Military Review

Too original tanks often lose ...

101
Too original tanks often lose ...
TV8 - "atomic tank" by Chrysler. Layout


The rear cockpit of the aircraft housed a nuclear reactor remote from the passengers. The use of fast-moving neutrons made it very lightweight. The reactor was cooled with water boiling at colossal pressure. The resulting steam was directed into a compact ultra-high-pressure steam turbine, on the shaft of which a permanent magnet of a high-frequency electric generator rotated at a speed of thirty thousand revolutions per minute. Electric current was directed through wires to high-frequency electric motors at the propellers. ... The steam returned in triumph to Aviation.
A. P. Kazantsev "The Burning Island"

History armored vehicles. Originality is what very often people value above all else. However, in technology, originality alone will not go far. There are also such indicators as reliability, safety, efficiency, and such a very important economic indicator as ... price! This is especially true of military equipment, where effective but unreliable weapon it simply will not be able to perform the proper functions, and an effective, but too expensive one, will not become widespread, which means that it will not be effective again. And the best example of such a situation, which should be taken into account by all designers of military equipment and weapons, is the history of American nuclear tanks.


Back during the Second World War, American engineers created an impressive number of experienced tanks of various types, gradually improving them. In this drawing by a modern artist, we see a heavy tank M6 (above) and one of its subsequent modifications - the M6A2E1 tank

And it so happened that in the 50s of the last century, mankind got its hands on a new powerful source of energy - nuclear decay, and began to develop it in the most active way. It was then that nuclear power was seen as almost a means of solving all energy problems. It was proposed to put nuclear reactors not only on ships and submarines, but also on railway locomotives, airplanes, and even ... on cars. Science fiction writers enthusiastically described atomic airplanes, and atomic cars, not to mention atomic bullets. Naturally, the military also read all these novels and simply could not stay away from the passion for such projects. In particular, in the United States of America, they began to seriously consider projects to create a tank with a nuclear reactor as a power plant. Fortunately, all these projects remained so on paper, because the experience of their application showed that it justifies itself only on ships and submarines.

Well, the actual history of American "atomic tanks" began in June 1954 during the third scientific conference Question Mark, at which American scientists first considered the project of a tank with a nuclear reactor. Tank TV1 (Track Vehicle 1 - "Tracked vehicle-1") was supposed to have a mass of about 70 tons and a 105-mm rifled gun, and the layout of the tank was very original. So, a small-sized nuclear reactor was supposed to be located in the front of the tank behind 350 mm thick armor. Behind the reactor and biosecurity was the workplace of the driver and two machine gunners in individual rotating turrets, and behind it was a fighting compartment with a gun turret and another machine-gun turret on the roof. Behind the tower were the power plant units. The undercarriage of the tank had eight rollers on each side.


Tank TV1 (Track Vehicle 1 - "Tracked vehicle-1")

For simplicity of the device, the reactor for TV1 had to work with an open coolant circuit. That is, it was planned to cool the reactor with atmospheric air, which was supposed to heat up from it and rotate the gas turbine, which, in turn, would drive the tank's transmission and its driving wheels. Such a facility could operate for 500 hours on a single nuclear fuel station. Only during these same 500 hours of operation, a reactor with such a cooling system would infect several tens or hundreds of thousands of cubic meters of air passed through it with radiation. Therefore, such a cooling system was found unsuitable. In addition, due to the need to have sufficient biological protection of the reactor on the tank, it was not possible to fit it into the required dimensions. In general, TV1, if built, would have turned out to be more dangerous for its own troops than for the enemy's troops.

In 1955, the next Question Mark IV conference was held, at which an improved design of the atomic tank, called the R32, was presented. The new one was smaller, as the development of nuclear technology made it possible to improve the reactor and reduce its size. Now the tank weighed 50 tons, had a frontal armor plate thickness of 120 mm and a turret with a 90-mm gun. It was decided to abandon the gas turbine operating on overheated atmospheric air and use more modern and effective means of protecting the crew from radiation. Calculations showed that the cruising range at one refueling with nuclear fuel could be about four thousand kilometers. That is, a tank of this type would actually not need tankers.

The R32 was also safer than its predecessor TV1, but still, due to the high level of radiation, it was not suitable for practical use. It turned out that for one tank it would be necessary to have several replacement crews and change them every time as soon as the tankers "grab X-rays."

All these difficulties led to the fact that the military's interest in atomic tanks began to gradually subside. True, back in 1959, a nuclear tank was designed on the basis of the M103 heavy tank. A draft design was prepared, and that was the end of it.

The latest project of a tank with a nuclear reactor was prepared by the Chrysler company, and not only prepared, but also made its full-size model. The new tank received the designation TV8 and was completely unique in all respects. There was nothing unusual about the tracked undercarriage, which cannot be said about the turret.


Tank TV8. Side view. The design of the tower is, of course, impressive ... Thanks to this shape, he could also float. But I couldn't shoot afloat!

The turret on this tank had a streamlined, faceted shape and for the first time in the history of world tank building was longer than the chassis itself. Everything was located inside it: the workplaces of the four crew members, the breech of the 90-mm recoilless system gun, and the ammunition load. Well, in the aft part of the tower there should have been a diesel engine or even a small-sized nuclear reactor. The reactor or engine was supposed to turn the generator, and that one would generate an electric current that powers the propeller motors and all the equipment of the tank. They argued only about where it would be best to place the reactor: in the tower or in the hull.

The TV8 mock-up was made, but it never went beyond the mock-up. The layout of this tank was too original, which was technically complex, but did not give any special advantages over both existing and developed tanks. Although, of course, this tank looked impressive and most of all resembled cars from science fiction films about the invasion of evil aliens.

Well, after the impressive TV8, not a single American atomic tank project came out even from the technical proposal stage. In other countries, replacing a diesel engine with a nuclear reactor was also considered, but even there it was recognized as technically unfeasible. Two features of nuclear power plants prevented their installation on a tank. Firstly, a reactor suitable for operation on a tank could not have sufficient anti-radiation protection. That is, his crew would be exposed to constant radiation. Secondly, in the event of damage to the tank and its power plant - and in a combat situation the likelihood of such an unpleasant development of events is very high - it turned into an extremely dangerous object for those around it. The chances of the crew to survive in this situation were very small, not to mention the fact that even those who survived would then have to be treated for radiation sickness.

It turned out that there was only one benefit from the use of an atomic reactor on a tank: an extremely large cruising range. But it did not cover all the other shortcomings of this design. Therefore, atomic-powered tanks in metal were not created and remained in the history of technology as an original technical idea that arose at the peak of a kind of fashion for everything atomic and nothing more.

In the tank "Hunter" ("Hunter"), developed by order of the US government in 1953-1955, everything was just as unusual - from the layout to the weapons and the chassis. The tank had a low silhouette and multi-layer armor with silicon dioxide as a filler, which provided high resistance to cumulative shells. At the same time, the mass of the tank should not exceed 40-45 tons. At that time, research on improving protection against cumulative ammunition was very widespread, and one of the solutions was just such a "glass" armor. With a thickness of 165 mm, it provided the same protection as monolithic armor of this thickness, but weighed significantly less.

The design of the upper part of the tank was very original. So, for example, he was armed with two 105-mm automatic cannons at once, firing rockets that rotated in flight. The guns were rigidly fixed in the swinging turret, since they had cluster loaders with a capacity of seven rounds. The maximum rate of fire of the guns was very high and amounted to 120 rounds per minute. Such a high rate of fire was required to compensate for the low accuracy of firing rockets, especially at long ranges. The full ammunition load was 94 shells, of which 80 were in the tank hull, and 14 shots were in the gun magazines, the aiming angles of which ranged from -10 ° to + 20 °, although the rotation of the tank turret by 360 ° was possible only at an elevation angle of + 20 °. Two 7,62 mm machine guns were paired with cannons, and a pair of 12,7 mm anti-aircraft machine guns were in the commander's cupola.

The tank was driven by 12 hydraulic motors (each of which rotated its own roadside roller!). This made it possible to abandon the drive wheel and use a lightweight rubber track, which was assembled from sections 1,8 m long each. This design theoretically allowed the tank to remain mobile not only with the loss of one track, but also several road wheels. Although a variant of the tank with "classic" drive wheels and tracks was also being developed.


Heavy tank "Hunter" on a traditional chassis


Project of the American heavy tank H3, armed with a 175-mm gun

Tank "Hunter" never left the sketch stage, although it was worked out well enough. The project of the heavy tank N-3, which was to be armed with the most powerful 175-mm gun, was also not successful. Although, it would seem, with such a gun and thick enough armor, this tank will be simply invincible on the battlefield. The tank was not even built, and remained in the blueprints ...

Even today, when it comes to installing exotic engines and powerful guns of 140-152 mm caliber on tanks, it should be remembered that all this in the past, one way or another, already happened and for a number of reasons did not go into business. It is clear that now the time is different, and the technology is more perfect, but the machines that are too original in technical terms for some reason always lose to the somewhat more traditional ones. So, all kinds of innovations, even today, on tanks should be in moderation!

PS The author and administration of the site would like to thank A. Sheps for the illustrations he provided.
Author:
101 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Gato
    Gato 8 September 2021 18: 22
    +15
    It depends on what is considered an original solution. At one time, the first British tanks were difficult to recognize as something traditional (apart from their naval origin), especially the design of the chassis with tracks around the hull.
    As for tank engines, ours were also noted in terms of originality:
    https://youtu.be/Wv0qg7zrjl4?t=17
  2. SERGE ANT
    SERGE ANT 8 September 2021 18: 23
    +23
    Thanks for the article. Well and our answer is answer to Chamberlain
    The TV8 mockup was made, but it never went beyond the mockup.
    We had at least one, but not a model
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 8 September 2021 18: 39
      +13
      Given that the Americans started with
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 8 September 2021 19: 56
        +9
        Not worse than the French B1bis! In many ways, and better ... Though average in classification!
    2. kalibr
      8 September 2021 18: 41
      +11
      Up close, he makes an even stronger impression than in the photo ...
    3. Intruder
      Intruder 8 September 2021 19: 23
      +16
      Thanks for the article. Well and our answer is answer to Chamberlain
      I agree, to the author Thanks !!!
      And the answer good , well ... there were also these, even the last project, of the Soviet RTK (as it is fashionable now):


      1. kalibr
        8 September 2021 19: 33
        +8
        Beautiful cars when done in color. Thank you!
      2. 9PA
        9PA 14 September 2021 18: 02
        +1
        The second tank from the top, tpp uro, has an interesting concept, is it currently applicable?
        1. Intruder
          Intruder 15 September 2021 07: 51
          +1
          Second tank on top, tpp uro
          An excellent concept of a missile tank, put universal onboard launchers and external target designation and forward "hammer the enemy" with massive missile strikes!
    4. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 8 September 2021 20: 22
      +9
      Wrong. Our "answer to Chamberlain" was a purely rocket tank.
  3. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 8 September 2021 18: 24
    +6
    The engineering imagination is ahead of the capabilities of the industry and the desires of the military.
    1. SERGE ANT
      SERGE ANT 8 September 2021 18: 36
      +15
      Yes, there were all kinds of projects - and flying
      wheeled-tracked flying tank MAC-1, developed in 1937 by engineer Mikhail Smalkov. The machine based on the light tank BT-7 was distinguished by a great design originality - a streamlined hull shape and the presence of folding devices for overcoming obstacles through the air. Also in 1937, specialists Moscow Aviation Plant No. 84 presented a project of an air-cushion tank, also known from documents as the "Amphibious Approaching Tank".
      The armored vehicle was supposed to be used for military operations in swampy and sandy areas. The progress of the work was supervised by engineer and designer Vladimir Levkov, who back in 1925 substantiated the possibility of hovercraft in his work "Vortex theory of the rotor".
      1. kalibr
        8 September 2021 18: 39
        +12
        What nice additions! However, there was a detailed article about Levkov's "tank" in my "Tankomaster" with a picture on the cover just for this photo!
        1. SERGE ANT
          SERGE ANT 8 September 2021 18: 56
          +10
          Sorry then, Vyacheslav Olegovich! Yes, there has already been so much written about these projects, it is dazzling in the eyes - you can't remember everyone! And the projects of engineers-inventors, even failed ones, are the driving force of progress.
          "First inevitably come: thought, fantasy, fairy tale. Scientific calculation follows them, and already, in the end, execution crowns thought." Konstantin Eduardovich Tsiolkovsky
          1. kalibr
            8 September 2021 19: 12
            +12
            Quote: SERGE ant
            "First inevitably come: thought, fantasy, fairy tale. Scientific calculation follows them, and already, in the end, execution crowns thought." Konstantin Eduardovich Tsiolkovsky

            Exactly. I think I already wrote that in the USA a dissertation was defended on the influence of covers with fantastic projects of Popular Mechanics on progress!
      2. Kuroneko
        Kuroneko 9 September 2021 05: 27
        +7
        Christie was selling us his flying tank around the same time. He even invented a lot earlier (but sold later), so I think it was not without his prototype. 32nd year, after all. No one had ever thought about it before.
    2. user1212
      user1212 9 September 2021 04: 38
      +7
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      military desires

      The military always has two desires: an impenetrable shield and an all-piercing sword. Engineering attempts to bring this to life are sometimes original to the extreme :)
  4. 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 8 September 2021 18: 43
    +9
    Thank you, Vyacheslav Olegovich!
    However, I will note ... The quote in the epigraph does not correspond much to the text of the article. I strongly doubt that Kazantsev knew more than Kurchatov.
    1. kalibr
      8 September 2021 18: 55
      +11
      Quote: 3x3zsave
      then Kazantsev, he knew more than Kurchatov.

      I don’t know and don’t want to know. Is there an atomic machine? There is! Were atomic planes in the USSR and in the USA? They were building! Did you want to build nuclear trains? Yes! I myself saw the drawings in the magazine "Science and Technology" for 1956. Was there a Chrysler auto project with a nuclear reactor? Was! Saw him in Popular Mechanics. So - everything is OK!
      1. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave 8 September 2021 19: 09
        +8
        I don’t know and I don’t want to know.
        Well, that's your right!
        A. Kazantsev's novel "The Burning Island", published in 1940. There were two years left before the start of the "Manhattan Project".
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 8 September 2021 19: 21
          +8
          I don’t know and I don’t want to know.
          Once again I thought: "Why am I here ???"
          1. kalibr
            8 September 2021 19: 31
            +4
            Quote: 3x3zsave
            "Why am I here ???"

            Then, to read something unknown and enjoy your own intelligence and ingenuity!
            1. Intruder
              Intruder 9 September 2021 18: 48
              +2
              Then, to read something unknown and enjoy your own intelligence and ingenuity!
              Bravo! good Directly and immediately ... wink
        2. kalibr
          8 September 2021 19: 29
          +7
          Anton! Kazantsev - for which I do not love him, there was also that ... "woman". He rewrote it all the time, hesitated along the line of the party. He wrote it in general in the 36th, it came out in the 40th, and then back in 1957, 1962 and 1975. The last option is generally quiet horror ... I had a hobby - to read all its versions and compare ... A good school for a writer, how it is not necessary ...
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 8 September 2021 19: 39
            +8
            Sorry, Vyacheslav Olegovich, the impression is that you "sent" me. I am too suspicious, lately ...
            1. kalibr
              8 September 2021 19: 41
              +8
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              Sorry, Vyacheslav Olegovich, the impression is that you "sent" me. I am too suspicious, lately ...

              Why would it suddenly send you to me? I just try to be short and to the point.
              1. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 8 September 2021 19: 50
                +6
                Well, I don’t know ... Any person, from time to time, has an irresistible desire to send someone. Why should I be an exception as a subject of sending?
                1. kalibr
                  8 September 2021 20: 07
                  +5
                  Quote: 3x3zsave
                  Why should I be an exception as a subject of sending?

                  Friends are all - enemies are the law! This is my rule.
                  1. 3x3zsave
                    3x3zsave 8 September 2021 20: 11
                    +6
                    I am more inclined towards Socrates and Descartes.
            2. Catfish
              Catfish 8 September 2021 22: 08
              +5
              Hi, hello! smile Look at life philosophically. drinks
      2. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 8 September 2021 21: 51
        +11
        Quote: kalibr
        Was there a Chrysler auto project with a nuclear reactor? Was! Saw him in Popular Mechanics. So - everything is OK!

        And I was "lucky" to observe the embryo of an atomic car project based on the BELAZ mining dump truck.
        By the end of the 70s, at Minsredmash, some people were running around with such an idea. They even gave our institute something to do there. Everyone grabbed their heads, began twisting their fingers at their temples, but there was nothing to be done, they began to count.
        They even wanted to create a department for this case, but somehow the case quickly died out, all the calculations went to the basket, and at the institute the people breathed a sigh of relief
  5. Catfish
    Catfish 8 September 2021 18: 44
    +13
    Good evening, friends! hi
    Vyacheslav, thanks for the interesting analysis of army fiction, but I had a purely "tankist" question about this:
    This made it possible to abandon the drive wheel and use a lightweight rubber track, which was assembled from sections 1,8 m long each. This design theoretically allowed the tank to remain mobile not only with the loss of one track, but also several road wheels.

    As far as I remember my service in the tank forces, even the loss of one track turned the tank into a relatively stationary target, i.e. he just spun around. In the situation with the "Hunter" model, I somehow have a bad idea of ​​the possibility of a normal movement of the tank with the loss of one caterpillar, even with all the leading rollers. I mean rough terrain, sandy ground, just soft ground. If the caterpillar takes on the entire weight of the machine, then the rollers will simply fail, and in this situation, whether the rollers rotate or not, it does not really matter.

    Thanks for the article. smile
    1. kalibr
      8 September 2021 18: 56
      +7
      Dear Konstantin! How much was bought, then sold. Material from Hunnicath's book "Firepower". And this is the best specialist in the history of American tanks in the United States.
      1. Catfish
        Catfish 8 September 2021 19: 03
        +7
        Vyacheslav, I’m without any complaints, I was simply surprised at the Americans - why it was necessary to develop something that under certain conditions simply would not be able to travel. Well, come on, they had a lot of money. smile
        1. kalibr
          8 September 2021 19: 09
          +7
          Yes, I understand, I just wanted to explain that they thought so ... And how really ... The forgotten ravines are not spoken of for nothing!
    2. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 8 September 2021 21: 48
      +7
      Hunter, like many western tank projects (or rather PTs), was intended for tank-artillery ambushes. So it wasn't a problem.
      The West did not hope to contain the tank armies of the USSR. Already demonstrating the IS-3 at the parade in Berlin, we have for a long time instilled fear in the minds of the bourgeoisie. The IS-3 seemed to them to be a tank from the future, and that is why tank destroyer projects became popular. The British even built hefty monsters with 185mm cannons. And with splinterproof armor. ^ _ ^ Ie. - for purely ambush tactics. Therefore, the main thing for Hunter was only to get to the position, and there it was already as expensive as possible to sell his life.
    3. ALEXEY TSENTILLO
      ALEXEY TSENTILLO 17 September 2021 14: 48
      0
      This means that a broken track can be assembled on rollers by throwing out the damaged section - it will be shorter, but the tank will be able to move.
      On the T-54 they did this - if the guide roller was interrupted, the caterpillar was put on through the drive sprocket to the whole road roller and drove ...
      1. Catfish
        Catfish 17 September 2021 14: 55
        0
        This is where you dealt with the "half-four"? In which battles and in which country? I served on these machines for three years and we have never had anything like it.
  6. Laksamana besar
    Laksamana besar 8 September 2021 18: 49
    +13
    The alleged view of the Grotte TG-5 tank:

    25-ton tank Grotte TG-1, marked the beginning of the development of the T-35 tank:
    1. kalibr
      8 September 2021 18: 58
      +7
      In the lower turret, the Syachintov's cannon is our first powerful tank cannon. They were awarded the order ... and then they shot the peasant ...
    2. Catfish
      Catfish 8 September 2021 19: 10
      +13
      The T-35 is still relatively not such a monster as the SMK, although both of them did not go into the series.

      "It was used in battles on the Mannerheim Line, where it was blown up by a mine and was subsequently evacuated. According to the results of comparative tests that revealed the clear advantages of the KV tank, the SMK was not accepted for service (although at first it was recommended for adoption by the Red Army) and was not mass-produced." (with).
      1. SERGE ANT
        SERGE ANT 8 September 2021 19: 39
        +12
        Hello tankers! In the war, there was a boom in tank projects! Three cannons at the official level (!) Were ordered to be installed on the T-34 - they say, the more guns, the better! I must say that A.A. Morozov, who took over the baton from M.I.Koshkin in improving the T-34, initially understood the absurdity and inconsistency of the "multi-cannon" tank invented by the People's Commissariat of Arms, but, of course, did not fulfill the order of the People's Commissar V. A. Malysheva - what kind of engineering thinking and education did this People's Commissar have? - he could not. There was only one way out: to issue a project doomed to rejection in advance. This was the "Project of the tracked tank T-34-3"
        However, this is far from the most surprising of all that during the war years our Soviet people offered to crush and destroy the enemy. For example, what kind of car was offered by someone Lyashenko T.I. and Badaev SV, whose project, executed again only at the level of the scheme, was called “Trackless Tank”. Well, in the explanatory note to him they wrote the following:
        “The experience of ongoing hostilities shows that the most vulnerable places of the modern tank are the tracks. A tank is destroyed not only by an anti-tank weapon, but also by a simple bunch of grenades. Other design flaws allow you to disable the tank even with a bottle of burning gasoline. In order to maximize the survivability and combat effectiveness of the tank, we offer a tank of the device described below.
        1. SERGE ANT
          SERGE ANT 8 September 2021 19: 42
          +10
          These are all flowers. Here, in my opinion, a berry
          Dear Joseph Vissarionovich, Wanting to defeat the hated German fascism and its army as soon as possible, I recommend the invention - KARAR - an armored light jumping machine. The constructive, tactical and combat features of Karara are as follows.
          DESIGN: Steel ball-shaped tower, reinforced on six legs. The legs are the undercarriage, receiving movement from the motor located in the turret. Moving Karara occurs by jumping from 5 to 20 meters. The jump comes from the work of the motor. Its power is transmitted to the supporting legs through the clutch A and the connecting rod B. The connecting rod, resting on the head of the upper part of the foot, throws the body of Karar forward in the desired direction. Two connecting rods rest simultaneously on two adjacent legs. At the time of the jump the other four legs are selected. Before jumping in the desired direction, the tower turns. The rotation is carried out by the motor. There are six sectors in total.
          Managed by Karar by one person sitting inside a tower in a swivel chair. The driver is also a shooter. The height of Karara to 3 meters, the diameter of the tower to 1,5 meters. Six support and mobility of Carara legs, shaped like a six-pointed star with a diameter of up to 3,5 meters.
          1. kalibr
            8 September 2021 20: 15
            +9
            No, this is not the most ... the most tracked vehicle with hundreds of nozzles spraying fire in millions of degrees. "Idea" - I give, they say, this idea to you, Comrade Stalin, and with it the power over the world. And you know with your wisdom how to prevent the nozzles from melting! - In my book "The Best Tanks of the World", the entire text of this opus is given.
        2. Catfish
          Catfish 8 September 2021 19: 47
          +9
          Well, everything is clear with the People's Commissar, there was no need for education, but an unbending will to carry out orders, it is difficult to say which was more of him, benefit or harm. request
          But the bottom two "designers" surpassed even the ever-memorable Lebedenko, such a good "step back", I wonder if they were not repressed by any chance?
        3. Intruder
          Intruder 9 September 2021 19: 01
          +2
          In the war, there was a boom in tank projects.
          And not only on earth, there was this boom !? wink
          The terms of reference for the development of a cannon aircraft appeared in the United States in January 1937 and provided for armament with a caliber of no more than 75 mm, with a moderate rate of fire and unitary cartridges. By October 1938, the US Artillery Corps was initiating an acceleration of work on the topic. It was necessary to find a suitable carrier aircraft for the installation of a 75-mm cannon with the necessary set of sighting equipment and gun control. From the point of view of the gunners, this problem did not present any difficulties. Indeed, at first glance, the military, far from aviation, there was no problem to mount the cannon on a sufficiently large aircraft, while ensuring the possibility of aiming it in a small range in the vertical and horizontal planes, as well as supplying ammunition with delayed fuses.






          The 75-mm aircraft cannons as part of the American aviation were used in combat only on the assault versions of the Mitchell B-25G and B-25H bombers, as well as on their naval versions of the PBJ-1H. In the Pacific theater of operations, cannon versions were used in the 100th squadron of the 42nd bomber group of the 13th air fleet; 498 Squadron 345 Bomber Group. In all four squadrons of the 38th bomber group √ 822; 823; 71 and 405. In Southeast Asia, cannon "Mitchells" flew as part of four squadrons of the 341st bomber group √ 11; 490; 22 and 491st. Several B-25Gs were even included in the 418th Night Fighter Squadron in the East Indies. In addition to the Mitchells, 75-mm M5 cannons were installed on Douglas A-26В "Invader" bombers. And on one of them, the A-26V-5, the M10 cannon was also tested. In addition to them, 75-mm armament was also planned for the super-heavy fighters Lockheed XP-58 "Chain Lightning" and the Curtiss XP-71, which remained in the project. At the end of World War II, the lightweight 75-mm M5 cannon under the new designation M6 was installed almost unchanged on the new M24 tank. Thus, the evolution of the old French cannon of birth at the end of the 19th century, having begun "on the ground", ended there.
      2. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 8 September 2021 19: 43
        0
        Hello, Konstantin.
        I don’t know, I don’t know ... It is one thing to give commands to two towers and another to give five! laughing
        As for me, the T - 35 is a purely ceremonial car.
        Have you heard the legend why the Germans considered our tanks from "raw" steel, and not from armor? Her, just the QMS is credited.
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 8 September 2021 19: 52
          +3
          Hi Igor. hi
          So in all countries these monsters were abandoned in favor of mobility as one of the decisive advantages of the tank.
          But if you haven't heard the legend, tell us.
          1. kalibr
            8 September 2021 20: 11
            +5
            They didn't manage to put the hatch on the armor steel tank! They put it out of iron. The tank was hit. At night, the Finns came, tore off the hatch, made an analysis - but ordinary iron. They sent it to the Germans. Those are shocked. It means that they do not break through because of the thickness. And since they had a low opinion of the Russians, it quite suited them. So they reported upstairs ...
            1. The leader of the Redskins
              The leader of the Redskins 8 September 2021 20: 16
              0
              Truly so, Vyacheslav Olegovich. I read about this legend during the Soviet Union. I am not responsible for the accuracy
            2. Laksamana besar
              Laksamana besar 8 September 2021 23: 08
              +4
              Expose the legend:
              On December 19, 1939, the SMK and T-100 received the task to support our units, which broke through into the depths of the Finnish fortifications in the Hottinen area. Both vehicles stepped forward, accompanied by five T-28 tanks. The tanks were already far in the depths of the enemy's defenses, when a strong explosion thundered under the forward-moving SMK. A T-100 and one T-28 stopped next to the wrecked tank, and the other four vehicles went ahead and disappeared around the bend. The SMK crew tried to save the tank, connected the broken tracks, but failed to start the car. Numerous attempts of the T-100 to tow the damaged SMK were not crowned with success: because of the icy conditions, the "weave" tracks slipped and it was not possible to move the tank. It was not possible to move the QMS and the joint efforts of the "hundred" and the remaining T-28. For five hours, the tanks fought in the depths of the Finnish positions. In this battle sergeant Mogilchenko was seriously wounded and the driver Ignatiev was slightly wounded. Having shot all the ammunition, the QMS crew moved to the T-100. The overloaded "weaving" (with 15 crew members!), Accompanied by a T-28 tank, returned to the location of the 20th tank brigade. For this battle, the crews of the vehicles were awarded orders and medals.

              The loss of an experienced tank angered the head of ABTU D.G. Pavlova. By his personal order on December 20, 1939, a company of the 167th MRB and the 37th engineer company, reinforced with two guns and seven T-28 tanks, were allocated to save the secret combat vehicle. The detachment was commanded by Captain Nikulenko. The detachment managed to break through the Finnish nadolby at 100-150 m, where it was met with strong artillery and machine gun fire. Having lost 47 people killed and wounded, the detachment retreated to its original positions, not following the order.

              The damaged SMK remained in the depths of the Finnish positions until the end of February 1940. It was possible to inspect it only on February 26, after the breakthrough of the main strip of the "Mannerheim Line". In early March 1940, with the help of six T-28 tanks, the SMK was towed to the Perk-Yarvi station and disassembled was sent to the Kirov plant.

              As for the story with the ill-fated manhole cover, all this is pure fantasy.

              Firstly, the cover was made of armor steel, like the rest of the tank.

              Secondly, during the liberation of the captured area and the inspection of the tank, the cover was in place.

              And thirdly, the Finnish intelligence officers did not need, risking their lives, to penetrate the QMS and twist something from it. The car was parked in the depths of the Finnish positions and, if necessary, they could easily disassemble the tank into parts and take it out. After all, they managed, with the help of captured tankers, to repair and tow two T-28s to the rear, and as spare parts for them, they were able to remove and take away from many tanks, knocked out in the same battle as the SMK, not only optical instruments, radio stations, elements of the internal equipment, but also towers, engines, radiators, gearboxes, etc.

              Undoubtedly, the Finnish command as trophies was primarily interested in serial T-28s, which could be restored and used, rather than some unknown type of vehicle, standing alone 50 meters from the headquarters of the Khottinen fortified area.
              1. kalibr
                9 September 2021 06: 39
                +2
                Nobody argues with that. But it was written in the book "Combat Vehicle Designer". The author is a team of authors from the Kirov Plant, headed by Popov. I don’t remember - it went like a factory bike or as a reliable fact, but it was written that way.
        2. Kuroneko
          Kuroneko 9 September 2021 01: 05
          +4
          The ceremonial cars were Nb.Fz. They were entirely made of non-armor steel, and initially had no practical application. Purely scare. With the T-35, everything is different. They tortured him for a long time, but in his concept he was simply late. The Soviet doctrine also changed (the tactics of a deep offensive operation - by the way, thanks to Christie and his born genius BT), and simply the same Spanish War showed everyone how to fight and how vulnerable the old, interwar tanks are. By the way, the Germans brought the blitzkrieg out of this - making a maneuver as the basis. The French began to glue tanks with anti-cannon armor. The Angles decided to sit on two chairs.
        3. 2 Level Advisor
          2 Level Advisor 9 September 2021 06: 58
          +2
          about the t-35 I read a review on it who fought in the war - the gun turrets had their own commander - an officer and they acted at their own discretion in the battle tank - he only asked the general direction .. by the way, the veteran wrote - that a normal tank was at the beginning of the war, but with difficult and expensive to repair .. + heavy
      3. hohol95
        hohol95 8 September 2021 20: 01
        +4
        Together with the QMS, there was also "his brother" T-100!
      4. hohol95
        hohol95 8 September 2021 20: 04
        +5
        By the way, this is it, the T-100, in your photo!
        He had rubber bands on his rollers. And the SMK had rollers without bandages !!!
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 8 September 2021 21: 11
          +7
          Exactly! smile
          The difference in the chassis is clearly visible here. And not only.
          T-100

          QMS
  7. Kuroneko
    Kuroneko 8 September 2021 19: 43
    +7
    Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Given that the Americans started with

    That's not where they started. And not even from the fact that I am now praying. Although he is also the same kind, and was considered average tank. In fact, they started with a copy of the rhombic British tanks.
    1. kalibr
      8 September 2021 20: 08
      +5
      About the "Long Eight" will be!
    2. Essex62
      Essex62 9 September 2021 11: 12
      +3
      Why so. Forerunner of Stewart, a very elegant machine.
  8. kalibr
    8 September 2021 20: 16
    +5
    Quote: SERGE ant
    what kind of engineering thinking and education did this people's commissar have?

    Such were our people's commissars!
  9. Vavilov
    Vavilov 8 September 2021 20: 49
    +5
    all these fantasies crashed on biodefense request in space, they have the very place, and even then they should be sent somewhere, to a neighboring galaxy for research
  10. dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky 8 September 2021 20: 53
    +3
    Why does a tank need an engine resource of 4000 km without refueling? He lives on the front line for no more than 3 days. How much will he roll during this time? And over long distances it is still carried on a railway platform. An example of an idiotic problem statement.
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 8 September 2021 21: 22
      +6
      You do not quite correctly assess the situation. At that time, it was believed that nuclear charges would destroy the lion's share of equipment and living personnel, and therefore the stake was placed on a few supertanks, which would put the final point in the confrontation after the exchange of nuclear cuffs.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 9 September 2021 14: 38
      +3
      Quote: dub0vitsky
      Why does a tank need an engine resource of 4000 km without refueling? He lives on the front line for no more than 3 days. How much will he roll during this time? And over long distances it is still carried on a railway platform.

      When entering a breakthrough and further actions behind enemy lines, will tanks also go on railway platforms? wink
      It’s not tanks fighting, structures fighting. ©
      The range at one refueling is more than critical for a tank. Because it determines not only how long one tank will pass, but also what kind of rear must be regularly equipped in a tank formation so that it can fulfill the tasks assigned to it.
      And this rear is needed no matter how long one tank lives. Because tanks come and go, and they always eat fuel. And the less the tank appetite, the less fuel tankers they need, the less frequent stops are needed for refueling, and the higher the unit's march speed. Moreover, the more compact the rear, the higher the speed of the march of the connection as a whole, and the less forces will have to be diverted to guard the rear. Because the rear areas of the motorized mechanized units are the main target of the enemy - they are a "soft" target, and their destruction by 146% leads to a decrease in the power and speed of movement of the motorized mechanized units up to a stop. And also the rear are remarkably able to block their own communications - and after all, the infantry should follow the tanks and go along them.
      What is the "range of a tank" is clearly seen from the Manchurian operation, when, even without the enemy's influence, after 2-3 days tank brigades, having used up fuel, grind off to the battalions, and after 5-6 days to the companies.
      1. stalkerwalker
        stalkerwalker 9 September 2021 14: 52
        +1
        Quote: Alexey RA
        The range at one refueling is more than critical for a tank. Because it determines not only how long one tank will pass, but also what kind of rear it is necessary to have in a tank formation so that it can fulfill the tasks assigned to it.

        There are examples when both the lack of the possibility of refueling, and the small resource of engines, both factory and already due to the development thereof, tank operations of the Red Army in 42-43. stopped ahead of schedule, without reaching the targets.
  11. Kuroneko
    Kuroneko 8 September 2021 20: 57
    +4
    Quote: Laksamana Besar

    25-ton tank Grotte TG-1, marked the beginning of the development of the T-35 tank:

    From which side does the TG-1 belong to the T-35? Independent - yes, it still has a certain relationship. And the Soviet tank builders knew about him.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 8 September 2021 21: 24
      +5
      Indipendence - yes, it still has a certain relationship.

      In my opinion, too, not very ...
      1. Kuroneko
        Kuroneko 8 September 2021 22: 01
        +4
        Soviet designers have significantly improved his idea. The problem with the T-35 was that it remained a wonderful land dreadnought, but only for the First World War. Generals love to prepare for past wars. If the T-35 had hit the fields of that war, it would have made a rustle. = 3
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 8 September 2021 22: 11
          +3
          Generals love to prepare for past wars.

          The old truth is that this also applies to admirals. laughing
          Here's a T-35 on the fields of that war

          This is already to the stories about the "Papadans", and let it be better to immediately get the T-72.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 9 September 2021 14: 43
            +3
            Quote: Sea Cat
            This is already to the stories about the "Papadans", and let it be better to immediately get the T-72.

            Nafig-nafig. In the T-35, the then engineers and personnel will at the very least figure it out. And even the supply with repairs will be able to establish. Because the first problem of the hitman is where to get the cartridges, and how to repair the out of order.
            And the T-72 will be the same for them sufficiently advanced technology indistinguishable from magic ©. smile
            1. stalkerwalker
              stalkerwalker 9 September 2021 14: 46
              +2
              Quote: Alexey RA
              ... Because the first problem of the hitman is where to get the cartridges, and how to repair the out of order.
              And the T-72 for them will be that very advanced technology, indistinguishable from magic.

              Poorly, you know the victims - they drag everything with them - both equipment, and shells for them, and blueprints, and technologies, and the tanks themselves are modernized, and then they themselves fight ...
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 9 September 2021 15: 07
                +7
                Quote: stalkerwalker
                Poorly, you know the victims - they drag everything with them - both equipment, and shells for them, and blueprints, and technologies, and the tanks themselves are modernized, and then they themselves fight ...

                Ja, ja ... pomnitsa, on "snowballs" somehow they calculated that in order to organize the production of a sample of weapons at least from the times of the late USSR, such as a tank or a helicopter, the victim would need to keep in his brain about a railway carriage of drawings for the product itself. And then there is also the railway documentation for materials, components, machine tools for production and machines for the production of machine tools. smile
                1. kalibr
                  9 September 2021 18: 23
                  +1
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  And then another railway documentation for materials, components, machines for

                  That's right and it's very funny!
                2. The comment was deleted.
                3. Andrey NM
                  Andrey NM 14 September 2021 08: 12
                  +1
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  you will need to keep in the brain approximately a railway carriage of drawings for the product itself

                  And then five more cars with permission cards and the same number for changes and deviations from the CD :).
        2. ALEXEY TSENTILLO
          ALEXEY TSENTILLO 17 September 2021 15: 15
          0
          He would not aim anything - he was knocked out by 75 mm cannons, and the weak engine and TD would not have allowed him to turn around
  12. Undecim
    Undecim 8 September 2021 22: 02
    +4
    In this drawing by a modern artist, we see a heavy tank M6 (above) and one of its subsequent modifications - the M6A2E1 tank


    It seems that the artist did not guess the proportions. In the photo, the tank looks somewhat different.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 8 September 2021 22: 18
      +5
      Usually the answer to this is - Well, what are you, my dear, just an Artist SEES THIS.
      In short, it is easy to offend a creative person. laughing
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 8 September 2021 22: 25
        +3
        The artist SEES THAT.

        This thesis does not apply to an illustrator.
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 8 September 2021 22: 31
          +6
          I agree, but illustrators are very different. request
          1. Gato
            Gato 9 September 2021 00: 31
            +4
            I agree, but illustrators are very different.

            It all depends on what style the artist creates. wassat
      2. vadimtt
        vadimtt 9 September 2021 09: 06
        +3
        What a cool picture! I would call it "Padded M1A1 Abrams on the outskirts of Baghdad" hi
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 9 September 2021 16: 30
          +3
          The same thing occurred to me. That's what an artist of genius means! smile
    2. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 9 September 2021 04: 45
      +1
      Minor inaccuracies are forgivable, but the skirt of the "goose" was one-piece, yes, like that of the M6, and this is a mess.

      And just in general, tank-building attempts of mattresses during WWII is an interesting topic. Suffice it to recall how they tortured poor T29, making him both T30 and T34. = _ =
      Perhaps, only the Anglo-Canadian Valentine survived the greater mockery. Moreover, it is surprisingly successful in all its guises: both with a tank (and increasing the caliber from 40 mm to 76 for a small light tank is not a huhry-muhry) and an ACS and a tank destroyer.
    3. kalibr
      9 September 2021 06: 43
      +1
      He didn't guess. Drawings are made from projections from Hunnicutt's book, and they are just brilliant.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 9 September 2021 07: 06
        +2
        He didn't guess.

        Drawings taken from projections from Hunnicutt's book

        So is the photo from the same book.
  13. dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky 8 September 2021 23: 11
    0
    Quote: Kuroneko
    You do not quite correctly assess the situation. At that time, it was believed that nuclear charges would destroy the lion's share of equipment and living personnel, and therefore the stake was placed on a few supertanks, which would put the final point in the confrontation after the exchange of nuclear cuffs.

    Error. I don’t know, yours, or you expressed someone else’s. After a nuclear bombardment, there is no need to finish off the survivors. And on this territory, thoroughly infected, there is nothing to do. Capture nuclear ashes? On the one hand, wait five hundred years for everything to calm down there, and on the other hand, these same five hundred years will be needed to restore their own economy. On the third hand, what, to capture the remaining and heal them, spending a scarce medicine on the enemy. wasting energy, while with your own ...... You are mistaken, you are all that AFTER you need to go somewhere, and move something at the borders, border posts, border outposts, and barbed wire. Of course, leave everything as it is on enemy territory, and let the living not think about anything, about any revenge and take care of their disabled and sick. Statistics of recent wars - five doctors and paramedics are busy with one wounded in the rear. Here, let them do business. And no one deals with one killed. The wounded is a burden for the country. Killed is just a loss.
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 9 September 2021 00: 39
      +2
      There were such performances. Even in the middle of the XNUMXth century, there was no understanding of the nature of radiation and its influence. Long term. It only became clear later. But what, even at the beginning of the century, both cocaine and heroin were considered quite harmless and useful drugs. For example. Well, even in World War II, many people dabbled in narcotic chocolates.
      1. kalibr
        9 September 2021 06: 44
        +1
        Quote: Kuroneko
        There were such performances. Even in the middle of the XNUMXth century, there was no understanding of the nature of radiation and its influence. Long term. It turned out only later. But what, even at the beginning of the century, both cocaine and heroin were considered quite harmless and useful drugs.

        + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
    2. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 9 September 2021 12: 55
      +1
      Quote: dub0vitsky
      Mistake.

      Well, yes. You are wrong. Completely and completely, and your opponent is completely correct. If you saw the posters from the then GO, and the then MO, you would know that the first protection against radiation was considered "to quickly leave the danger zone." That is, drive or run to the nearest river and quickly wash off the ash from yourself and your clothes. And that's all.
      Nobody understood the real danger of radiation damage, because THEN they thought that way and not otherwise. Shaking your fists after a fight is not the most sensible behavior. How old are you in general?)
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 9 September 2021 14: 51
      +1
      Quote: dub0vitsky
      After a nuclear bombardment, there is no need to finish off the survivors. And on this territory, thoroughly infected, there is nothing to do. Capture nuclear ashes?

      So there won't be a huge contaminated area. For two reasons - the lack of a sufficient number of SBCs to vitrify the entire territory of the enemy and the relative "purity" of the military atom (the level of radiation on the ground decreases approximately 10 times in time intervals equal to degrees 7). In the same Totsk exercises, the radiation level very quickly dropped to safe (for l / s on vehicles) values ​​everywhere, except for the epicenter zone.
      Therefore, "one tactical SBS per battalion in the defense zone" is the maximum possible. And then a lot of tasty things will remain, which would not hurt to capture.
  14. Reklastik
    Reklastik 8 September 2021 23: 15
    +1
    Fast-flying neutrons laughing laughing laughing laughing
  15. Kuroneko
    Kuroneko 9 September 2021 00: 30
    +4
    Quote: Sea Cat
    The T-35 is still relatively not such a monster as the SMK, although both of them did not go into the series.
    Did not understand. What is it like? The T-35 is the world's only SERIES five-tower tank. 63 units riveted, emnip.
  16. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 9 September 2021 12: 50
    +1
    It’s a pity that Hunter didn’t start building. It would be very interesting to look in metal.
  17. dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky 9 September 2021 14: 26
    +1
    Quote: Mikhail3
    Quote: dub0vitsky
    Mistake.

    Well, yes. You are wrong. Completely and completely, and your opponent is completely correct. If you saw the posters from the then GO, and the then MO, you would know that the first protection against radiation was considered "to quickly leave the danger zone." That is, drive or run to the nearest river and quickly wash off the ash from yourself and your clothes. And that's all.
    Nobody understood the real danger of radiation damage, because THEN they thought that way and not otherwise. Shaking your fists after a fight is not the most sensible behavior. How old are you in general?)

    And where is he right? The fact that on a radiation-protected tank to rush to the epicenter and finish off the survivors? ? Do you understand what this eccentric is writing about?
  18. dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky 9 September 2021 14: 44
    +1
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: dub0vitsky
    Why does a tank need an engine resource of 4000 km without refueling? He lives on the front line for no more than 3 days. How much will he roll during this time? And over long distances it is still carried on a railway platform.

    When entering a breakthrough and further actions behind enemy lines, will tanks also go on railway platforms? wink
    It’s not tanks fighting, structures fighting. ©
    The range at one refueling is more than critical for a tank. Because it determines not only how long one tank will pass, but also what kind of rear must be regularly equipped in a tank formation so that it can fulfill the tasks assigned to it.
    And this rear is needed no matter how long one tank lives. Because tanks come and go, and they always eat fuel. And the less the tank appetite, the less fuel tankers they need, the less frequent stops are needed for refueling, and the higher the unit's march speed. Moreover, the more compact the rear, the higher the speed of the march of the connection as a whole, and the less forces will have to be diverted to guard the rear. Because the rear areas of the motorized mechanized units are the main target of the enemy - they are a "soft" target, and their destruction by 146% leads to a decrease in the power and speed of movement of the motorized mechanized units up to a stop. And also the rear are remarkably able to block their own communications - and after all, the infantry should follow the tanks and go along them.
    What is the "range of a tank" is clearly seen from the Manchurian operation, when, even without the enemy's influence, after 2-3 days tank brigades, having used up fuel, grind off to the battalions, and after 5-6 days to the companies.

    "Suha, theory, my friend, and the tree of life is forever green." Faus. Goethe. Of course, 4000 km is the minimum you need. And if you think about it, the supply bases for these nuclear monsters need to be set up in one place, on a different physical, economic, special basis, and all the rest of the equipment that goes with them accompanied, and without which they are zero without a wand, as before, through the usual 50 kilometers? Oh well. They do not need to replenish their ammunition. For the crew too. What for? Let them engage in cannibalism or privateering in the areas where they were sent by the Motherland. You wrote the word "STRUCTURE" with such taste that I thought that you are writing about these five or six nuclear tanks, implying that everything else is not included in the STRUCTURE.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 9 September 2021 15: 01
      +1
      Quote: dub0vitsky
      And if you think about it, the supply bases for these nuclear monsters need to be set up in one place, on a different physical, economic, special basis, and all the rest of the equipment that goes with them, and without which they are zero without a wand, as before, through the usual 50 kilometers? Oh well. They do not need to replenish their ammunition. For the crew too

      It remains - I do not argue about this. But if we manage to throw out at least those TMZs that are responsible for supplying fuel to atomic tanks and vehicles based on them from the rear of the TD / MPD staff, this will significantly reduce the rear. And it will reduce the amount of supplies that need to be supplied to the nearest stations for supply. This is especially important for the Yankees with their eternally inflated rear (I met the ratio for the American army in WWII for the American army - "twenty rear personnel per soldier").
  19. dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky 9 September 2021 15: 26
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: dub0vitsky
    And if you think about it, the supply bases for these nuclear monsters need to be set up in one place, on a different physical, economic, special basis, and all the rest of the equipment that goes with them, and without which they are zero without a wand, as before, through the usual 50 kilometers? Oh well. They do not need to replenish their ammunition. For the crew too

    It remains - I do not argue about this. But if we manage to throw out at least those TMZs that are responsible for supplying fuel to atomic tanks and vehicles based on them from the rear of the TD / MPD staff, this will significantly reduce the rear. And it will reduce the amount of supplies that need to be supplied to the nearest stations for supply. This is especially important for the Yankees with their eternally inflated rear (I met the ratio for the American army in WWII for the American army - "twenty rear personnel per soldier").

    Yes, are you familiar with arithmetic? What volumes of TANK fuel are you dealing with if you have a couple of dozen atomic monsters? What about the same TANK fuel for all kinds of armored vehicles with the same engines? Why the hell to bother with stupidity? Or do you think that tens of thousands of tanks will be replaced by atomic ones? The navel will not be untied in a country that has conceived this?
  20. dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky 9 September 2021 15: 32
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: dub0vitsky
    After a nuclear bombardment, there is no need to finish off the survivors. And on this territory, thoroughly infected, there is nothing to do. Capture nuclear ashes?

    So there won't be a huge contaminated area. For two reasons - the lack of a sufficient number of SBCs to vitrify the entire territory of the enemy and the relative "purity" of the military atom (the level of radiation on the ground decreases approximately 10 times in time intervals equal to degrees 7). In the same Totsk exercises, the radiation level very quickly dropped to safe (for l / s on vehicles) values ​​everywhere, except for the epicenter zone.
    Therefore, "one tactical SBS per battalion in the defense zone" is the maximum possible. And then a lot of tasty things will remain, which would not hurt to capture.

    Totsk tests led to a massive and, so far secret, retirement. Moreover, for a short-term period, Zhukov was interested in how much and what would happen with an OFFENSIVE THROUGH ...., and not staying indefinitely in the occupied territory .... The relatively clean (in your opinion) state of the environment in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, gave impressive results. Including the post-war health consequences in the third generation of victims. Are you not familiar with the traces of the Chernobyl tragedy? We in Penza, had the good fortune to live in a clean zone, taking advantage of additional benefits. Until 2010. I am surprised at idiots who think that the enemy in the rear has a lot of tasty things. Without thinking that he himself will have to bury millions of his fellow citizens in nuclear graves, vitrifying and lowering them to a kilometer depth ...
  21. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 9 September 2021 19: 37
    +1
    Such an EH would fit a typewriter like the German "Rat", if they were ever seriously even planned in the metal. For tanks weighing less than 100 tons, this is a useless matter, because in addition to powerful external protection, powerful internal protection is needed, separating the crew and the reactor, and the reactor itself is made using technologies of the highest reliability. That is, in fact, the reactor would have to be placed and protected so that even if the entire tank with the crew was bent into the trash, the reactor would at least remain satisfactorily sealed and self-damping. Which is in itself a fantasy for the technology of the 20th century, and even now, in general. The more heavy equipment meets such conditions, allowing exclusive booking of any of its parts without weight distortions. A sort of land cruiser)
    The problem of a long stroke also does not solve other problems of the tank's crew - namely, the problem of the service life of the tracks, the problem of power supply, cooling-lubrication (probably). All this for large motorized units will still have to be brought up, that is, these tanks will get some gain in the throw in theory, but it will not be as impressive as one might think at first glance.
    On the whole, of course, all these ideas were deeply utopian.
  22. Saladine
    Saladine 10 September 2021 18: 47
    0
    The same Hunter
  23. The comment was deleted.