shells to destroy one nuclear fuel?

      Are you going to adjust fire by satellite?
      Quote: Kostadinov
      I saw only nuclear fuel and SU in a duel situation for a better understanding of only their capabilities.

      In your opinion, the battlefield is a perfectly flat surface for a dozen kilometers, where will the opponents, as the fighters, go one by one towards a friend?
      On the Kursk Bulge, there were situations when one Tiger burned up to a dozen T-34s leaving to meet him.
    2. Alf
      Alf 23 March 2021 15: 57
      +1
      Quote: Kostadinov
      And how will this rockad road help the nuclear fuel not substitute the board when it is in position or during movement?

      Learn the Charter. Exit from under the fire is carried out in reverse to natural shelter. After that, along the road, the ACS or the tank moves to another place. If it's hard for you to imagine, watch the series Brothers in Arms, where in one of the episodes the Germans moved like that.
  • Valery Radevich_2
    Valery Radevich_2 April 2 2021 21: 32
    0
    One Jagdtiger in battle destroyed up to 50 Shermans, so not everything is so simple.
  • Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev April 30 2021 22: 30
    0
    I can't understand why such a booking? We would weaken it by half, or even three times, it would become cheaper, and most importantly, it would be easier and there would be less breakdowns. What is the point of making a mobile pillbox that cannot reach the battlefield? By the end of the war, the Germans' roof went completely.
  • Alexey Efremovskiy
    Alexey Efremovskiy 20 May 2021 09: 50
    0
    It is interesting to compare with the SU-100-Y in terms of the gun :)