Chinese anti-tank artillery during the Cold War

41
Chinese anti-tank artillery during the Cold War

In the second half of the 1950s, the Chinese military conducted an audit of anti-tank artillery. All obsolete American and Japanese 37 - 47 mm guns were retired. Soviet 45mm, German 50mm, British and American 57mm guns were deposited and used for training purposes. In anti-tank artillery divisions, 57-85-mm Soviet-style guns were used, and in battalion and regimental echelons, 75 and 105-mm recoilless guns.

Chinese 57 mm anti-tank guns


As already mentioned in the previous part of the cycle, dedicated to the Chinese anti-tank artillery, during the war in Korea, the PLA received 57-mm ZiS-2 anti-tank guns from the USSR. These guns had good service and operational characteristics and high armor penetration.



After the end of the Korean War, the Soviet Union handed over technical documentation and helped to establish its own production of 57-mm anti-tank guns. The Chinese clone ZiS-2, which entered service in 1955, was designated Type 55. Until 1965, the Chinese industry produced about 1000 Type 57 55mm anti-tank guns, which served until the early 1990s.

In the late 1950s, a number of LVT (A) (4) amphibious assault support vehicles in the PRC were rearmed with 57-mm Type 55 cannons. Initially, these American-made vehicles, recaptured from the Kuomintang, were armed with a 75-mm M2 howitzer. In addition to the 57 mm gun, the vehicle had a rifle caliber machine gun.


Protected by bulletproof armor, a floating lightly armored vehicle weighing about 18,5 tons on land accelerated to 40 km / h. Floating speed - up to 10 km / h. Due to the low specific pressure on the ground, the floating self-propelled gun easily went to the sandy shore, could move through loose sand, mud, swamp. Anti-tank self-propelled guns, created on the basis of captured LVT (A) (4), were in service with the PLA until the mid-1970s.

Chinese 85 mm anti-tank guns


To strengthen its anti-tank artillery, China received several dozen 1950-mm D-85 anti-tank guns in the mid-44s. Soon, with Soviet support, the PRC launched the licensed production of 85-mm guns. The Chinese version of the D-44 is known as the Type 56.


85-mm anti-tank guns of Soviet and Chinese production in the War Museum of the Chinese Revolution

In terms of its characteristics, the Chinese 85-mm gun did not differ from the Soviet prototype. The mass of the gun in the combat position was 1725 kg. Effective rate of fire 15 rds / min. An armor-piercing projectile weighing 9,2 kg had an initial speed of 800 m / s and at a distance of 1000 m along the normal could penetrate 100-mm armor. A sub-caliber projectile weighing 5,35 kg left the barrel with an initial speed of 1020 m / s and at a distance of 500 m, when hit at a right angle, pierced 140-mm armor. A cumulative projectile, regardless of the normal range, penetrated 210-mm armor.

In the first half of the 1960s, the D-44 guns that were in the Soviet Army were transferred to the divisional artillery. This was due to the insufficient power of the 76-mm ZiS-3, as a divisional weapon, and the increased protection of the western tanks.

The D-44 anti-tank gun perfectly matched the realities of the end of World War II. However, a few years after the adoption of the D-44 into service, it became clear that this gun could no longer confidently penetrate the frontal armor of post-war medium and heavy tanks at actual combat distances. In this regard, under the leadership of the chief designer F.F.


Anti-tank 85 mm gun D-48

The mass of the gun in the firing position is 2350 kg. New unitary shots were developed especially for this gun. A new armor-piercing projectile at a distance of 1000 m pierced armor with a thickness of 150 mm at an angle of 60 °. A sub-caliber projectile at a distance of 1000 m pierced homogeneous armor 180 mm thick at an angle of 60 °. The maximum firing range of a high-explosive fragmentation projectile weighing 9,66 kg is 19 km. Rate of fire - up to 15 rounds / min.

For firing from the D-48, an "exclusive" ammunition was used, which was not suitable for other 85-mm guns. The use of shots from the D-44, KS-1, 85-mm tank and self-propelled guns was prohibited, which significantly narrowed the scope of the gun.

Shortly before the breakdown of military-technical cooperation between the countries, the Soviet Union handed over to the PRC a license to manufacture the D-48. In China, this gun was accepted into service under the designation Type 60.

But, in connection with the "cultural revolution" that began in the PRC, few such guns were released. Until the mid-1980s, the main means of anti-tank defense of the PLA were 85-mm Type 56 and 57-mm Type 55 guns, as well as 75-105-mm recoilless guns.

Chinese 75-105-mm recoilless guns


Created in 1952 on the basis of the American 75-mm recoilless gun, the Chinese Type 52 recoilless recoil was significantly inferior to the prototype in terms of its main characteristics. Due to the fact that very little high-quality steel was smelted in the PRC in the early 1950s, the Type 52 barrel was much thicker than that of the M20, which led to an increase in the mass of the Chinese gun.

In addition, due to imperfect ammunition, the Chinese 75-mm recoilless gun had a lower effective firing range and worse armor penetration. Nevertheless, the 75-mm recoilless system was actively used by Chinese people's volunteers at the final stage of the Korean War. It is stated that with the help of Type 52 recoilless guns, more than 60 tanks and armored vehicles were destroyed and incapacitated.

In 1956, the PLA adopted the Type 75 56-mm recoilless gun. It differed from the Type 52 in the bolt design, sights and a new machine with small wheels.


Chinese 75 mm Type 56 recoilless gun

A new 75-mm cumulative grenade with normal armor penetration up to 140 mm was also adopted. Due to the fact that the cumulative grenade of increased power became heavier, the effective firing range against tanks did not exceed 400 m.A light cumulative grenade with armor penetration up to 100 mm could hit moving point targets at a distance of up to 500 m.


Ammunition for the 75 mm Type 56 recoilless gun

The gun could conduct aimed fire with fragmentation projectiles at stationary targets at a range of up to 2000 m. The maximum firing range was up to 5500 m. The Type 56, which weighed more than 85 kg in a combat position, served a crew of four. Combat rate of fire - up to 5 rds / min.

In the early 1960s, a modernized Type 56-I recoilless gun with a lightweight collapsible barrel and a machine without a wheel drive entered service. The weight of the gun in the firing position was reduced by 18 kg. In 1967, a new light alloy tripod lathe was developed for the Type 56-II, thereby reducing the weight of the gun by another 6 kg.


American and Chinese 75mm recoilless guns at the War Museum of the Chinese Revolution

Due to the higher armor penetration and better efficiency of fragmentation shells, by the mid-1960s, the modernized Type 56-I and Type 56-II completely supplanted 57-mm recoilless guns in the PLA combat units.

In the mid-1960s, to increase the firepower of the Chinese patrol ships of the project 062 and the artillery ships of the project 0111, they were armed with paired 75-mm recoilless guns.


However, due to the very small, by sea standards, effective firing range and low rate of fire, recoilless guns on the decks of Chinese warships did not take root.

Taking into account the fact that the cost of a 75-mm Type 56 recoilless gun in the mid-1960s did not exceed $ 200, despite a number of shortcomings, it was actively exported to African and Asian countries. Chinese 75-mm recoilless wheels were used during the hostilities in Southeast Asia, and also participated in many local wars. In March 1969, Type 56 recoilless guns took part in the border armed conflict in the area of ​​Damansky Island.

According to official Chinese sources, two Soviet armored personnel carriers BTR-75 were hit by fire from a 60-mm recoilless gun on Zhenbao Island (the Chinese name for Damansky Island). During the battle, the recoilless gunner Yang Liin, sacrificing himself, knocked out a Soviet T-62 medium tank.


Soviet tank T-62, knocked out on Damansky Island

However, the photographs of the damaged tank show that the undercarriage is damaged, which is typical for detonation on anti-tank mines.

After dark, from the tank, which remained in the location of the Chinese troops, the PLA servicemen managed to dismantle the night vision devices and the weapon stabilizer, which were secret at that time. To prevent the T-62 from getting to the enemy, the ice around it was broken by the fire of 120-mm mortars, and the tank sank.

Subsequently, the Soviet T-62 was raised, evacuated and rebuilt. Chinese experts thoroughly studied the captured tank, revealing its advantages and disadvantages. Of particular interest were the smoothbore cannon with feathered shells, the fire control system, the weapon stabilizer, and night vision devices.


The captured T-62 was at the PLA tank test range until the mid-1980s, after which it was transferred to the Beijing Military Museum of the Chinese Revolution. Currently, the T-62 tank is installed next to the American M26 Pershing, captured on the Korean Peninsula, at the entrance to the armored vehicles hall of the Military Museum of the Chinese Revolution.

Shortly before the cooling of relations between the countries, the USSR transferred the license for the production of the 82-mm recoilless gun B-10, which had been in service with the Soviet army since 1954. In the Soviet army, the gun served as an anti-tank weapon for motorized rifle and parachute battalions.


82-mm recoilless gun B-10

The B-10 recoilless gun was smooth-bore and fired with feathered cumulative and fragmentation shells. The mass of the wheeled gun is 85 kg. Maximum range - up to 4400 m Rate of fire - 6 rds / min. Effective firing range at armored targets - up to 400 m, armor penetration - up to 200 mm. The gun ammunition included cumulative and caseless-loaded fragmentation shots. The mass of the fragmentation and cumulative projectiles is 3,89 kg, the muzzle velocity is 320 m / s.

The B-10 gun significantly surpassed the 75-mm recoillessness available in the PLA, and in 1965 it was put into service in the PRC under the designation Type 65.


Calculation of the Chinese Type 65 recoilless gun in the firing position

In 1978, the 82-mm Type 78 gun, created on the basis of the Type 65, entered service. The weight of the new gun was reduced to 35 kg, which made it possible, in case of urgent need, to fire a shot from the shoulder. In addition, changes were made to the bolt, which facilitated the loading process and increased the combat rate of fire. On the Type 65, the bolt opens downward, on the Type 78 - to the right.


82 mm Recoilless Type 78 Gun

The muzzle velocity of an 82-mm cumulative grenade is 260 m / s, the effective firing range against tanks is 300 m. Armor penetration is 400 mm normal. The maximum firing range of a fragmentation grenade is 2000 m. Effective rate of fire is up to 7 rds / min. To combat manpower, projectiles equipped with 5 mm steel balls, with an effective engagement zone of up to 15 m, have been created.

The light 82-mm Type 78 recoilless recoillers were widely used in the PLA, they were used during the armed conflict with Vietnam and on the Sino-Indian border, supplied to the armed detachments of the Afghan opposition, African and Asian countries.


In the 1980s, upgraded versions of the Type 78-I and Type 78-II were created. The release of improved modifications continued until the second half of the 1990s. The ability to mount night sights appeared, the shutter was improved, and the ammunition load included shots of increased power. 82-mm recoilless guns are still in the PLA, but now it weapon is mainly seen as a means of fire support for infantry.

During the Vietnam War, Chinese intelligence showed great interest in samples of American equipment and weapons captured by the guerrillas and the regular army of North Vietnam during the hostilities.


American 106-mm recoilless gun M40

Among the captured samples shipped to the PRC were the American 106-mm M40 recoilless guns. The development of this recoilless gun was carried out during the years of the Korean War, when the inability of the 75-mm recoilless gun to penetrate the frontal armor of Soviet heavy tanks became apparent. The M40 gun entered service in 1953, but it did not have time to take part in the hostilities on the Korean Peninsula.


In addition to fighting armored vehicles, the 106-mm recoilless gun could fire from closed positions, for which there were standard sighting devices. When firing at visually observed targets, a sighting 12,7-mm automatic rifle with tracer bullets was used, which gives a bright flash and a cloud of smoke when it hits the target. The flight trajectory of sighting bullets at a distance of up to 900 m corresponded to the trajectory of a 106-mm cumulative projectile.


Taking into account the fact that the mass of the 106-mm recoilless gun was 209 kg, it was usually installed on various vehicles. Most often these were light off-road vehicles.


On the basis of the American 106-mm gun in 1967, the PRC created a 105-mm gun. The debugging was delayed, and the Chinese recoilless system was adopted by the PLA under the designation Type 75 in 1975.

In general, the Type 75 gun repeated the design of the M40, but there were a number of differences. On the Chinese recoilless recoil, there was no large-caliber rifle and simplified sights were used. The mass of the gun was 213 kg.

Like other recoilless guns copied from American designs, the Type 75 used perforated-case rounds. Part of the gases passed through the holes and were thrown back through special nozzles in the breech of the barrel, thus creating a reactive moment that dampens the recoil force.

For firing, shots were used with a cumulative and high-explosive fragmentation grenade. The mass of a unitary shot with a fragmentation grenade is 21,6 kg, with a cumulative one - 16,2 kg. The initial speed of a cumulative grenade is 503 m / s, a high-explosive fragmentation grenade - 320 m / s. The range of a direct shot with a cumulative projectile is 580 m. The maximum firing range of a high-explosive fragmentation projectile is 7400 m. A cumulative projectile, when it hits at an angle of 65 °, pierced 180 mm thick armor. Rate of fire - 5-6 rds / min.


Most of the 105-mm recoilless guns produced in the PRC were installed on light army off-road vehicles. The calculation of the gun was 5 people. Each vehicle, armed with a recoilless gun, had a place to carry 8 unitary rounds in capping. In defense, the gun could be removed from the vehicle and fire from the ground.


Beijing BJ2020S off-road vehicle with 105 mm recoilless gun at the Military Museum of the Chinese Revolution

Until the mid-1990s, six Type 105 75-mm recoilless guns were part of the anti-tank battery of the PLA regular infantry regiments stationed in the northwest of the PRC. Currently, they are almost completely replaced by anti-tank systems with guided missiles.

A number of guns installed on Beijing BJ2020S vehicles have been exported. It is reliably known that such machines were used in the civil war in Libya.


The 105mm guns mounted on the jeeps have survived in Chinese airmobile units. These light anti-tank self-propelled guns can be transported on the external sling of medium transport helicopters or inside the Shaanxi Y-8 military transport aircraft (copy of the An-12).


They are in the batteries of recoilless guns of the airborne division's artillery divisions. Each battery contains six Type 75. It is reported that the upgraded 105mm recoilless systems are equipped with computerized sights with a night channel and laser rangefinders. In addition to the recoilless gun, a large-caliber machine gun can be mounted on the BJ2020S vehicle.

Although 105-mm recoilless systems are already ineffective against modern tanks, the Norinco corporation offered them for export until recently. It is believed that such weapons can be useful to the rapid reaction forces and can be successfully used against light armored vehicles and manpower.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

41 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +13
    August 22 2021
    As always, very interesting and beautifully illustrated! Little-known details mentioned! good
  2. +10
    August 22 2021
    Sergey, thanks for the article! It is interestingly written and worked out.
  3. +10
    August 22 2021
    Traditionally, I want to thank Sergei for an interesting selection of materials. Special thanks for the illustrations.
    1. +10
      August 22 2021
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      Traditionally, I want to thank Sergei for an interesting selection of materials. Special thanks for the illustrations.

      Thanks to! Glad you liked it! drinks
      It is not clear what kind of hoopoe, cons you constantly molds?
      1. +7
        August 22 2021
        It is not clear what kind of hoopoe, cons you constantly molds?

        It is on the site that some secret conglomeration of "offended and offended" is working, thus expressing longing for their wretched existence.
        1. +8
          August 22 2021
          Quote: Undecim
          It is on the site that some secret conglomeration of "offended and offended" is working, thus expressing longing for their wretched existence.

          Good evening!
          I can still understand when the minuses are put for outright delirium, or the Nazis. But why go down like that? request
          1. +5
            August 22 2021
            Sometimes the logic of human actions is difficult to explain to a non-specialized specialist.
          2. +3
            August 23 2021
            Good evening, Sergey! hi
            With the minuses from this audience, the story is the same as with the relations in the communal kitchen at one time: "I’ll spit in my neighbor’s saucepan!" And to hell with them, with the poor. laughing

            ... in the early 1950s, very little quality steel was smelted in the PRC ...

            So, as far as I remember, then the Chinese had another slogan in use, such as "we will melt iron in every peasant household!", Or something in the same spirit. What kind of quality are we talking about if the barrel of a Chinese AK clone could be bent with bare hands. request

            ... knocked out a Soviet medium tank T-62.

            Our regiment specifically informed the l / s that more tanks were knocked out (2 or 3, I don't remember exactly), but the Chinese got exactly the one that went under the ice, and only on it were the dead, the rest of the tanks, ours brought out of there on their own ... I will not vouch for the accuracy of the information; headquarters of our regiment p / Colonel Nardin, he was on a business trip to Damanskoye immediately after these events.

            How are you Sergey, how are you hunting, fishing? smile
            Bow to the wife. love
            1. +4
              August 24 2021
              Konstantin, hello!
              Thanks for a flower! smile
              Seryozha goes fishing regularly, they have piled on grayling and lenoks. There is no hunting yet - not the season.
              Seryozha began a new series of articles, it seems about Chinese anti-aircraft guns. One article was sent for moderation, but it is not known when the next one will be ready.
              Tomorrow we will fly to Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, from there a tour of the Kuril ridge. Let's see the volcanoes and the northern tip of Japanese Hokkaido.
              1. +4
                August 24 2021
                Quote: zyablik.olga
                Seryozha goes fishing regularly,

                I will interfere request love
                Hi Seryoga drinks
                Here I went fishing with my grandson on Lake Rakovicheskoye We caught 16 perches and 3 roach fellow He will understand wink
                1. +5
                  August 24 2021
                  Quote: Ruslan67
                  Caught 16 perches and 3 roach

                  And I bought one roach, and I bought that ... Where can I go to my brother, he is catching what kind of ...
                  1. +2
                    August 24 2021
                    Quote: mordvin xnumx
                    Quote: Ruslan67
                    Caught 16 perches and 3 roach

                    And I bought one roach, and I bought that ... Where can I go to my brother, he is catching what kind of ...

                    Well, okay, since they started squeaks fishes are measured, I will also lay out a little of what Seryozha caught.

                    1. +1
                      August 24 2021
                      Well, my bro doesn't miss either ...
                    2. +2
                      August 24 2021
                      Class! And then I carried crucians in the pond ...
                    3. +2
                      August 24 2021
                      Such a fish can eat the fisherman himself. wink good
                2. +1
                  5 September 2021
                  Quote: Ruslan67
                  Caught 16 perches and 3 roach
                  Amateur! negative
                  Hi! drinks
                  1. 0
                    6 September 2021
                    Quote: Angry Guerrilla
                    Amateur!

                    Yetilov the Bugbearer am
                    Hi drinks
              2. +2
                August 24 2021
                Good afternoon, Olga! love
                Say hello to Sergey and wish you both a successful trip and good mood. smile drinks
  4. 0
    August 22 2021
    To strengthen its anti-tank artillery, China received several dozen 1950-mm D-85 anti-tank guns in the mid-44s.
    The D-44 were divisional guns that replaced the ZIS-3, and were adopted in 1946. The anti-tank gun was the D-48, which was put into service in 1953, but only 819 of them were produced, for comparison, the D-44 was produced more than 10 thousand pieces. In general, it is not clear why the D-48 was adopted, because already in the series there was a much more powerful BS-3, the more it should have been clear to the generals that the armor of tanks would only increase and adopt a weaker gun than the existing BS- 3, a deliberately erroneous decision.
    1. +4
      August 22 2021
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      The D-44 were divisional guns that replaced the ZIS-3, and entered service in 1946.

      Have you read the article carefully? Or did you just look at the pictures?
      BS-3 as a purely anti-tank was never considered. No. Which is reflected in its full name. Moreover, its creator V.G. Grabin, also did not consider it anti-tank.
      1. 0
        August 22 2021
        You wrote:
        To strengthen its anti-tank artillery, China in the mid-1950s received several dozen 85-mm anti tank guns D-44. Soon, with Soviet support, the PRC launched the licensed production of 85-mm guns. The Chinese version of the D-44 is known as the Type 56.

        In the USSR, the D-44 was a divisional gun. Now, if you wrote that "To strengthen its anti-tank artillery, China, with Soviet support, established the licensed production of 85-mm D-44 divisional guns. The Chinese version of the D-44 is known as the Type 56 anti-tank gun," then yes, there would be no comment , since the Chinese could classify the D-44 clone as an anti-tank gun, this is their business. But the D-44 was precisely that of a divisional, and not an anti-tank gun. And the BS-3 was almost always used as a PTO, it was neither a corps nor a divisional cannon, it was produced in the amount of 3818 pieces, which is almost 5 times more than the D-48, which was noticeably weaker than the BS-3.
        1. +6
          August 22 2021
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          In the USSR, the D-44 was a divisional gun.

          It became a divisional gun in the USSR in the 60s, after it became clear that the armor penetration of the D-44 was not enough for confident penetration of the frontal armor of new Western tanks.
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          Now, if you wrote ...

          If I need your advice, I will definitely ask him. You can also pile your article on this topic, VO in this regard is open to everyone.
          1. 0
            August 22 2021
            Quote: Bongo
            It became a divisional gun in the USSR in the 60s, after it became clear that the armor penetration of the D-44 was not enough for confident penetration of the frontal armor of new Western tanks.

            The D-48 was put into service in 1953, long before the 60s. In my opinion, the D-48 is an unnecessary weapon, and its meager release suggests that it was not particularly needed. In fact, the D-48 is an analogue of the German PAK-43, except that it is lightweight and under the Soviet caliber. And for the 50s, the D-48 was already completely insufficient to combat modern tanks, since both the Allies and the USSR made post-war tanks just invulnerable to the PAK-43, which was then the standard of anti-tank equipment.
            1. +5
              August 22 2021
              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              The D-48 was put into service in 1953, long before the 60s.

              What does this have to do with the fact that the D-44 since the start of mass production was supplied exclusively to anti-tank fighter battalions? And why all the rest of the verbiage?
              1. -3
                August 22 2021
                Quote: Bongo
                What does this have to do with the fact that the D-44 since the start of mass production was supplied exclusively to anti-tank fighter battalions? And why all the rest of the verbiage?

                It was necessary to increase the production of BS-3, and not to adopt the D-48 series, which by 1953 was completely outdated. As for the D-44, it was also not needed, in divisional artillery howitzers are needed, not guns. The experience of the Germans is proof of this. No wonder then only howitzers served in the SA in the regimental and divisional artillery.
                1. +4
                  August 22 2021
                  Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                  It was necessary to increase the production of BS-3, and not to adopt the D-48 series, which by 1953 was completely outdated.

                  Gospadya ... wassat
                  Where do you get this nonsense, or is it your own conclusions? Do you think that in the Main Missile and Artillery Directorate of the USSR Ministry of Defense there were people stupider than you? No.
                  Compare the armor penetration of the D-48 with the BS-3, as well as their weight, cost and service and operational characteristics.
                  The 100-mm BS-3, for many reasons, was frankly not optimal for fighting armored vehicles.
                  1. -3
                    August 22 2021
                    Quote: Bongo
                    Compare the armor penetration of the D-48 with the BS-3, as well as their weight, cost and service and operational characteristics.

                    The M-42 is also MUCH lighter than the BS-3, but nevertheless, after the war, the M-42 was immediately sent to the reserve and to the aid of the Chinese and Koreans according to the principle "God behold, what is useless for us!"
                    Quote: Bongo
                    The 100-mm BS-3, for many reasons, was frankly not optimal for fighting armored vehicles.

                    The 100-mm caliber existed in the SA for a very long time, new PBSs were developed for it, it was not without reason that the T-54/55 had the same guns. And then the T-12 gun - purely PTO - was created for a caliber of 100 mm.
          2. +6
            August 22 2021
            It became a divisional gun in the USSR in the 60s, after it became clear that the armor penetration of the D-44 was not enough for confident penetration of the frontal armor of new Western tanks.

            1. +9
              August 22 2021

              I respect your argument, but I know for certain that the D-44 was in the anti-tank battalions until the mid-60s.
              In addition, the this publications are about Chinese anti-tank artillery. hi
              1. 0
                August 22 2021
                Quote: Bongo
                I respect your argument, but I know for certain that the D-44 was in the anti-tank battalions until the mid-60s.

                The ZIS-3 also fought the whole war as a PTO, out of 48 thousand guns produced, half, 24 thousand, were sent to the PTO, since the armor penetration of forty-five was insufficient. And the M-42s themselves were produced a little more than 10 thousand, that is, throughout the war, it was the ZIS-3 that was the workhorse of the PTAP. According to your logic, it turns out that the ZIS-3 is a PTO?
              2. +6
                August 22 2021
                In addition, this publication deals with Chinese anti-tank artillery.

                I agree, these are two different questions. The Chinese could easily classify this weapon. as anti-tank.
                As for the Soviet army, I think it would be correct to say that the D-44 divisional gun was also used as an anti-tank gun.
        2. +7
          August 22 2021
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          And BS-3 was almost always used as a PTO, it was neither a corps nor a divisional gun.

          As a field gun, the BS-3 was used in light artillery brigades of tank armies. Plus the corps artillery regiments of the 9th Guards. A.
          In fact, BS-3 repeated the fate of its predecessor, the M-60. Too heavy for a division, too light for a corps. In the presence of a normal tractor, the A-19 covers it like a bull, a sheep.
          1. -2
            August 22 2021
            Quote: Alexey RA
            As a field gun, the BS-3 was used in light artillery brigades of tank armies. Plus the corps artillery regiments of the 9th Guards. A.
            In fact, BS-3 repeated the fate of its predecessor, the M-60. Too heavy for a division, too light for a corps. In the presence of a normal tractor, the A-19 covers it like a bull, a sheep.

            Well, yes, the optimum is a 152 mm gun that shoots in bursts and weighs two tons. But nobody canceled the laws of physics. The A-19 projectile weighs one and a half times heavier, the gun does not have a muzzle brake, and the muzzle velocity is lower than that of the BS-3, and it is the muzzle velocity that is the main one for penetrating armor. And nevertheless, BS-3 weighs TWO times less than A-19, which gives an awesome room for maneuver!
            1. +6
              August 22 2021
              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              The A-19 projectile weighs one and a half times heavier, the gun does not have a muzzle brake, and the muzzle velocity is lower than that of the BS-3, and it is the muzzle velocity that is the main one for penetrating armor.

              Even in theory, the armor penetration of a 100 mm gun was only 4-5 mm higher than that of a 122 mm gun.
              And if you remember that Jacob de Mar has limits of applicability ... smile
              1. 122mm tank gun "D-25" (plant number 9) having the same ballistics as the guns: 122mm A-19, 122mm D-2 plant number 9 C-4 TsAKB, namely: muzzle velocity v = 780-790 m / ce with a projectile of 25 kg. This cannon penetrates the Panther's forehead confidently at a distance of 2500 meters, and this is not yet the ultimate distance.

              2. 100mm tank gun D-10, having the same ballistics with the gun 100 mm BS-3, namely: initial speed v = 890-900 m / s. with 15,6 projectile kg
              This gun punches the forehead of the Panther at a distance of 1500 mtr., And this is already the limit.

              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              And nevertheless, BS-3 weighs TWO times less than A-19, which gives an awesome room for maneuver!

              That is why the BS-3 field gun was made. It was all about cravings. If the USSR had a high-speed tractor under the A-19, there would be no need for the BS-3.
              1. -3
                August 22 2021
                Quote: Alexey RA
                That is why the BS-3 field gun was made. It was all about cravings. If the USSR had a high-speed tractor under the A-19, there would be no need for the BS-3.

                Nevertheless, the new post-war generation of T-54/55 tanks was made with a 100 mm cannon, not a 122, which means there was some good reason for this.
    2. +6
      August 22 2021
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      In general, it is not clear why the D-48 was adopted, because already in the series there was a much more powerful BS-3

      Weight and dimensions. BS-3 weighs one and a half times more than D-48.
      1. -4
        August 22 2021
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Weight and dimensions. BS-3 weighs one and a half times more than D-48.

        And the mass of the M-42 is half the mass of the ZIS-2. Perhaps, according to your logic, it was not worth restoring the production of the ZIS-2 in 1943?
        1. +5
          August 22 2021
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          And the mass of the M-42 is half the mass of the ZIS-2. Perhaps, according to your logic, it was not worth restoring the production of the ZIS-2 in 1943?

          And besides the mass, is it very difficult for you to compare the armor penetration of all the guns in question? fool
          You try to fit facts to fit your theories and drag an owl onto the globe. negative
  5. +4
    August 22 2021
    Very interesting article. Thanks for the hard work!
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. 0
    1 September 2021
    or like that !!
  8. 0
    October 1 2021
    I like very much the article. Very interesting. If I'm not wrong the production in China of the PL-54 85mm (D-44) would have been finished in 1960 and the production of the PL-60 85mm (D-48) in 1962?

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"