Military Review

Armored vehicles of Germany in the Second World War. Stug Assault Gun

52
Colonel Erich von Manstein, who became famous as commander of large armored formations during World War II, proposed to create special units of mobile assault artillery in the Wehrmacht structure, which are equipped with self-propelled self-propelled artillery units built on tracked chassis. This idea was supported, and in June of the following year, the German High Command decided to develop mobile armored infantry support vehicles equipped with 1935-millimeter guns. Daimler-Benz companies were instructed to develop an assault artillery mount, and Krupp companies were instructed.





Five experimental zero-series machines left the shop as early as 1937. A slightly modified PzKpfw III Ausf B chassis was used as a base for creating these machines. In a completely closed low-profile fixed combat wheelhouse, a short-barreled StuK 37 L / 24 gun of 75 millimeters was installed. The gun relative to the longitudinal axis of the machine was shifted to the right; therefore, the driver's seat was in the same place. The difference was that the driver’s seat was now in front of the crew compartment. Along its walls were located ammunition which included 44 projectile. A machine gun for firing at infantry was not envisaged. In general, this car had a rather low silhouette and good booking. 250-strong engine "Maybach" HL 108TR allowed to develop ACS speed up to 25 km / h, but for a combat vehicle designed to directly support the infantry, this speed was enough.

Since the cuttings and hulls of the experienced SAUs were made of non-armored steel, the assault guns could not take part in the hostilities, so after completing the comprehensive testing program that took place at the Kummersdorf training ground, they were transferred to an artillery school where they were used as training machines before the start of 1941 year

In February 1940, after some changes were made to the design, the first batch of 30 cars was produced at the Daimler-Benz plant, which differed from the experimental ones mainly in the engine and chassis. As a base for self-propelled guns used Tanks PzKpfw III Ausf E / F, the machine was driven by the Maybach HL 120TR engine, the frontal armor was up to 50 millimeters thick. These self-propelled artillery mounts on March 28, 1940 received the official designation "7.5 cm Strumgeschutz III Ausf A" (abbreviated as StuG III). About a month later, four batteries of assault guns of this modification took part in hostilities in France. According to the results of these battles, the vehicles received the highest ratings from the crews and from the command.

Armored vehicles of Germany in the Second World War. Stug Assault Gun




Soon, the mass production of the self-propelled guns of the StuG III was transferred from the Daimler-Benz overloaded with military orders to Almerkish Ketten Fabrik (Alkett). The volume of the monthly issue was 30 machines, which made it possible to introduce the StuG III self-propelled guns into the 1940 series in 184, and to produce 548 units by the end of next year. these highly needed front cars.

Self-propelled artillery StuG III of various modifications were the most massive tracked combat vehicles of the German army during the Second World War. In the 1942 year, after arming 75-mm long-barreled guns, which had high armor-piercing characteristics, they essentially became the main anti-tank weapon of the Wehrmacht. At the same time, the functions of the assault gun were transferred to the StuH 42 assault howitzer developed on that base of the same machine and differing from the ACG StuG III only by the installation of a high-explosive fragmentation gun. In total, from February 1940 to April 1945, more than 10,5 thousand StuH 42 assault howitzers and StuG III guns were manufactured at the MIAG and Alkett factories.

The StuG III assault rifle, like all German tanks produced for a long time, was continuously upgraded in the production process, not only to improve the fighting qualities, but also to reduce the cost and simplify the design. As a result of making a large number of changes to the latter, (changes, as a rule, were not very significant), eight modifications were seen. It makes no sense to list all the innovations, we dwell only on the main ones, which seriously affected the fighting qualities of self-propelled guns.

StuG III Ausf. F 6-th field army of the Wehrmacht moves on the floor of the railway sleepers, which are laid down along the railroad tracks. The assault gun is followed by a German soldier with boxes for machine-gun belts — the number of the machine-gun crew. In the right part of the picture is an officer with binoculars in the form of the tank crew of the 5 th Panzer SS Viking division.

Column of German assault guns StuG III in Italy. Summer xnumx


SAU StuG III Ausf.F on the city street


Consider first of all the evolution of the weapons SAU StuG III. On the first assault guns, a short-barreled StuK 38 L / 24 gun with a barrel length of only 24 caliber was installed. The main armament of the B, C, D and E modifications was the same. If the task of providing fire support to the infantry was by force, then it almost did not work to destroy the enemy’s tanks. Gun fire was effective only at close distances. After the German attack on the USSR and the collision with the KB-1, KV-2 and T-34 tanks having good defense, the situation deteriorated even more, therefore the StuG III F modification began to install the long-barreled StuK 40 L / 43 gun with greater efficiency. The self-propelled version of the StuG 40 Ausf F / 8 (after this modification, the StuG III was called that way) was installed gun StuK 40 L / 48 has even more power. Self-propelled guns of the latest, most advanced and most massive modification of the Ausf G. were armed with the same weapon. Also, with the start of the production of assault guns that had long guns in service, which fell into the repair of earlier versions of the machine, they also began to re-equip them. The installation of effective anti-armor guns has significantly changed the situation, turning the ACS modifications F, F / 8 and G into a very formidable weapon and the main anti-Wehrmacht. In order to provide the troops with the necessary fire support, they decided to start the production of a new self-propelled artillery installation armed with a suitable for these purposes howitzer leFH 18 L / 28 caliber 105 millimeters. In March 1943, it unfolded. The new self-propelled artillery gun, which received the designation StuH 42, was identical in its design to the modifications F, F / 8, G. The gun ammunition consisted of 36 shots. Until the end of the war, based on the PzKpfw III Ausf G, they released 1299 machines, on the basis of the PzKpfw III Ausf F, also 12.

As the experience of combat showed, in certain situations machine-gun armament for close combat is no less important for SAU than cannons. And if the original machine gun to deal with the enemy's manpower was not provided for, then, starting from modification E, they began to install it. On StuG III modifications F and subsequent modifications of the machine gun carried on the roof. The weapon had a limited firing angle, as it was installed in a protective shield in the slot. But the self-propelled guns of the last series of the G modification were equipped with a circular-rotation machine gun with remote control. This modification, undoubtedly, was a step forward to save many German tankers.

Simultaneously with the improvement of the SAU armament, work was done to increase the armor protection of the machines, as a result of which the thickness of the cutting armor and the frontal part of the hull was increased to the 80 millimeters on the latest, most mass modifications. On already released SAU protection increased by hanging additional armor plates. Also, ACS StuG III, starting with 1943, began to be equipped with onboard screens, which protected the back of the chassis and side from cumulative projectiles, as well as bullets of anti-tank guns. This led to an increase in the mass of the combat vehicle and to a deterioration in maneuverability, which was already unimportant.

The crew of the German SAU "Sturmgeshuts" (StuG.III Ausf.G) commander of the 1-th battery 237-th brigade of assault guns Hauptmann Bodo Spranz (Bodo Spranz). On the gun barrel there is a stylized image of a tank and 33 of white rings, indicating the number of armored vehicles the crew had damaged. In addition, on the Spratz sleeve (1920 — 2007) there are stripes of four personally destroyed armored vehicles.

Beautiful dynamic photo of the attacking German self-propelled artillery installation of the class of assault guns StuG III Ausf.B


Self-propelled artillery installation StuG III


The remaining changes that were made during the years of mass production concerned, as a rule, the form of cutting, aiming devices, the number of hatches, and so on. Outwardly, the StuG 40 Ausf G assault rifle stood out with the commander's turret that appeared on it and the new cast mask of a cannon (later called the “pig's nose” for its characteristic form), which was installed from November 1943.

The first StuG III Ausf A assault guns received their baptism of fire in 1940, in France, where they immediately proved themselves very well. In a small number of vehicles of modification B participated in the Balkans in the hostilities, however, a truly serious test was waiting for them in the summer of 1941. The last battles in which StuG III Ausf A and B took part were held at Stalingrad in 1942-1943. Only in the training units, several units of assault guns of the first modifications were able to survive to 1944. Modifications C and D on the battlefield appeared in the summer of 1941 g, but by winter their number had decreased significantly, and subsequently they were rearmed with a long-barreled gun. After that, they were used until the end of World War II.

The latest modification of the StuG III Ausf E equipped with a short-barreled 75 mm caliber appeared in the autumn of 1941, although the weakness of such weapons by this time became quite obvious. The creation of this modification was caused by the need for combat special vehicles of the commanders of the assault divisions. To this end, due to the introduction of some structural changes, the internal volume of logging was increased, unlike ACS of modifications C and D, they were not re-equipped and were used as commander and reconnaissance vehicles until the end of the war.

Field Marshal Albert Kesselring conducts reconnaissance of the area with the officers of the SAU StuG IV armor


Column of assault guns StuG 40 in anticipation of the team on the march. In the foreground the assault gun Ausf. G with a direct machine gun shield and additional on-board armor plates, which began to install 1942 on modifications from December. In the background the assault gun Ausf. F / 8, September – October 1942 release early modification


German assault gun (assault howitzer) StuH 42 on the march. StuG III is following her


After the StuG III assault guns were armed with a long-barreled gun, they were turned into effective tank destroyers. In this capacity they were actively used on all fronts until the last days of the war. In the combat biography of StuG III there are many glorious pages. For example, at Stalingrad at the beginning of September 1942, the 244 Battalion of the Assault Artillery battalion (commander chief vakhmist Kurt Pfrendtner) destroyed 20 Soviet tanks for 9 minutes, and the crew commanded by Horst Naumann, who went to 184 battalion bracers, put a marching master battalion. 01.01.1943 destroyed 04.01.1943 Soviet vehicles during the battles of Demyanskom. The most famous ace of assault artillery of the SS troops is considered to be the SS assault gunführer Walter Knip, commander of the Second Assault Artillery Battalion of the tank division "Das Reich". His unit between 12 and 05.07.1943 destroyed the Soviet army’s 17.01.1944 tanks. Perhaps these figures are overestimated, but the fact that when using competent tactics and in the right hands, the assault guns of the ACS of the StuG III, or more precisely the StuG 129 Ausf G, were extremely formidable weapons, is beyond doubt.

Another proof of the combat qualities of the self-propelled guns of the StuG III is that even in the 1950s, the Romanian, Spanish, Egyptian and Syrian armies were in service.

Tactical and technical characteristics of self-propelled artillery installation StuG III:
Base - medium tank PzKpfw III Ausf G;
Classification - assault gun;
Weight - 23900 kg;
Crew - 4 person;
Dimensions:
length - 6770 mm;
width - 2950 mm;
height - 2160 mm;
clearance - 390 mm;
Armor:
The forehead of the body is 80 mm;
Board - 30 mm;
Feed - 30 mm;
Roof - mm xnumx;
Armament:
The gun - StuK 40 L / 48, caliber 75 mm (shotgun 54);
The gun - StuK 40 L / 48, caliber 7,92 mm (ammunition 1200 ammunition);
Powerplant: engine Maybach HL 120TRM, carburetor, power 300 l. with. (220,65 kW);
Obstacle obstacles:
Wade depth - 0,80 m;
The width of the moat - 1,90 m;
Wall height - 0,60 m;
Maximum lift angle - 30 degrees;
Maximum speed on the highway - 40 km / h;
Power reserve on rocade - 95 km;
Cruising on the highway - 155 km.

Column of Finnish assault guns StuG III Ausf. G from the Lagus division on the march in Karelia. Germany has put its allies 59 these SAU

German sappers under cover of the Sturmgeshutz self-propelled guns (StuG III) are heading to the Soviet positions in Stalingrad


The crew of the German assault gun StuG III for lunch

Smoke breaker German self-propelled They are sitting on the StuG IV's undercarriage, the Sd.Kfz armored personnel carrier is visible in the background. 250 and StuG III Assault Gun

German paratroopers (recognizable by the helmets of parachutists) in a trench. In the background is a StuG III assault gun.

A German soldier armed with an StG 44 assault rifle lights a gun at the self-propelled gun from the crew of the assault gun StuG IV (armored cap-cab of a driver with two periscopes, a form of frontal armor corps)

StuG III Ausf. G with onboard anti-cumulative screens

German tanker firing a MG-34 machine gun mounted on a self-propelled artillery mount (assault gun) StuG III Ausf. G

SAU StuG III overcomes the ford

Column of German assault guns StuG III on the march to the Caucasus

Tank assault of sappers-bomber (sturmpionieren) from the SS division "Das Reich" on the armor of the assault gun StuG III Ausf F

German self-propelled artillery mounts StuG III Ausf.B. For this machine, the PzKpfw III Ausf G tank chassis was used, it was armed with an 75-mm short-barreled gun. A total of 320 ACS of this modification was released, the last of them were used in combat operations near Stalingrad (autumn 1942)

German SAU "Sturmgeshütz" (StuG III Ausf. G, Sd.Kfz 142 / 1), shot down during the fighting for the liberation of France

Padded German self-propelled gun StuG III on the Boulevard of Liberation in Belgrade. Picture taken 18 October 1944 year - this is the height of the fighting for the city. However, on the street and at the wrecked car is full of curious civilians, including children. Far away are the domes of St. Mark's Cathedral.

[Center]The column of German assault guns Stug III, destroyed by the Soviet aviation
Part of the 2-th tank group of the Wehrmacht are forwarded through the water barrier. In the foreground is the StuG III Ausf.C / D assault gun from the 177 th assault gun battalion (Sturmgeschütz-Abt. 177), in the background there is the Bussing-Nag G31 car with the emblem of the 2 tank group (“G” - Guderian) on the right wing. End of October 1941[/ Center]
A Soviet soldier inspects StuG III Ausf.F, a padded German assault rifle. A breach in armor allows you to look inside the self-propelled gun

The StuG 40 Ausf.G assault rifle exploded as a result of an armor-piercing projectile. On the left you can see the roof of the cabin, thrown off by an explosion. The ACS is remarkable: concrete pillows were fixed on the frontal armor of the cabin, and the crew additionally booked all vertical surfaces of the vehicle with tracks from the T-34 tank. The number of the Soviet trophy team "6". Lake Balaton District

Soviet assault gun destroyed by StuG III Ausf A assault rifle, Kiev district, summer of 1941

German SAU StuG 40 in the lobby of the Allied-destroyed Hotel Continental in Cassino. Italy

Troop German SAU "Sturmgeshuts" (StuG III Ausf.G) with concrete reinforcement on top of armor plates of the 104-th Infantry Division of the 1-US Army. Crew members, (right) Sergeant Clau Barton (Cloy Barton) and Bruce Coltrane (Bruce Coultrane) armed with a German assault rifle StG-44

The soldiers of the 3 of the Ukrainian Front are considering a shell of the captured German self-propelled gun StuG III Ausf. G on the road to Nikopol. The car has a winter camouflage, on the surviving caterpillar are visible anti-slip teeth (Mittelstollen), used to improve road performance on ice or solid snow

Captured by Soviet troops in the city of Szekesfehervarvar German tanks and self-propelled guns, abandoned due to lack of fuel. In the right corner is partially visible Pz.Kpfw. VI "Tiger", further located two medium tanks Pz.Kpfw. IV and SAG StuG 40

Captured by Soviet troops Finnish self-propelled artillery installation of a class of assault guns StuG III German production

A brigade of repair tankers arriving from the front to study captured StuG III (from the 192 division of assault guns) in the courtyard of the Moscow elevator plant where repair base No. XXNX was located

Soviet tankers master the StuG III Ausf self-propelled artillery system captured from the Germans. B (as opposed to later modifications, armed with a short-barreled gun). Presumably belonged to the 214-th Division assault guns. 14 was captured on May 1942 by the tank crews of the 5 Guards Tank Brigade. Southwest Front, May 1942

Soviet tankers on captured German armored vehicles. This is a separate company of captured tanks, Western Front, March 1942, in the foreground - the Pz.III medium tank, then - the StuG III assault guns





Photos used:
http://waralbum.ru
52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych 3 September 2012 09: 32 New
    +4
    The creation of such tools was an extremely correct idea!
    The question arises, why did this direction not develop in the USSR until the rooster pecked at a famous place? And after all, work began ...
    1. lelyk72
      lelyk72 3 September 2012 10: 34 New
      +2
      It is far from always possible to adequately assess the prospects of a direction in advance.
      1. igordok
        igordok 3 September 2012 13: 51 New
        +1
        "A tank without a tower is a bad tank." T-34 and KV coped with the assault tasks. If the idea were correct, in the modern army there would be assault tanks with a fixed cabin - where they are (the Swedish S-103 does not go - this is a tank destroyer).
        1. Brother Sarych
          Brother Sarych 3 September 2012 13: 55 New
          0
          Actually, they didn’t do it very well, and if we talk about the economic efficiency of their use, then in general the result is closer to unsatisfactory! How much HF cost and how much is such an unit?
          1. igordok
            igordok 3 September 2012 16: 36 New
            +1
            If the short 75mm coped, then the 76,2mm coped, all the more so.
            And about the price. The KV-1 was cheaper than the StuG III. I agree that during the war, to create ersatz tanks, in order to catch up with the amount, everyone had to. But to get involved in this was not worth the dead end branch of development (there are no modern ones).
            1. lelyk72
              lelyk72 3 September 2012 17: 25 New
              -1
              I think that comparing the price of equipment from different countries is incorrect, there are too many variables. (the official course is not a conversation at all). But the Soviet guns, ceteris paribus, were weaker than the German ones during WWII, so "If the short 75mm coped, then the 76,2mm coped, especially in all directions" - not a fact.
              1. Alex
                Alex 13 January 2014 21: 53 New
                +2
                Quote: lelyk72
                so "If the short 75mm coped, then the 76,2mm coped, especially in all directions" - not a fact.
                Fact. And here it is
                But Soviet guns, ceteris paribus, were weaker than German,
                - is not a fact.
        2. Bronis
          Bronis 3 September 2012 16: 26 New
          +5
          Self-propelled guns in the Red Army 5 1941, in fact, was not for several reasons. Firstly, a very large tank fleet was formed in the previous decade. There were a lot of tanks, and breakthrough tanks (sometimes they were called medium or light, but there were short-range guns 76,2 mm.): T-28, some BTs, well, actually the breakthrough tank - T-35 Accordingly, the main tasks of self-propelled guns were assigned to them - infantry support. They did not take into account only the fact that on BT and T-28 the armor was not sufficient for action at the forefront “point blank”, and this was assumed. And the T-35 added problems with size, weight and projection very good for anti-tank artillery, and something about 50 pieces were released. However, its main problem is the complexity of the design and mobility. They fought a little. At the same time, it seems that the Red Army understood these shortcomings, although it was not openly recognized. As a result, HF appeared.
          In addition, as a result of the experience gained in the Finnish campaign, the KV-2 was created, but the 152-mm was originally intended for decent fortifications. For trenches and dugouts, this was redundant. The car was not mass initially. But it’s more self-propelled than a tank. The tower is a tank legacy, but some American self-propelled guns from the war also had a tower, so this is not an indicator.
          In addition, an active supporter of self-propelled guns was Tukhachevsky. But what became of him is known to all. Accordingly, it was not accepted to openly support the ideas of the enemies of the people ... Perhaps this factor also took place, but this is only a version, no more.
          In any case, the Red Army had means of supporting infantry, but it did not work out to fully demonstrate them in the 1941 year ... not the Red Army was advancing. But by the 1942 year, in fact, they were gone. It was then that they thought about cheaper, but mass self-propelled guns. Here, I agree with Brother Sarych. Price and the possibility of quick production was on the side of self-propelled artillery.
          1. ESCANDER
            ESCANDER 3 September 2012 20: 05 New
            +1
            igordok - is not "tank without a tower", it’s you without a tower. Learn the mathematical part and history.
            At the initial stage of CF:
            - What was the caliber of guns of German tanks and what kind of self-propelled guns?
            - the height of the profile what was the German tanks and what self-propelled guns?
            - what was the thickness of the armor of the tanks and what of the self-propelled guns?
            - What was the price and speed of production of the German tanks and which of the self-propelled guns?
            - What was the strategy for the use of tanks and what kind of self-propelled guns?
            The German tank in Blitzkrieg’s strategy (according to Guderian) is a breakthrough and deep wedging weapon, and the assault gun in Blitzkrieg’s strategy (according to Manstein) is supporting infantry in the territory it occupies (in the form of destroying the remaining fortified areas).
            By the way, Guderian was very unhappy with Manstein, because the tank bases planned by him were delayed at Sturmgeschutz, but Manstein (as time showed) was right. Manstein made the right conclusions after the 1st World War, putting artillery in the tank (removing everything superfluous from it, along with the tower). It was a very efficient machine and very successful tactics (not used by anyone before the village). To misinform the enemy, the Germans called them "tank destroyers" and using them as assault guns to support infantry was a big surprise, no one could oppose anything.
            1. igordok
              igordok 3 September 2012 21: 30 New
              +1
              Regarding the TANK WITHOUT TOWER, I quoted many soldiers.

              But the tank can not provide artillery support?
              What can a tank not do, but can a stormtrooper do?

              Quote: Prokhor
              What is curious: being really needed in the 2MV and a very significant almost military force, the assault artillery instantly disappeared at its end.


              That's really why
              Quote: ESCANDER
              It was a very efficient car and a very successful tactic.
              not used until now. Because now it’s not a war, and cheap nedotanki are not needed.
              1. Bronis
                Bronis 3 September 2012 22: 53 New
                +1
                Yes, in fact, a tank with the appropriate weapons and armor can be the equivalent of an assault gun. Only in the initial period of the war did the Germans make this impractical in view of the very concept of a blitzkrieg. The main advantage of the first "panzers" can be considered mobility and speed. Armor is an important but secondary element. Well, since it was necessary to finish off the surrounded enemy, I had to create a car for these realities - here the armor and low profile were more important than mobility.
                However, the panzer IV of early modifications was also created mainly to support the infantry. Somehow its application could have something in common with the “Shtugs”, but the effectiveness was lower.
                Well, when the blitzkrieg failed and the USSR began to rebuild its tank fleet, the Germans already began to sharpen their tanks and self-propelled guns to counter armored vehicles. It was not up to the support of the infantry, or rather not so much to it.
              2. ESCANDER
                ESCANDER 4 September 2012 06: 16 New
                0
                igordok
                not used until now. Because now it’s not a war, and cheap nedotanki are not needed.
                Because now - another time with other technologies and methods of warfare have changed, but self-propelled guns - have remained.
    2. Civil
      Civil 3 September 2012 19: 34 New
      0
      + for an excellent selection of photos! Shikarrrno!
      1. bazilio
        bazilio 4 September 2012 19: 19 New
        +1
        Why were the shtug and sau successful in WWII but were not used afterwards? Because with the failure of the blitzkrieg, WWII turned into a war of attrition, where the price came to the leading position (not so much in money but in raw materials). sau from the tank differs in the absence of a tower, therefore cheaper. After the war ended, the tank destroyers lost their relevance due to an increase in capacity and armoring of the tanks themselves, improvement and distribution of RPGs.
        1. ESCANDER
          ESCANDER 4 September 2012 21: 29 New
          0
          bazilio
          - After the war ended, the tank destroyers lost their relevance due to an increase in capacity and armoring of the tanks themselves, improvement and distribution of RPGs.

          Tank destroyers - yes, but the others (Msta-S) remained.
  2. awg75
    awg75 3 September 2012 09: 50 New
    0
    excellent article author well done. knowing a story is very useful
    1. igordok
      igordok 3 September 2012 13: 55 New
      +1
      I agree. One could mention SU-76, and from the same test is made.
  3. Skavron
    Skavron 3 September 2012 09: 57 New
    -1
    I don’t know how anyone, but half of the photo didn’t open for me.
    Article plus clearly.
    1. Smirnov Vadim
      Smirnov Vadim 3 September 2012 10: 03 New
      +2
      Everything opens, the problem is in your browser.
    2. Manager
      Manager 3 September 2012 10: 34 New
      -1
      Quote: Skavron

      I don’t know how anyone, but half of the photo didn’t open for me.
      Article plus clearly.

      Install yourself Google chrom. You will see the difference right away. The speed is many times faster
      1. Robin gud
        Robin gud 3 September 2012 15: 13 New
        -1
        Google chrom to the point!
  4. OLDTODD
    OLDTODD 3 September 2012 10: 19 New
    +1
    Hello everyone!!! The article is informative, I always read with interest materials on armored vehicles!
    In the World of Tanks, fought on such ;-))) Cool device.
  5. Stas57
    Stas57 3 September 2012 10: 24 New
    +1
    fin? A. Peltonen?

    but in general a good machine, successful.
    add on my own

    Kholm, Nizhny Novgorod region
  6. Tourist Breakfast
    Tourist Breakfast 3 September 2012 10: 31 New
    +1
    Thank you for the article!

    In TTX error:
    .
    Armament:
    The gun - StuK 40 L / 48, caliber 75 mm (shotgun 54);
    The gun - StuK 40 L / 48, caliber 7,92 mm (ammunition 1200 ammunition);


    It should be:

    Armament:
    The gun - StuK 40 L / 48, caliber 75 mm (shotgun 54);
    Machine gun - MG-34, caliber 7,92 mm (ammunition 600-900 rounds);

    For modifications of Ausf. F & Ausf. G of course
  7. Gromila555
    Gromila555 3 September 2012 10: 37 New
    +1
    The advantage of such tools is stealth and high firepower. At that time it was impossible to fit all this into a tank. In the USSR, no one really knew WHAT a tank should be, so they threw themselves from one to the other, however, practically everyone had the same situation.
    The Germans, we must pay tribute to them, dealt with this problem, and then abandoned multi-turret tanks due to metal saving.
    SU-85 appeared at the front in 1942, so they didn’t pull the rubber for a long time
    1. erased
      erased 3 September 2012 11: 04 New
      +2
      Su-85 was produced from August 1943 to July 1944.
      The decision to produce such vehicles was made following the outcome of the Battle of Kursk.
      1. loc.bejenari
        loc.bejenari 3 September 2012 15: 40 New
        +2
        Su 85 is a fighter and not an assault gun
        its analogue among the Germans is Hetzer and jagdpanther and jagdpancer
    2. Kibb
      Kibb 3 September 2012 15: 22 New
      -2
      Quote: Gromila555
      SU-85 appeared at the front in 1942, so they didn’t pull the rubber for a long time

      WHAT YEAR? Maybe wrong? And what is the relation of one to another

      Quote: Gromila555
      In the USSR, no one really knew what the tank should be, so they rushed from one to the other

      Seriously?
      Quote: Gromila555
      however, it was also the case with almost everyone.

      Quote: Gromila555
      and then abandoned multi-turret tanks due to the economy of metal.

      Oh, "and the guys do not know that"
      1. LION
        LION 3 September 2012 22: 44 New
        +1
        And the boys are driving tanks. They do not need to read books.
    3. LION
      LION 3 September 2012 22: 42 New
      +1
      In 1942 SU 122 appeared on the basis of T 34. Learn the mathematical part.
    4. Alex
      Alex 13 January 2014 22: 08 New
      +3
      Quote: Gromila555
      In the USSR, no one really knew WHAT a tank should be, so they threw themselves from one to the other, however, practically everyone had the same situation.
      They knew very well what the tank should be like. And especially in the USSR and Germany (which they, by the way, have demonstrated). England and France also had their own concept of using tanks, less successful, but also quite meaningful. Well, the fact that different countries have different doctrines is not Newton’s binomial.

      and then abandoned multi-turret tanks due to the economy of metal.
      There are many reasons for abandoning multi-tower tanks, but the METAL saving is not included in their list, do not fantasize.
    5. Jager
      Jager 25 December 2019 19: 10 New
      0
      And here Stug. III and SU-85? An analogue of the Stug III was the SU-122. The fact that the Germans set the long barrel is not from a good life. And only here is an analogy with the SU-85. Stug is primarily infantry support. By the way, the Stug units were organizationally related to artillery, and not to the Panzerwaffe. The crews even had a different uniform, artillery gray.
  8. Patos89
    Patos89 3 September 2012 10: 50 New
    -1
    I support an interesting article and photos pleased
  9. erased
    erased 3 September 2012 11: 00 New
    +1
    Good technique! Able to do!
    The Germans were a strong, skilled, experienced adversary. But we defeated them, though with incredible difficulty, but nonetheless. The higher is the glory of our ancestors!
  10. Kars
    Kars 3 September 2012 11: 25 New
    +1
    The assault artillery in the German troops has proved its effectiveness.
    First as support for the infantry, and then as tank destroyers.
    1. Prohor
      Prohor 3 September 2012 11: 36 New
      +1
      What is curious: being really needed in the 2MV and a very significant almost military force, the assault artillery instantly disappeared at its end.
      1. lelyk72
        lelyk72 3 September 2012 11: 40 New
        +2
        As one acquaintance explained to me, though far from tank troops, anti-tank missions were relevant precisely during the war, due to the lower cost than the tank, in the period between wars, it is possible to shift anti-tank missions to tanks.
        1. porfirev
          porfirev 3 September 2012 12: 08 New
          +1
          lelyk72,
          I will add that the lack of a turret in a tank destroyer, compared with a tank, gave a gain in mass in general, and in the volume of the fighting compartment in particular, which made it possible to place a more powerful artillery system.
          For example, the Pz38t had a 37mm stub, and the Hetzer created on its base had a very effective 75mm gun.
          1. lelyk72
            lelyk72 3 September 2012 12: 34 New
            +2
            I absolutely agree, while the price, even with a more powerful gun, was still lower than the tank on which the PT was built.
          2. Jager
            Jager 25 December 2019 19: 13 New
            0
            Pz. 38 possessed a very successful chassis at the same time.
    2. igordok
      igordok 3 September 2012 17: 04 New
      -1
      Quote: Kars
      The assault artillery in the German troops has proved its effectiveness.
      First as support for the infantry, and then as tank destroyers.
      for the lack of full tanks in sufficient quantities.
      1. Kars
        Kars 3 September 2012 17: 21 New
        -1
        We don’t need to focus on anti-tank guns, the Germans began to use things as anti-tank guns precisely because of Soviet superiority in the number of tanks. The infantry also needed its own artillery, which accompanied it. Our Su-76 supported the infantry, and it appreciated it for that. And Stug became do up to the soviet company and knowledge p number of tanks of the USSR

        Here we can say almost perfect WWII assault guns.
        1. Kibb
          Kibb 3 September 2012 17: 31 New
          +2
          Quote: Kars
          Infantry also needs its own artillery, which accompanies it.

          And they don’t think about infantry - WoT is a good game, but a game
          Quote: Kars
          Our Su-76 was supported by infantry, and she appreciated it for it

          Just a gun (or howitzer) on the tracks is not particularly interesting to anyone except the infantry
          1. lelyk72
            lelyk72 3 September 2012 17: 34 New
            +1
            1. in WOT su76 a good thing, at least farm.
            2. And where is WOT?
            1. Kibb
              Kibb 3 September 2012 17: 40 New
              -1
              Quote: lelyk72
              And here is WOT?

              1. The whole evaluation of armored vehicles recently goes through the prism of WoT
              Quote: lelyk72
              in WOT su76 a good thing, at least, a farm thing.

              2. What does WoT have to do with it?
  11. borisst64
    borisst64 3 September 2012 14: 28 New
    +1
    "A beautiful, dynamic photo of an attacking German self-propelled artillery mount of the StuG III Ausf.B assault gun class"

    What attack? She just RIDES through the dust.
  12. loc.bejenari
    loc.bejenari 3 September 2012 15: 43 New
    -1
    photo from near Kiev is one of two things lost in the south of Kiev
    the other was captured in its entirety and it was exhibited until the fall of the city
    By the way, during the assault on Kiev, the Germans did not have tanks at all (several T 38 do not count)
    there were only support artillery pieces
  13. ESCANDER
    ESCANDER 3 September 2012 20: 26 New
    +1
    In the tank units of the Red Army there was a recommendation - "to avoid a frontal attack on the stormtrooper."
    1. ESCANDER
      ESCANDER 4 September 2012 21: 32 New
      0
      Looks like a true patriot sculpts cons. It does not matter that nichrome does not chop. But on the whole head a patriot.
    2. Stas57
      Stas57 6 September 2012 12: 51 New
      +1
      In the tank units of the Red Army there was a recommendation - "to avoid a frontal attack on the stormtrooper."

      it is possible, however, until the middle of the 42 year, according to the report of NII-48, the "artillery assault" was defeated (guaranteed penetration)
      76mm armor-piercing-at course. angle 15 gr in the forehead to 1100 m ,,
      sides, feed up to 1900m "from all distances at any angles",
      not affected in the forehead by 37 and 45 mm, sides and sterns from 500 to 800 depending on the angle (37mm worse).
      everything is approximately enough, since there are many different nuances, such as a shell, guns, meeting angles.
  14. blackidler
    blackidler 3 September 2012 21: 27 New
    -1
    The article is very similar to the one on Wikipedia. As it is not so.
    But the photos are great!
  15. Forward
    Forward 4 September 2012 00: 02 New
    +1
    But we don’t care that “shtug”, that is not “shtug” anyway, a Russian soldier nostylyil to the Germans and drove them all the way to Berlin! angry

    Ferdinand heavy assault gun, destroyed by direct hit of an air bomb from a diving bomber Pe-2. Tactical number unknown. The area of ​​Ponyri station and state farm “May 1”.
    1. Gazprom
      Gazprom 4 September 2012 08: 39 New
      -3
      What are you talking about?
  16. mind1954
    mind1954 4 September 2012 03: 11 New
    +1
    Thank you for the article ! Well, as I understand it, our answer to STUG is SU-76 ?!
    And before that, of course, they gave us a lot of problems, since before the attack
    on us, they clearly worked out the interaction of the Yu-87 with tanks and
    STUG with infantry, with good direct radio communication!
    For our advancing infantry chains, calculations rolled
    goodbye Motherland to suppress enemy firing points,
    and the Fritz called STUG!
    1. Gazprom
      Gazprom 4 September 2012 08: 37 New
      +1
      goodbye Motherland to suppress enemy firing points,
      and the Fritz called STUG!

      Straighten everything straight.
      How many of these sexes would be, and not on all sections of the front to everything, and there’s no question about the usual front, so everyone had to drag the ordinary barrel artillery to the hump
      1. mind1954
        mind1954 4 September 2012 19: 50 New
        +2
        I don’t know how many there were? But I have a videotape on the history of German
        armored vehicles of the war and there, simply, "hymns are sung" to the interaction
        STUG with the infantry !!! I understand that, urgent, the appearance of the SU-76 -
        - a tribute to the effectiveness of this interaction!?
        1. Gazprom
          Gazprom 6 September 2012 03: 30 New
          +1
          Well, hymns with hymns, but the use of pieces is still not massive, but rather piece-wise, not like the artillery of the RGK, of course, but I repeat, they were not in every front, and not in every direction.
  17. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 7 September 2012 09: 15 New
    +1
    it was a self-propelled gun of direct infantry support ....
  18. Jager
    Jager 25 December 2019 19: 16 New
    0
    Great article! Many moments are not covered, but still excellent.
  19. Maksimov
    Maksimov 21 May 2020 23: 05 New
    0
    The article was written by a young Nazi or tolerant liberalist. In general, either an enemy or a ram. Because only one can write "There are a lot of glorious pages in the StuG III combat biography." And then there is a report on the destroyed Soviet tanks. For sheep I explain that there can be no "glorious" pages in an inglorious army. For those who do not understand what the enemy writes this way, I explain that the Fritz on the Shtugs killed your grandfathers neither in our native land. And this ghoul author calls it "glorious pages."
  20. Maksimov
    Maksimov 21 May 2020 23: 14 New
    0
    Quote: Gromila555
    In the USSR, no one really knew what the tank should be, so they threw themselves from one to the other.

    Yeah, therefore, by the time of the war, the USSR had tanks (T-34 and KV) in service, which the Germans only dreamed about.