Military Review

ZiS-2 57 mm: The gun, the appearance of which is associated with German disinformation

159

During the Great Patriotic War, there was enough misinformation and so-called stuffing on both sides. Disinformation often played a significant role in getting what you want from your adversary. Of course, it didn’t always work. But it did happen.


There is an opinion that some types of weapons, both in the Red Army and in the Wehrmacht, appeared on the basis of misinformation thrown in by intelligence. One such opinion concerns the appearance in the Soviet Union of the ZiS-2, a 57-mm anti-tank gun.

Soviet designers were given the task of creating a cannon, the ability to cope with tankswith an armor of at least 60 mm. At the same time, the opinion is expressed that the very appearance of this technical task is connected with the disinformation work of the German side. Some experts believe that it was the German side that made a pseudo-leak about the alleged appearance of armored vehicles with such characteristics at the Wehrmacht.

As a result, a 57 mm cannon was created, but its power (and hence the final costs) turned out to be too large for the purposes that were available at that time. However, this was in 1941. Later, the Wehrmacht actually acquired heavier tanks, which became quite suitable targets for the ZiS-2.

Of course, there are other versions about the appearance of the 57-mm anti-tank gun in the early 1940s in the USSR and the reasons for its rather long “non-use” for its intended purpose. At the same time, supporters of different versions have their own "indisputable" arguments for their own righteousness.

The Starina channel tells about the gun:

159 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 12 January 2022 17: 58
    +13
    We tried to post the video.

    It was not the power that turned out to be excessive, but the reserve impact was low.
    1. hohol95
      hohol95 12 January 2022 19: 04
      +6
      Did the British 6-pounder also have a low armor action?
      And the German 50mm RaK-38?
      1. Sancho_SP
        Sancho_SP 12 January 2022 19: 45
        +2
        Done right. That is why pak-40 appeared in three times in large circulation. Like the ZIS-3, for example.
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 12 January 2022 19: 54
          +3
          RaK-40 appeared because the RaK-38 coped with Soviet, British and American tanks with "some tension"!
          Naturally, she punched models of light tanks "at once".
          Namely, light tanks were the main ones at the beginning of WWII!
          But in France the "Queen of the battlefield" infantry tank Mk.II "Matilda" "suddenly" appeared, and in the USSR they had to face the KV-1.
          And naturally the French B-1 and S-35 became a problem for the Germans, but surmountable due to the use of the entire arsenal of Wehrmacht artillery.
          1. Alf
            Alf 12 January 2022 21: 01
            +2
            Quote: hohol95
            But in France "suddenly" the "Queen of the battlefield" infantry tank Mk.II "Matilda" appeared

            And Valentines.
            1. hohol95
              hohol95 12 January 2022 21: 48
              +4
              Infantry tank Mk.III "Valentine" in France ???
              Okay, even "Churchili" on the beaches of Dieppe.
              But "Valentines" near Aras???
              Where does the information come from?
              good
              1. Alf
                Alf 12 January 2022 22: 12
                +4
                Quote: hohol95
                Infantry tank Mk.III "Valentine" in France ???
                Okay, even "Churchili" on the beaches of Dieppe.
                But "Valentines" near Aras???
                Where does the information come from?
                good

                I'm not talking about Arras, about sultry, hot Africa.
                1. hohol95
                  hohol95 12 January 2022 22: 29
                  +5
                  request
                  Eh, but I thought ...
                  drinks
                  The Valentine, with its 60mm frontal armor, wasn't bad.
        2. Zug
          Zug 13 January 2022 10: 21
          +2
          Pak 40 is Pto and Zis 3 is a general military weapon.
          1. Sancho_SP
            Sancho_SP 13 January 2022 10: 53
            0
            And what was in the "Soviet PTO" in 41-42, if not divisional guns? Forty-heels?
            1. Zug
              Zug 13 January 2022 18: 11
              +2
              I'm talking about specialized weapons, which the ZIS 3 was not. ZIS2 is just an anti-tank gun
              1. Sancho_SP
                Sancho_SP 13 January 2022 19: 56
                +1
                Anti-tank cannon units are no longer about guns, but about tactics of use.

                Universal guns (zis-3, f-22, etc.) can be armed with anti-tank units in a regular and effective manner. That is why the zis-3 universal gun replaced the zis-2 everywhere until the 43rd.

                The non-universal gun ZIS-2 with a non-standard caliber, weak armor effect and a weak high-explosive fragmentation projectile had to be returned after Kursk only because it was faster than developing another gun of a larger caliber. Nevertheless, already in the 44th, the BS-3 appeared as a heavy towed weapon, as well as 85-mm self-propelled guns in commercial quantities.
    2. Zug
      Zug 13 January 2022 10: 20
      +4
      They could not just make its barrel - in gross production, the percentage of rejects reached 50 percent, there were problems with ammunition. The problem was solved only in the second half of 1943 with the import of American machine tools.
      1. Omskgasmyas
        Omskgasmyas 14 January 2022 18: 22
        +1
        There was a catastrophic shortage of machines for drilling long thin pipes. And those that were at the factories in the 41st drilled barrels for anti-aircraft guns. Therefore, the marriage during drilling with old machines reached 90%, and the resource of the barrels did not exceed 100 shots. Therefore, the release of the gun was stopped until the 43rd year, until the appearance of shielded 4s and the Tiger with the Panther. And all the anti-tank guns of large calibers were abandoned by the retreating Red Army, due to their inability to move on horseback. There were no high-speed and powerful tractors in the Red Army for the entire war.
    3. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 13 January 2022 16: 01
      +1
      ... and they wrote that the production of such barrels for the industry of the USSR was problematic and their resource was small
      1. Sancho_SP
        Sancho_SP 13 January 2022 19: 58
        0
        It would be NECESSARY - there would be production. For tank and aircraft engines with marriage and a resource at the beginning of the war, everything was even worse, but there, in the absence of suitable alternatives, it was impossible to produce through.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 13 January 2022 22: 40
          0
          Quote: Sancho_SP
          It would be NECESSARY - there would be production. For tank and aircraft engines with marriage and a resource at the beginning of the war, everything was even worse, but there, in the absence of suitable alternatives, it was impossible to produce through.



          There were more urgent 76mm cannons with ± the same provisions and a good round of projectiles…. And not so strict requirements for pipes
  2. Fedorov
    Fedorov 12 January 2022 18: 02
    +7
    I think it has nothing to do with misinformation. USSR - they designed and built powerful tanks, as they assumed that the enemy would have something similar. Otsedov and the corresponding cannon were organized. As far as I am informed, the T-3 was punched through. from any angle. T-4 in the forehead is easy from 500 meters.
    1. soul
      soul 12 January 2022 19: 20
      +4
      Earlier it was said that in 1941 the production of the ZIS-2 was stopped due to the fact that it was technologically complex. It's a pity of course.
      1. kytx
        kytx 12 January 2022 19: 44
        +1
        It was also expensive and redundant for German tanks of that period. But then its production had to be restored
        1. Sahalinets
          Sahalinets 13 January 2022 02: 43
          +3
          Yes, there is no "redundant" powerful weapon! Someone once blurted out this nonsense about the ZIS-2, but the public repeats it. The ZIS-2 could hit any German tank of 1941 from two kilometers, and there were real examples of this. But 53-K could not cope with the frontal armor of the Pz.Kpfw.III and Pz.Kpfw.IV even from 500 meters!
          It's just that the production of long barrels turned out to be difficult, so they decided to use quantity rather than quality.
          1. kytx
            kytx 13 January 2022 08: 39
            +1
            E- economy.
            Why an expensive gun when a cheaper and simpler one does just fine?
            1. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 13 January 2022 10: 09
              0
              Quote: kytx
              E- economy.
              Why an expensive gun when a cheaper and simpler one does just fine?

              Why shoot from 2 kilometers, if you can from 500 m. Nobody thought about the loss
              1. Alf
                Alf 13 January 2022 20: 32
                -1
                Quote: Pilat2009
                Why shoot from 2 kilometers, if you can from 500 m.

                Isolated cases. The Germans, for all their preparation, fired at 500-600 meters. Isolated cases only confirm the exceptions. Look at my plate below.
            2. vl903
              vl903 13 January 2022 19: 06
              0
              Quote: kytx
              E- economy.
              Why an expensive gun when a cheaper and simpler one does just fine?

              it wasn’t even a matter of price, but even worse, physically they couldn’t make many trunks
            3. Sahalinets
              Sahalinets 14 January 2022 02: 11
              +1
              This cheap cannon of yours couldn't handle it! The Germans directly write that forty-five were not dangerous for tanks ...
              1. kytx
                kytx 14 January 2022 03: 49
                +2
                It's not about 45k at all.
                And further. 45ku was used until the end of the war, probably out of stupidity, like the Germans did their 37mm. what
                1. Sahalinets
                  Sahalinets 14 January 2022 04: 06
                  0
                  The 45 mm was the main anti-tank gun. In 1941-42 it was 53-K, in which even the tabular armor penetration did not allow hitting three and fours in the forehead. Then the M-42 appeared, only the Germans increased their armor to 80 mm in the frontal part. I'm not even talking about panthers and tigers.
                  Used for lack of a better one. Yes, they could punch a tank into the side or hit an armored personnel carrier, but was that really enough?
          2. faiver
            faiver 13 January 2022 13: 12
            0
            The ZIS-2 could hit any German tank of 1941 from two kilometers, and there were real examples of this.
            - it could, in the event that it got there, taking into account our shitty sights, as well as the mass retirement of personnel PTOs in 41-42, real examples are more of an exception than a rule ... hi
            1. kytx
              kytx 14 January 2022 03: 52
              0
              It's not even about the qualifications of the calculations, it's just a problem to hit a moving target from 2 km.
      2. Zug
        Zug 13 January 2022 10: 23
        +4
        They could not make barrels on it. Already wrote above that in gross production, the percentage of rejects was up to 50 percent. Problems with ammunition. Even as they did not try to Kursk, they did not have time.
    2. Peter is not the first
      Peter is not the first 12 January 2022 19: 43
      +7
      I think it has nothing to do with misinformation. USSR - they designed and built powerful tanks, as they assumed that the enemy would have something similar.

      I agree that there was no misinformation, but there was real information about the beginning of the development, in 1937-1938, of a German heavy tank. From the project of which the Pz.Kpfw. VI Tiger.
      Of course, not immediately with 100 mm armor, but even the initial sketches already had armor of fifty millimeters. So the ZiS-2 was an adequate response to the real projects of a potential enemy.
    3. expert
      expert 13 January 2022 01: 33
      0
      As far as I remember, this (the excess power of the gun) and the increased complexity of production were the reasons for the refusal to produce the ZiS-2 in the early years of the war.
    4. Ml. Sergeant
      Ml. Sergeant 14 January 2022 21: 47
      0
      Everyone said right
  3. vl903
    vl903 12 January 2022 18: 07
    +4
    great gun. wunderwaffe of the USSR. had it been in the right quantities, the blitzkrieg would have ended in 1941. besides punching, apparently it still had little flatness - it was easy to hit.
    But the weak technology for the production of long barrels in the USSR made it impossible to produce it in commercial quantities. except for the barrel, this is the same 76mm cannon. so we completely switched to 76mm instead of her.
    when in 1943 under the lend-lease they received machines from the United States, it became no longer relevant.
    1. Flooding
      Flooding 12 January 2022 18: 46
      +2
      Quote: vl903
      except for the barrel, this is the same 76mm cannon. so we completely switched to 76mm instead of her.

      what is "the same"?
      ZIS-3?
      not only the barrel, but the entire swinging part
      and since chronologically the ZIS-2 was the first, it would be logical to say the opposite
      1. vl903
        vl903 12 January 2022 19: 31
        +6
        the number of 57mm barrels that could be produced was small, with a huge amount of scrap and therefore a huge consumption of metal, tools, machine-tool hours, man-hours. The same plant could produce multiples of 76mm guns with less consumption of valuable resources, machine-tool hours, tools and man-hours. 76mm also worked well for infantry. though the tanks are worse. all weighed and in 1941 chose the 76mm cannon for mass production. since during the war the expenditure of guns was also gigantic.
        1. Flooding
          Flooding 12 January 2022 19: 47
          +2
          again
          in the Red Army there was more than one type of gun in the caliber of 76 mm
          therefore, it was required to clarify that you mean ZIS-3
          since The ZIS-3 was created and began to be produced later than the ZIS-2, then write about the 57mm gun
          Quote: vl903
          except for the barrel, this is the same 76mm cannon

          not quite right
          it is more logical to write on the contrary - about the partial similarity of the ZIS-3

          otherwise I do not argue with you
          1. vl903
            vl903 12 January 2022 19: 58
            +1
            literally I don’t remember a hornbeam, but even before zis3 its factory was producing a 76mm gun. the technical complexity of the entire gun except for the barrel is approximately the same even for different brands of 76mm guns
            1. Zug
              Zug 13 January 2022 10: 27
              +2
              I think you are right. There is information on the number of defects in gross production. The gun was needed already in the spring of 1942. There were also problems with the ammunition. What character I do not remember exactly, it seems the projectile was not stable in flight (I apologize for the clumsy description)
        2. Alf
          Alf 12 January 2022 21: 05
          +5
          Quote: vl903
          the number of 57mm barrels that could be produced was small, with a huge amount of marriage

          In the production of 88-mm guns in 71 calibers, only 5 barrel was obtained from 1 blanks, 4 went into marriage and the Germans did not consider this a tragedy.
          Quote: vl903
          since during the war the expenditure of guns was also gigantic.

          The consumption of shells was gigantic, and 57-mm shells were produced in small quantities, especially at the beginning of the war and armor-piercing.
          1. vl903
            vl903 13 January 2022 06: 52
            +3
            Quote: Alf
            Quote: vl903
            the number of 57mm barrels that could be produced was small, with a huge amount of marriage

            In the production of 88-mm guns in 71 calibers, only 5 barrel was obtained from 1 blanks, 4 went into marriage and the Germans did not consider this a tragedy.
            Quote: vl903
            since during the war the expenditure of guns was also gigantic.

            The consumption of shells was gigantic, and 57-mm shells were produced in small quantities, especially at the beginning of the war and armor-piercing.

            yes you are absolutely right 1/5 was considered the norm in the production of long barrels. I read somewhere that the marriage in the production of 57mm reached 1/200, but here I was asked to confirm with a quote, I could not find where I read (((. shells are another argument, but possibly surmountable
            1. Zug
              Zug 13 January 2022 10: 28
              +1
              So I heard in a lecture by a historian that in gross production, marriage reached 50 percent ...
              1. vl903
                vl903 13 January 2022 10: 47
                +2
                Quote: Zug
                So I heard in a lecture by a historian that in gross production, marriage reached 50 percent ...

                is it vabsche or about high aspect ratio trunks?
                so the hulls of the tanks jarred during hardening and there, too, the marriage was sometimes large. this inevitably military technology is the peak of technical progress. to make a prodigy and what would be a lot and simply and cheaply is ppsh, ak47, t34, liberty, etc.
                1. Zug
                  Zug 13 January 2022 18: 12
                  +2
                  The rejection of barrels was large until the machines came from the USA. Although, um, I think even 50 percent. By the spring of 42 guns were needed like air ...
                  1. vl903
                    vl903 13 January 2022 18: 19
                    +1
                    if 50% of the marriage was they would probably have given the Stalin Prize. apparently it was worse. only there is no data how much the real marriage was.
                    1. Zug
                      Zug 13 January 2022 19: 09
                      +1
                      Well, about the documents, it seems like, according to Isaev, just 50 percent, although it is also surprising.
                      1. vl903
                        vl903 13 January 2022 19: 12
                        0
                        50% is it on American machines and already with established production by 1944 or before American machines?
                      2. Zug
                        Zug 13 January 2022 21: 35
                        0
                        Well, there is information about the supply of machine tools ..
                      3. vl903
                        vl903 13 January 2022 20: 30
                        0
                        and what is the name of Isaev's book? I want to read at my leisure
                2. Alf
                  Alf 13 January 2022 18: 14
                  +2
                  Quote: vl903
                  is it vabsche or about high aspect ratio trunks?

                  As far as I heard and read, it was just about the long-barrels.
                  Quote: vl903
                  to make a prodigy and what would be a lot and simply and cheaply is ppsh, ak47, t34, liberty, etc.

                  There is such an expression - "quantity is also quality". While another Wittmann burned 5 T-34s, another dozen T-34s bypassed him and broke through defenses in a couple of other places where the Tiger could not be physically at the same time, after which the crew blew up their armored car and stomped to the rear.
                  1. vl903
                    vl903 13 January 2022 18: 16
                    +1
                    quite right, this is what explained the choice of 76mm instead of 57mm for the production of 1941
                    1. Alf
                      Alf 13 January 2022 18: 26
                      +2
                      Quote: vl903
                      quite right, this is what explained the choice of 76mm instead of 57mm for the production of 1941

                      Not only. In 41, the 76-mm gun could both hit all types of tanks and almost all ground targets, while the 57-mm gun also hit all tanks, but it coped much worse with infantry targets.
                      1. vl903
                        vl903 13 January 2022 18: 50
                        +1
                        and the flatness and the amount of anticipation?
                        fight pto is a second duel. the fewer corrections the better.
                        Grabin understood this and therefore justified 76mm instead of 45mm with a bunch of arguments, including an excess capacity of 57mm. then this phrase was taken out of context and began to be used as the main argument, probably
                      2. Alf
                        Alf 13 January 2022 20: 20
                        +1
                        Quote: vl903
                        and the flatness and the amount of anticipation?

                        The counter question is the real distance of opening fire? Not more than 500 meters, with such a range the flatness is the same, and the lead is insignificant.
                        Here is an interesting fact - the range of destruction and, accordingly, the opening of fire of German anti-tank guns. Medium-caliber 75-mm worked at a distance of 500 meters.
                      3. vl903
                        vl903 14 January 2022 09: 44
                        0
                        in the discussion at Pasholok, people who studied or worked with ZIS2 and other VET spoke out. here they should be asked about comparing zis2 and zis3 in relation to.
                        I'm the usual sofa expert.
                        and for trunks - while there are no statistics on marriage, one cannot exclude the refusal to produce zis2 for subjective reasons
                      4. Alf
                        Alf 14 January 2022 18: 07
                        0
                        Quote: Alf
                        Quote: vl903
                        and the flatness and the amount of anticipation?

                        The counter question is the real distance of opening fire? Not more than 500 meters, with such a range the flatness is the same, and the lead is insignificant.
                        Here is an interesting fact - the range of destruction and, accordingly, the opening of fire of German anti-tank guns. Medium-caliber 75-mm worked at a distance of 500 meters.

                    2. kytx
                      kytx 14 January 2022 04: 03
                      0
                      It was the military who insisted on 76, and not Grabin, because of the high-explosive action.
            2. Alf
              Alf 13 January 2022 18: 09
              +1
              Quote: vl903
              yes you are absolutely right 1/5 was considered the norm in the production of long barrels. I read somewhere that the marriage in the production of 57mm reached 1/200, but here I was asked to confirm with a quote, I could not find where I read

              Unfortunately the same story.
    2. Fedorov
      Fedorov 12 January 2022 18: 50
      +1
      It was in 1943 that it was put into full production, and this does not apply to American machine tools. 45s with large long caliber were built successfully even then, for example.
      1. vl903
        vl903 12 January 2022 19: 34
        0
        the question is in the amount that could be produced physically with full exertion of forces. and the expenditure of resources on it. single barrels of large elongation could do, but they were gold and tens of thousands of barrels are needed for the war.
    3. smaug78
      smaug78 12 January 2022 19: 38
      -8
      The USSR already had a lot of wunderwaves, but it didn't help ...
      1. vl903
        vl903 12 January 2022 20: 01
        0
        Well, no matter how any war is a battle of wunderfawles, whatever one may say. the example of the Japanese shows that any banzai with a bare ass on a hedgehog is a dead number
        1. smaug78
          smaug78 12 January 2022 20: 18
          -3
          But the Germans in '41 did not have a wunderwolf ...
          1. vl903
            vl903 12 January 2022 20: 28
            +1
            grow older! and mg34, shtug, t3, t4, piece, messer, bismarck, enigma? full set of waffles !!!
            1. smaug78
              smaug78 12 January 2022 21: 07
              -3
              grow older! and mg34, shtug, t3, t4, piece, messer, bismarck, enigma? full set of waffles !!!
              compared to what? With T-34, KV -1 and 2, further down the list?
              1. vl903
                vl903 13 January 2022 06: 58
                0
                Quote: smaug78
                grow older! and mg34, shtug, t3, t4, piece, messer, bismarck, enigma? full set of waffles !!!
                compared to what? With T-34, KV -1 and 2, further down the list?

                compared to the world level. all these are masterpieces that influenced the development of world military technology.
                1. smaug78
                  smaug78 13 January 2022 17: 26
                  -2
                  And what has this technique influenced, besides the machine gun?
                  1. vl903
                    vl903 13 January 2022 17: 45
                    0
                    all but bismarck, a new type of war. the whole world is starting to pull up their technique to this level. Bismarck and Tirpitz together would have staged a blitzkrieg for Britain; Hitler hadn’t hurry up. Tirpitz pinned down the Angles and Amers with one presence.
                    tanks, planes, submarines, missiles - the whole world tried to make it better or better.
                    1. smaug78
                      smaug78 13 January 2022 17: 50
                      -2
                      all but bismarck, a new type of war. the whole world is starting to pull up their technique to this level.
                      What is the whole world, what to pull up to?
                      Bismarck and Tirpitz together would have staged a blitzkrieg for Britain; Hitler hadn’t hurry up.
                      A simple arithmetic calculation shows that you are wrong. Dear, you would have learned to begin with what a blitzkrieg is, otherwise empty cleverness does not paint anyone ...
                      1. vl903
                        vl903 13 January 2022 18: 55
                        +1
                        Well, sorry, the French army was impressed by German weapons, the Angles miraculously fled to their island, but you were not impressed)))
                      2. smaug78
                        smaug78 13 January 2022 20: 40
                        -2
                        Well, sorry, the French army was impressed by German weapons, the Angles miraculously fled to their island, but you were not impressed)))

                        all but bismarck, a new type of war. the whole world is starting to pull up their technique to this level.
                        Dear, do you even remember and understand the meaning of your texts? laughing
                      3. vl903
                        vl903 14 January 2022 09: 52
                        0
                        OK. if the whole world does not consider German technology to be crap, but you do, then name what in life you have done with your own hands that is technically outstanding. one about which in 70 years people in other countries will discuss the bad and or the excellent
                      4. Alf
                        Alf 13 January 2022 20: 34
                        +3
                        Quote: smaug78
                        What is the whole world, what to pull up to?

                        At least up to MG-42 and up to the intermediate cartridge.
            2. expert
              expert 13 January 2022 01: 45
              +2
              With all due respect, attributing the Ju87 Stuka, serially produced since September 1935 to the Wunderwaffe, is overkill.
              Even when the USSR brought from Germany a copy of combat aircraft for study, the Soviet specialists did not want to take it.
              It was already outdated by 1940.
              It was a mistake, though.
              The device was with a twist, the dive machine alone was expensive. The "footmen" filigree worked from a dive to point targets.
              1. vl903
                vl903 13 January 2022 07: 00
                +4
                the thing is an integral part of the blitzkrieg. it is impossible to overestimate
            3. Yarhann
              Yarhann 13 January 2022 10: 14
              +4
              the army wins, not the waffles. all the above mentioned was not even on the 41st year of waffle, especially bismarck)) who should they scare? unless defenseless caravans, which he did.
              The success of the beginning of the war in the USSR for Germany was in a powerful and relatively modern industry, which was further strengthened by the occupied countries and, of course, well-organized logistics - that is, the supply of manpower and equipment to the places of hostilities. But something went wrong, the industrial sector in the USSR was restored And began to give the front weapons, the logistics were adjusted no worse than the German one, and how would the outcome of the war be clear on this - a matter of time, which happened in the end.
              And the wunderwaflu was created by the Americans and applied to the Yapas in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
              1. vl903
                vl903 13 January 2022 10: 38
                +1
                WWII was already a war of technologies and as you rightly said, a war of economies and industry.
                The best army without a wunderwolf is cannon fodder.
                Bismarck had to collect the entire English fleet to drown. and he sank the finest ship in England with one shot.
                and if the USSR had not been a wunderwolf, it would not have survived
                1. Gembyh124
                  Gembyh124 13 January 2022 12: 11
                  +1
                  As for Bismarck, this is most likely luck!
                  1. vl903
                    vl903 13 January 2022 12: 27
                    0
                    Quote: Gembyh124
                    As for Bismarck, this is most likely luck!

                    Of course, it was not without luck. but guess the angles to make more armor where needed and there would be a completely different alignment
                2. The comment was deleted.
                  1. vl903
                    vl903 13 January 2022 12: 33
                    0
                    I can imagine how difficult it was to aim through the barrel, and even at that time there were usually two gunners on the horizon and vertical.
                    what were the losses in the ratio of 1 tank to 1 gun?
                    although it is clear that both in terms of resource and dimensions of maneuverability these were disposable batteries and unfortunately calculations
                3. tikhonov66
                  tikhonov66 13 January 2022 12: 58
                  +3
                  Unique battle near Moscow: 19th century cannons against fascist tanks
                  https://ribalych.ru/2013/10/02/unikalnaya-bitva-pod-moskvoj-pushki-19-veka-protiv-fashistskix-tankov/
                  After the evacuation of the F.E.Dzerzhinsky Artillery Academy to Samarkand - by the time of the battle for Moscow - only its personnel remained in Moscow - about a hundred old-regime military specialists, who were no longer taken into the active army due to their age. One of these grandfathers was well aware of the locations of artillery arsenals in Moscow and in the Moscow suburbs, where very old artillery systems were mothballed. History has not preserved the name of this man, but within XNUMX hours several high-power anti-tank fire batteries were formed.
                  To combat the German medium tanks, they picked up old siege weapons of 42 caliber line and six inches (152mm), which were used even during the liberation of Bulgaria from the Turkish yoke (model 1877). After the end of the war, due to the strong deterioration of the barrels of the guns, these were delivered to the Mytishchi arsenal, where they were stored in a mothballed state. Shooting from them was unsafe, but they could still fire 5-7 shots. Shells of the 42nd line were available, but there were no "native" six-inch shells. But at the Sokolniki artillery depot, there were a large number of captured British Vickers high-explosive shells of 6-inch caliber and weighing 100 feet, that is, just over 45,4 kilograms. There were also caps (casings) and capsules, repulsed in the civil war from the invaders. All this property has been stored so carefully since 1919 that it could well be used for its intended purpose. There were no propellant charges, but there was American smokeless powder. The academy professors calculated reinforced charges for direct fire at 600 m, taking into account the wear of the barrels.
                  Soon, several heavy anti-tank artillery fire batteries were formed. The guns were commanded by the same old artillerymen - "grandfathers" who had fought in the Russo-Japanese War, and the servants were students of the 8-10th grades of Moscow special artillery schools. The guns did not have sights, so it was decided to shoot only with direct fire, aiming them at the target through the barrel. For the convenience of shooting, the guns were dug into the ground up to the hubs of wooden wheels.
                  German tanks appeared suddenly. The gun crews made the first shots from a distance of 500-600 m. The German tank crews at first mistook the bursts of shells for the action of anti-tank mines - the explosions were so powerful that when a shell burst near the tank, it rolled over on its side or stood on its bottom. But it soon became clear that the guns were being fired at point-blank range. A shell hit in the turret of a light tank tore it off and threw it tens of meters to the side. And if a six-inch siege cannon projectile hit the forehead of a light tank's hull, then it passed the tank through and through, destroying everything in its path and "took out" the engine from the stern ... The German tankers could not even imagine such horror!
                  Having lost a company of 15 tanks, the tank battalion retreated. The German command considered the incident an accident and sent another battalion in a different way, where it also ran into an anti-tank ambush (there was a forest around it - and the Red Army reconnaissance intercepted the map with two planned tank routes). The offensive from the north-west to Moscow by a tank company of the Nazis removed from Leningrad was thwarted.

                  Then the Germans decided that on the northwestern boundary of the defense of Moscow, the Russians had used some kind of top-secret anti-tank weapon of Stalin. It was only strange that Stalin did not use this anti-tank weapon either before or after this incident ...
                4. Yarhann
                  Yarhann 13 January 2022 21: 52
                  +1
                  Yes, the bismarck is the same pseudo-underwaffle as the dora tool and the like garbage on which the fascists spent their resources. In the first combat exit, merge))) this is of course a worthy use of the wunderwafle. And the LK with which they fought, as it were, was much older, although it was modernized, but the pagyp could not hold out to the level of modern ones, but Bismarck was driven out and eventually stumbled. And they didn’t kick the whole fleet, but those that were nearby.
                  And to slaughter such a mammoth was an important task, the location of the ship was under control all the time - the Britons did everything right, cornered and hammered it.
                  Mother's best wunderwolf is the military-industrial complex and high-quality logistics - that's all that is needed for Victory. And it became impossible to win with cannon fodder after machine guns were invented - this was understandable back in WWI. And the result was achieved by the one who had the best industry and logistics.
                  You can endlessly remember the wunderwaves of the Third Reich - because all this is essentially dull shit - magapushkas, megatanks, two disposable mega-ships, etc. And what ensured the breakthrough to Moscow and Stalingrad for the Germans - the usual standard weapons that riveted stably (grooves 2/3/4), messengers, junkers, a mass of artillery, a mass of various vehicles, stably fell into units and were maintained in combat readiness, all this was provided by fuels and lubricants, grub , soldiers with medical aid, etc., etc. - that is, the logistics of war. The experience of the Germans was adopted in the shortest possible time, the military-industrial complex of the USSR began to mobilize and until the end of the war regularly replenished units with everything necessary - and the logistics machine scattered all this on time and in the right amount along the entire front. As a result, the result is natural - Victory, and without the wunderwolf. The military-industrial complex of the USSR simply could not afford to build a wunderwafl, in contrast to Nazi Germany, to which all of Europe hunched over.
                  And you can remember about the hilarious wunderwaves of Japan - such as yamata and especially submarine aircraft carriers)) As a result, the Americans won who stupidly riveted more conventional avics and a lot of carrier-based aircraft)) and a big hello to the wunderwaves. And to consolidate the result, they presented the yapas and the whole world with two wunderwales - who were truly wunderwaffe
                  1. vl903
                    vl903 14 January 2022 10: 19
                    0
                    Quote: Yarhann
                    Yes, the bismarck is the same pseudo-underwaffle as the dora tool and the like garbage on which the fascists spent their resources. In the first combat exit, merge))) this is of course a worthy use of the wunderwafle. And the LK with which they fought, as it were, was much older, although it was modernized, but the pagyp could not hold out to the level of modern ones, but Bismarck was driven out and eventually stumbled. And they didn’t kick the whole fleet, but those that were nearby.
                    And to slaughter such a mammoth was an important task, the location of the ship was under control all the time - the Britons did everything right, cornered and hammered it.
                    Mother's best wunderwolf is the military-industrial complex and high-quality logistics - that's all that is needed for Victory. And it became impossible to win with cannon fodder after machine guns were invented - this was understandable back in WWI. And the result was achieved by the one who had the best industry and logistics.
                    You can endlessly remember the wunderwaves of the Third Reich - because all this is essentially dull shit - magapushkas, megatanks, two disposable mega-ships, etc. And what ensured the breakthrough to Moscow and Stalingrad for the Germans - the usual standard weapons that riveted stably (grooves 2/3/4), messengers, junkers, a mass of artillery, a mass of various vehicles, stably fell into units and were maintained in combat readiness, all this was provided by fuels and lubricants, grub , soldiers with medical aid, etc., etc. - that is, the logistics of war. The experience of the Germans was adopted in the shortest possible time, the military-industrial complex of the USSR began to mobilize and until the end of the war regularly replenished units with everything necessary - and the logistics machine scattered all this on time and in the right amount along the entire front. As a result, the result is natural - Victory, and without the wunderwolf. The military-industrial complex of the USSR simply could not afford to build a wunderwafl, in contrast to Nazi Germany, to which all of Europe hunched over.
                    And you can remember about the hilarious wunderwaves of Japan - such as yamata and especially submarine aircraft carriers)) As a result, the Americans won who stupidly riveted more conventional avics and a lot of carrier-based aircraft)) and a big hello to the wunderwaves. And to consolidate the result, they presented the yapas and the whole world with two wunderwales - who were truly wunderwaffe

                    if we talk about the child prodigy in the correct sense, then I absolutely agree with you.
                    I couldn’t apparently explain that I consider prodigies to be massive successful samples, anti-prodigies actually --- ppsh, t34, il2, thing, shtug, tiger, panther, mg34 / 42, etc. and zis2 could be in this row, make us 30 thousand of them and cure children's sores (there were a lot of shortcomings in it or even in them, it had a lot of upgrades)
                    1. Yarhann
                      Yarhann 14 January 2022 10: 37
                      +1
                      so everything depends on the military-industrial complex - the qualifications of workers and the availability of equipment, machine tools, etc., etc. Therefore, with such mass production, the emphasis is on the manufacturability of products - and here the engineers of the USSR worked head and shoulders above the German engineers. this made it possible in a short time to organize the production of all the equipment necessary for the front throughout the country.
                      And there was no time to refine and fix jambs in wartime - this was well understood on both sides of the front, and there was little point in finalizing it in the process - because in the realities of the Second World War it was logistics that ruled - that is, a high-quality supply of advanced units with everything necessary. Therefore, they didn’t introduce anything special to replace the T34, they just stuck the turret with a new gun and that was enough, the Germans also riveted how many of the same 3/4x grooves (about 15000) during the war, they also modernized them a little - it was the main tank Wehrmacht. of course, both the Wehrmacht and the Red Army tried to saturate the troops with new models in mass quantities, like the same panthers or is-2 on our part - but they were technologically more complex, required more resources and qualified specialists - therefore there were much fewer of them in the ranks.
                      1. vl903
                        vl903 14 January 2022 10: 47
                        0
                        I agree probably completely, except for the fact that the shoals were not corrected. corrected and how, of course, commensurate with the capabilities and mass production. on the same t34, more than 3000 rationalization proposals were introduced. in fact, the t34 1941 and 1945 are different machines both in terms of design and technology. and so on for all other samples
                        if you don’t give the army the newest weapon, you will lose. give but little due to modernization, you will also lose
                      2. Yarhann
                        Yarhann 14 January 2022 20: 43
                        +1
                        I rather meant the design, layout, etc. - there have always been jambs in this, and even now they are encountered when designing on a computer.
                        According to the kit, it is clear that the jambs were corrected, as the kit itself was finalized, and the nodes themselves were replaced with others. The same 34s, if I'm not mistaken, were made by three factories, and in some places they used a different set.
                        For an analogy, I can recall how long the frigate 22350 was designed for - there, during the development campaign, the Moscow Region had new Wishlist because new opportunities for suppliers of equipment, components and assemblies appeared, as a result, the frigate seemed to be getting prettier and prettier, but mostly on paper. Thank God they stopped on the final project in time and built Gorshkov, otherwise they could have modernized it for another 10 years). This is good in peacetime, when the army does not require replenishment of lost equipment, but in the military they would be put up against the wall for such red tape. At the same time of the Second World War, many changes were made to the factory design bureaus - because it’s one thing that the design team dreamed up there - another thing is what the factory can do in real life and how it will work - all this needs to be finalized on the spot, one might say on the go. It is for this reason that the USSR could not stop in such a paradigm of development and construction - they built a lot of different things, closed projects, built new ones, gave them away in parts, and so on in a circle. Therefore, at the turn of 80-90, we were full of weapons similar in performance characteristics but different in design, etc.
                        There was an arms race.
                      3. vl903
                        vl903 14 January 2022 22: 18
                        0
                        Quote: Yarhann
                        I rather meant the design, layout, etc. - there have always been jambs in this, and even now they are encountered when designing on a computer.
                        According to the kit, it is clear that the jambs were corrected, as the kit itself was finalized, and the nodes themselves were replaced with others. The same 34s, if I'm not mistaken, were made by three factories, and in some places they used a different set.
                        For an analogy, I can recall how long the frigate 22350 was designed for - there, during the development campaign, the Moscow Region had new Wishlist because new opportunities for suppliers of equipment, components and assemblies appeared, as a result, the frigate seemed to be getting prettier and prettier, but mostly on paper. Thank God they stopped on the final project in time and built Gorshkov, otherwise they could have modernized it for another 10 years). This is good in peacetime, when the army does not require replenishment of lost equipment, but in the military they would be put up against the wall for such red tape. At the same time of the Second World War, many changes were made to the factory design bureaus - because it’s one thing that the design team dreamed up there - another thing is what the factory can do in real life and how it will work - all this needs to be finalized on the spot, one might say on the go. It is for this reason that the USSR could not stop in such a paradigm of development and construction - they built a lot of different things, closed projects, built new ones, gave them away in parts, and so on in a circle. Therefore, at the turn of 80-90, we were full of weapons similar in performance characteristics but different in design, etc.
                        There was an arms race.

                        I agree.
                        the same t34 back in 1940-1941 before the war, they offered to change it to an improved t34m, then t43, etc. and only at the end could afford to change to t44.
                        this is always a difficult choice - switching to the best model or increasing the mass production of an existing one
                      4. Yarhann
                        Yarhann 14 January 2022 22: 52
                        +1
                        Yes sir . when there is a war, there is no time to pick your nose - the front needs equipment, and not just some kind of time of the last war, but a modern one that meets the realities of the new war. The Wehrmacht offered the world a new war - the rapid advance of motorized rifle and tank units precisely through mechanization. They rolled out the whole of Europe precisely in logistics, and only in the USSR felling began, and then after they had swept the same car in the first year. And then the logistics of the war improved in our country and the tactics were used more tightly - quick swift counterattacks, which eventually broke the attacking enthusiasm of the blitzkrieg and dripped the Wehrmacht in the defense of their positions. And then the felling of the military-industrial complex and military logistics went on almost on an equal footing) On an equal footing, we reached Berlin.
                        But when we reached Berlin, we didn’t burn all the Germans in ovens and didn’t starve to death in concentration camps (which simply didn’t exist in the USSR), unlike what they did with all the infidels
      2. Alf
        Alf 12 January 2022 21: 08
        +5
        Quote: smaug78
        The USSR already had a lot of wunderwaves, but it didn't help ...

        USSR lost the war?
        1. smaug78
          smaug78 12 January 2022 22: 03
          +1
          THE USSR. had it been in the right quantities, the blitzkrieg would have ended in 1941 ..
          Probably not read ...
          1. vl903
            vl903 13 January 2022 07: 01
            +3
            Quote: smaug78
            THE USSR. had it been in the right quantities, the blitzkrieg would have ended in 1941 ..
            Probably not read ...

            ancestors were not stupid. had to choose the best possible.
            57mm physically couldn't do much. and for the war you need a lot
            1. smaug78
              smaug78 13 January 2022 17: 25
              0
              Clearly, you haven't read it ...
              1. vl903
                vl903 13 January 2022 17: 29
                0
                did they not read it or me?
            2. Alf
              Alf 13 January 2022 20: 24
              +1
              Quote: vl903
              and for the war you need a lot

              And already yesterday.
    4. faiver
      faiver 13 January 2022 13: 15
      +3
      had it been in the right amount, the blitzkrieg would have ended in 1941
      - call, but you are mistaken ...
      1. vl903
        vl903 13 January 2022 13: 25
        0
        Quote: faiver
        had it been in the right amount, the blitzkrieg would have ended in 1941
        - call, but you are mistaken ...

        why so
        for a blitzkrieg, you need air superiority, communications, artillery and equipment to destroy the fortifications, and then the Stugs and M34 to finish off the infantry.
        the success of the 57mm anti-tank gunnery in 1941 guaranteed the complete knocking out of tanks and units from the Germans. and that's it, the war turns into a trench modeled on PMV
        1. faiver
          faiver 13 January 2022 14: 00
          +2
          for a blitzkrieg, you need air superiority, communications, artillery and equipment to destroy the fortifications, and then the Stugs and M34 to finish off the infantry.
          - precisely due to superiority in the air, excellent communication and well-developed interaction of troops, blitzkrieg and fired all the way to Moscow for the whole 41st year, the Germans should not be considered idiots, where they faced a strong anti-tank defense infantry, artillery and aviation broke the defense
          1. vl903
            vl903 13 January 2022 14: 10
            0
            Quote: faiver
            for a blitzkrieg, you need air superiority, communications, artillery and equipment to destroy the fortifications, and then the Stugs and M34 to finish off the infantry.
            - precisely due to superiority in the air, excellent communication and well-developed interaction of troops, blitzkrieg and fired all the way to Moscow for the whole 41st year, the Germans should not be considered idiots, where they faced a strong anti-tank defense infantry, artillery and aviation broke the defense

            after a collision with a good anti-tank equipment, tanks become much smaller. Germany's industry was excellent, but could not quickly rivet pieces and tanks. take into account also the experience of tank crews and PTO calculations.
            at 57mm pto, the experience of tank crews would fall and the crews would grow, and this would further aggravate the situation. all together would sharply increase the losses of Germany.
            the result would be a war with heavy casualties and a slow pace of advance. and this is far from a blitzkrieg. by December 1941 Germany would have been blown away
            there were about 1 scraps for 5 damaged tank. for one destroyed 57mm there were 2-3 German tanks
            1. faiver
              faiver 13 January 2022 14: 25
              +1
              those. Germans in your opinion all the same and di-oty? Well, we always had a good deal of hats ...
              1. vl903
                vl903 13 January 2022 14: 40
                0
                Quote: faiver
                those. Germans on yours all the same? Well, we always had a good deal of hats ...

                did not understand the course of your thoughts. than the Germans did not please you?
                Well, maybe their intelligence service poorly assessed the USSR. but ours also gave a blunder. so everything is perfect only fairy tales. usually everything is more complex and multifaceted.
                If we had left the production of 57mm, then they would have been knocked out by aviation and artillery, and we would not have had time to replenish it. Therefore, we left 76mm in production. but aviation cannot knock everyone out. if 57mm tens of thousands of tank fist would quickly end. without him, even air supremacy will not give a blitzkrieg. and without the blitzkrieg, Germany had no chance in the opinion of the Germans themselves
                1. faiver
                  faiver 13 January 2022 14: 45
                  0
                  if 57mm tens of thousands of tank fist would quickly end.
                  - is your last name not Tukhachevsky?
                  1. vl903
                    vl903 13 January 2022 14: 47
                    0
                    You don’t level me with Tukhachevsky, he thought about the wars of the future, and I talk about past wars, it’s somehow easier.
                    1. faiver
                      faiver 13 January 2022 14: 48
                      0
                      your solutions are the same ...
                      1. vl903
                        vl903 13 January 2022 14: 56
                        0
                        firstly, nothing depends on me - it means just reasoning
                        2.Tukhachevsky offered a lot of interesting things.
                        3. what is wrong in my thesis? (Germany only needs a blitzkrieg, tanks are a mandatory part for a blitzkrieg, tens of thousands of anti-tank guns 57mm would have knocked out German tanks in 1941? there was no other choice)
                      2. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 13 January 2022 16: 19
                        +1
                        Quote: vl903
                        what is wrong with my thesis?

                        Your thesis lacks an understanding of what a blitzkrieg is. As a result of the "lightning war", the main defeat of the enemy's army is not inflicted by prodigies (Bismarck or ZiS-2), but by a strategic retreat, in which all stocks / ammunition / heavy weapons are simply thrown away on the side of the road. If the USSR in 1941 had 100mm Rapier in service with the PTO, this would not have affected the outcome in any way. How did not affect and 14,5 thousand. 45mm cannons capable of penetrating ANY German tank in 1941, if not on the front, then on the side.
                      3. vl903
                        vl903 13 January 2022 17: 08
                        0
                        in order for a blitzkrieg to occur, a "tank advantage" is needed.
                        if there were a rapier there would be no retreat. there would be no one to retreat from.
                        45 to board? and who will give you the board? and what is the distance to the side? which means losses, out of 14 thousand, 12 were lost by December along with experimental calculations. on one tank 4-5 45mm guns perished with crews. and one 57mm managed to burn 3 tanks. the difference is 12 times !!!! then by December they would have lost 1000 guns and would have remained at 13000 !!!!
                        By the way, the rapier would be worse, because the worse the maneuverability and the larger size.
                        You yourself in 1941 with a 45mm cannon and say - wait for them to substitute their side of 300 meters and even preferably at an angle of 0 degrees. and do not pay attention to the infantry and other tanks that are already crushing your gun - your 45mm power is sufficient!
                      4. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 13 January 2022 17: 14
                        +1
                        Quote: vl903
                        45 to board? and who will give you the board? and what is the distance to the side?

                        And in what projection do you think the tanks were burned on the Kursk Bulge? Head-on?
                        Quote: vl903
                        which means losses, out of 14 thousand, 12 were lost by December along with experimental calculations. on one tank 4-5 45mm guns perished with crews. and one 57mm managed to burn 3 tanks

                        Doesn't it bother you that the statistics of losses for 1941 and for 1944 are at least incorrect to compare? Conditions are different.
                        Quote: vl903
                        You yourself in 1941 with a 45mm cannon and say - wait for them to substitute their side of 300 meters and even preferably at an angle of 0 degrees. and do not pay attention to the infantry and other tanks that are already crushing your gun - your 45mm power is sufficient!

                        And in 4941 it was necessary to wait 300m, but to the side, but at an angle close to 0? The bulk of German (and not only) tanks had something like 15 ... 25mm. There, even 500m at an angle of 30 degrees will no longer save you.
                      5. vl903
                        vl903 13 January 2022 17: 26
                        0
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Quote: vl903
                        45 to board? and who will give you the board? and what is the distance to the side?

                        And in what projection do you think the tanks were burned on the Kursk Bulge? Head-on?
                        Quote: vl903
                        which means losses, out of 14 thousand, 12 were lost by December along with experimental calculations. on one tank 4-5 45mm guns perished with crews. and one 57mm managed to burn 3 tanks

                        Doesn't it bother you that the statistics of losses for 1941 and for 1944 are at least incorrect to compare? Conditions are different.
                        Quote: vl903
                        You yourself in 1941 with a 45mm cannon and say - wait for them to substitute their side of 300 meters and even preferably at an angle of 0 degrees. and do not pay attention to the infantry and other tanks that are already crushing your gun - your 45mm power is sufficient!

                        And in 4941 it was necessary to wait 300m, but to the side, but at an angle close to 0? The bulk of German (and not only) tanks had something like 15 ... 25mm. There, even 500m at an angle of 30 degrees will no longer save you.

                        1.the tanks are fired into the side from no source.
                        2. 1941 tanks were thinner than 1945 and the battles were of a different nature. statistics are relative. especially when you read how they tried to calculate (this is really difficult - the war is not a movie and everything is more complicated) but even without statistics 57mm for 1941 sews everything from any distance to any point. 45mm, taking into account the problems of shells that were actually in the troops and 25mm in the side from 300m, and then if you're lucky. (I don't remember the exact data)
                        3.I am embarrassed by the lack of accurate statistics for the marriage of 57mm barrels in 1941. If the Germans considered 80 marriage for 88mm as the norm, then what kind of marriage was there in 1941? if 99% then this would explain everything at once. if 85 then questions remain
                      6. DesToeR
                        DesToeR 13 January 2022 20: 46
                        +1
                        Quote: vl903
                        1.the tanks are fired into the side from no source.

                        Why do you think so? The Germans, for example, after receiving the PAK40 into service, opened fire from short distances and with the entire battery at once. Whoever broke these rules on this land did not stay long. It is understandable - no matter what supergun it is, tactics decide. There is no clear understanding that on 1 km of the front, the enemy against you will ALWAYS deploy more tanks than you will have anti-tank guns. Whatever the tank is, it is at least a cannon in motion, fully protected by armor.
                        Quote: vl903
                        I am confused by the lack of accurate statistics of the marriage of 57mm barrels in 1941.

                        The whole problem of the "researchers" of the history of the ZiS-2 is a lack of understanding of the processes that were taking place then. The point was not in the weak armor-piercing of the magpie, but in the banal economy. In 1941, the PTR was an effective weapon, but against the background of a strategic retreat, it is impossible to realize all these prodigies.
                      7. vl903
                        vl903 14 January 2022 10: 06
                        0
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Quote: vl903
                        1.the tanks are fired into the side from no source.

                        Why do you think so? The Germans, for example, after receiving the PAK40 into service, opened fire from short distances and with the entire battery at once. Whoever broke these rules on this land did not stay long. It is understandable - no matter what supergun it is, tactics decide. There is no clear understanding that on 1 km of the front, the enemy against you will ALWAYS deploy more tanks than you will have anti-tank guns. Whatever the tank is, it is at least a cannon in motion, fully protected by armor.
                        Quote: vl903
                        I am confused by the lack of accurate statistics of the marriage of 57mm barrels in 1941.

                        The whole problem of the "researchers" of the history of the ZiS-2 is a lack of understanding of the processes that were taking place then. The point was not in the weak armor-piercing of the magpie, but in the banal economy. In 1941, the PTR was an effective weapon, but against the background of a strategic retreat, it is impossible to realize all these prodigies.

                        on the one hand, they shot at the side because the battle was a duel or even an ambush in a few minutes. or you or you. and when firing at the side, they will detect and hit the gun a few seconds later. on the other, because there is no chance to break through the forehead. at the same time, to the flank gun, if 500m, then to the one in front of the tank 100m? her chances of survival? zis2 greatly simplifies the formation of defenses and the chances of victory, the survival of the crew, and much further greatly reduces the likelihood of a defense breakthrough and then a strategic retreat. like a snowball. therefore, it seems to me that if zis2 in the number of WWII would have gone a little differently
                        45 was bad, ptr is better than a bottle of gasoline. 57 is even better. laser from star wars is even better. but in life they fight with what they have and what there is a lot of.
  4. svp67
    svp67 12 January 2022 18: 08
    +7



    Shtug-3 in the museum of the city of Verkhnyaya Pyshma
    Soviet designers were given the task of creating a cannon, the ability to cope with tanks with an armor of at least 60 mm.
    And what was the misinformation? Somehow they forget that the German infantry was fought not by tanks, but by self-propelled guns, and just Shtug-3, with its thick frontal armor, which our 45s did not take, could well become the target against which it "worked" 57 mm PTO
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 12 January 2022 18: 31
      0
      ... the German infantry was led into battle not by tanks, but by self-propelled guns ...


      And why did they need Sd.Kfz then. 251 "Hanomag"?
      1. svp67
        svp67 12 January 2022 18: 46
        +3
        Quote: Sea Cat
        And why did they need Sd.Kfz then. 251 "Hanomag"?

        And how many were there and where? The "Panzer Grenadier" and then, most often only in the first battalions.
        Yes, and everyone in the war does his job, someone carries the infantry and covers it with his armor and machine gun fire, and someone protects with his armor, tracks and artillery gun fire
      2. hohol95
        hohol95 12 January 2022 19: 07
        +5
        "Ganomagi" were taken to the battlefield! And in battle, "hrenodera" were covered with armor of tanks or "StuGov".
        "StuGi" in the frontal were held better than many German tanks at the beginning of the war.
  5. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 12 January 2022 18: 11
    +4
    Soviet designers were given the task of creating a cannon, the ability to cope with tanks with an armor of at least 60 mm. At the same time, the opinion is expressed that the very appearance of this technical task connected with the disinformation work of the German side.
    Rave. Unas themselves had tanks with such armor and it is logical to expect the appearance of similar ones from the enemy. That is, it was clear that this was possible.
    the reasons for its rather long "non-use" for its intended purpose.
    The question is not “non-use” for its intended purpose, but the discontinuation of production. It turned out to be very not technologically advanced, a large% of marriage, high costs, in the shops almost entirely boys and women. Men are old masters. request Yes, and ammunition is a problem, as far as I remember. Churchill's ally requested samples of the ZIS-2 as necessary military information.
  6. Valerikk
    Valerikk 12 January 2022 18: 18
    0
    Quote: Fedorov
    I think it has nothing to do with misinformation. USSR - they designed and built powerful tanks, as they assumed that the enemy would have something similar. Otsedov and the corresponding cannon were organized. As far as I am informed, the T-3 was punched through. from any angle. T-4 in the forehead is easy from 500 meters.

    from 500 m could pierce the forehead and T-6
  7. boris epstein
    boris epstein 12 January 2022 18: 25
    +1
    Since April 1941, a modification of the PzKpfw IV Aust F with 50 mm frontal armor of the hull and cannon mask has been developed. In total, from April 1941 to March 1942, 462 vehicles of this modification were produced. In June 1942, work began on a new version of the four-Aust H. On it, the armor of the frontal parts of the hull and turret had already reached 80 mm, and an armored screen was installed around the turret. So the need for the ZiS-2 was already in the spring-summer of 1942.
  8. Pavel57
    Pavel57 12 January 2022 18: 31
    +2
    The British were interested in the cannon. They wanted to get it.
    1. Anatole Klim
      Anatole Klim 12 January 2022 18: 47
      +5
      The old woman is still fighting in Syria and Yemen, she still needs

      [Center]
  9. strannik1985
    strannik1985 12 January 2022 18: 42
    +4
    How is the Zis-2 redundant, if by 15.10.1940/45/1937 it was experimentally established that the caliber armor-piercing of the 2600-mm cannon model 30 penetrates the K = XNUMX armor at an angle of XNUMX degrees to the normal from a distance 150 meters?

    [Center]
    1. Fedorov
      Fedorov 12 January 2022 18: 56
      +1
      As if everything is correct. But to the distance not only 150 m, but even 500 still had to be reached or wait for MG 34-42 to water you.
    2. vl903
      vl903 12 January 2022 19: 46
      +2
      as Grabin writes, the decision to remove 57mm was made taking into account several circumstances:
      1. The large consumption of existing guns must be urgently replenished.
      2.many barrels 57 cannot be produced due to marriage
      3. gigantic consumption of materials, tools, man and machine-tool hours
      4. If you shoot a 76mm cannon, then they can be made much larger.
      5.If you release 76mm, you save a huge amount of resources
      6.with the worst anti-tank capacity, 76mm worked much better against infantry in trenches and armor-piercing had much better armor-piercing effect.
      so the 57mm had not a small, but a lesser zabronevoe effect. power was relatively 76mm excessive, but
      it was not the main thing.
  10. Pavel57
    Pavel57 12 January 2022 18: 51
    +1
    That's where the 57mm came from.
  11. fiberboard
    fiberboard 12 January 2022 18: 53
    +3
    How to understand excess power? And why is the reserve impact low? Does the 45mm anti-tank gun have more?
    1. mister-red
      mister-red 12 January 2022 19: 05
      +2
      Quote: fiberboard
      How to understand excess power? And why is the reserve impact low? Does the 45mm anti-tank gun have more?

      I, too, are constantly surprised by the opinion about the ZiS-2, that it had a low armor action and that sometimes the shell pierced through the tank and did no harm. And what are the modern sub-caliber shells doing, exploding inside the tank or what?
      1. vl903
        vl903 12 January 2022 19: 49
        0
        as Grabin writes, the decision to remove 57mm was made taking into account several circumstances:
        1. The large consumption of existing guns must be urgently replenished.
        2.many barrels 57 cannot be produced due to marriage
        3. gigantic consumption of materials, tools, man and machine-tool hours
        4. If you shoot a 76mm cannon, then they can be made much larger.
        5.If you release 76mm, you save a huge amount of resources
        6.with the worst anti-tank capacity, 76mm worked much better against infantry in trenches and armor-piercing had much better armor-piercing effect.
        so the 57mm had not a small, but a lesser zabronevoe effect. power was relatively 76mm excessive, but
        it was not the main thing.
      2. mat-vey
        mat-vey 13 January 2022 13: 10
        0
        Quote: mister-red
        And what are the modern sub-caliber shells doing, exploding inside the tank or what?

        As for tungsten and depleted uranium, you can say so ... In the process of "passing" through the armor, they experience the so-called "crimp", as a result of which, going outside the armor, they begin to "peel off". Fragments of tungsten are scattered at high speed behind the armor space, and uranium, due to the properties of uranium, also self-ignite ...
    2. Alf
      Alf 12 January 2022 21: 19
      0
      Quote: fiberboard
      And why is the reserve impact low?

      Because the HE shell of the 57-mm gun had an explosive of 220 grams, and the HE of the 76-mm gun had 781 grams.
      1. Valerikk
        Valerikk 13 January 2022 09: 37
        +2
        Quote: Alf
        Quote: fiberboard
        And why is the reserve impact low?

        Because the HE shell of the 57-mm gun had an explosive of 220 grams, and the HE of the 76-mm gun had 781 grams.

        And what does the OF here have to do with it?
        1. Alf
          Alf 13 January 2022 18: 22
          +2
          Quote: Valerikk
          Quote: Alf
          Quote: fiberboard
          And why is the reserve impact low?

          Because the HE shell of the 57-mm gun had an explosive of 220 grams, and the HE of the 76-mm gun had 781 grams.

          And what does the OF here have to do with it?

          Apparently, the author had in mind not so much an armored as a PF action on infantry targets. And the explosive charge in armor-piercing shells was very different.


          18 grams is a lot less than 155.
  12. Amateur
    Amateur 12 January 2022 19: 04
    +3
    Than to watch any * (nonsense) it is necessary to read the memoirs of V.G. Grabin, in which a whole chapter is devoted to the development of the ZiS-2.
  13. Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 12 January 2022 21: 00
    +3
    What can I say ...
    On the one hand, even if there were these art systems, little would have changed at the beginning of the war. There was a complete mess, except for the north. There, in the north, the Nemchura and the Finns did not push through.
    On the other hand, (I am not an artilleryman, and not a strategist, especially a couch one)), it is a pity that these artillery systems were not enough at the end of the 41st and the beginning of the 42nd. It would be a little easier and a little more men would return.
    I emphasize - a little. The entire industrial complex of Europe fought against us.

    ..
    In the dry ... Grabov is a genius of artillery. Fact!
    Created an excellent puncher / killer.
    As for our special services, in the context of the starting post... Yes, it's sad. But the Germans did not sleep either, which is confirmed by their first victories on our territory.
    1. sergey_please
      sergey_please 12 January 2022 22: 13
      0
      Do you know why Korolyov did not like Grabin?
      1. Alf
        Alf 12 January 2022 22: 30
        +2
        Quote: sergey_please
        Do you know why Korolyov did not like Grabin?

        We will listen with pleasure ...
      2. Al_lexx
        Al_lexx 12 January 2022 23: 21
        +1
        Quote: sergey_please
        Do you know why Korolyov did not like Grabin?

        No. I do not know.
        Why didn't you expand the topic?
        It would be interesting.
    2. Alf
      Alf 12 January 2022 22: 14
      +3
      Quote: Al_lexx
      The entire industrial complex of Europe fought against us.

      Almost everything of that time was NATO.
      1. Alf
        Alf 12 January 2022 22: 53
        +2
        Quote: Alf
        Quote: Al_lexx
        The entire industrial complex of Europe fought against us.

        Almost everything of that time was NATO.

        Minusator, of course, anonymous?
        1. Al_lexx
          Al_lexx 12 January 2022 23: 22
          0
          ..no, I'm just a concerned community ..
          Tell me, already ...)
          1. Alf
            Alf 13 January 2022 18: 06
            +1
            Quote: Al_lexx
            ..no, I'm just a concerned community ..
            Tell me, already ...)

            Alexey, believe me, I will tell you from the bottom of my heart, you are the last of the last to whom I will say a minus! hi
            1. Al_lexx
              Al_lexx 13 January 2022 23: 12
              0
              All right.
              Mutually.
            2. The comment was deleted.
        2. Al_lexx
          Al_lexx 13 January 2022 09: 38
          +5
          Quote: Alf
          Minusator, of course, anonymous?

          Basil. I don’t know, most likely yes. And fuck it.

          Chessgovrrya, I'm tired of everything here.
          Once there was a good resource. Turned into a kind of sandbox for juvenile idiots.
          Admins this topic (juvenile idiots) clearly pull.
          In short, that topvar is not and will no longer be. Outbid ...
    3. vl903
      vl903 13 January 2022 08: 21
      -3
      the Germans broke through where there were concentrated strikes and there was a 5th column in the rear. in the south of the USSR, the first 2 weeks even advanced. the mess was where the blitzkrieg was.
      and 57mm each ... I don’t remember exactly, but it seems that there were 5 destroyed 45mm per German tank, and 57mm seems to be only 1/2. and AS Lavrenenko seemed to have 34mm on his T57
      and there would have been a couple of million fewer losses if all the things and tanks had been knocked out by the winter of 1941 - the Germans with mass replenishment of losses were not very
      1. smaug78
        smaug78 13 January 2022 17: 29
        0
        the Germans broke through where there were concentrated strikes and there was a 5th column in the rear. in the south of the USSR, the first 2 weeks even advanced. the mess was where the blitzkrieg was.
        dear, you would not be disgraced ...
        1. vl903
          vl903 13 January 2022 17: 31
          +1
          ? osote me pliz! I will gladly admit that I am wrong if so
          1. smaug78
            smaug78 13 January 2022 17: 34
            +1
            Dear, you wrote nonsense, you need to prove them hi And to begin with, against whom were they attacked in the South, to what depth, and so on?
            1. vl903
              vl903 13 January 2022 17: 55
              0
              I don't remember exactly now. border guards and Black Sea people along the Black Sea seem to be against Romanians.
              then we had to retreat ourselves so as not to get surrounded.
              motivation, quality of troops, as well as equipment we had better at that time and in that place
              1. smaug78
                smaug78 13 January 2022 18: 02
                +1
                The key word is against Romanians ...
                1. vl903
                  vl903 13 January 2022 18: 03
                  0
                  Quote: smaug78
                  The key word is against Romanians ...

                  agree
    4. Yarhann
      Yarhann 13 January 2022 10: 23
      0
      all right, the war is the industrial complex of the military-industrial complex and logistics, there was not the wrong one at the beginning of the war with the USSR - that is why they merged until the production of weapons and the logistics of the war were adjusted. And specific types of weapons, as a rule, make a minimal contribution to victory. Tanks were already sawing a lot - the simplest thing is anti-tank minefields, the placement of which on the defensive lines was an axiom of the Second World War.
      1. vl903
        vl903 13 January 2022 17: 33
        +1
        Quote: Yarhann
        all right, the war is the industrial complex of the military-industrial complex and logistics, there was not the wrong one at the beginning of the war with the USSR - that is why they merged until the production of weapons and the logistics of the war were adjusted. And specific types of weapons, as a rule, make a minimal contribution to victory. Tanks were already sawing a lot - the simplest thing is anti-tank minefields, the placement of which on the defensive lines was an axiom of the Second World War.

        remove any of the components listed by you and the war is lost
  14. dzvero
    dzvero 12 January 2022 22: 36
    +2
    There was no misinformation - the development of the T-VI began in the 38th. Rather, there was an overestimation of the capabilities of German industry - the Tiger was late for the beginning of Barbarossa. The revaluation led to the imposition of a transition to 107 mm at the expense of 76/45 - hello to Marshal Kulik. The 107 mm cannon did not work, the rest were removed, plus the losses of the first months - production had to be urgently restored. Fortunately, Grabin had aces up his sleeve - ZiS-2 (reserve for the future) and ZiS-3, as well as the courage to put the ZiS-3 on gross production without being put into service.
  15. smaug78
    smaug78 13 January 2022 17: 28
    0
    influenced the development of world military technology.

    Quote: vl903
    the thing is an integral part of the blitzkrieg. it is impossible to overestimate
    is blitzkrieg a technique?
    1. vl903
      vl903 13 January 2022 18: 08
      0
      no.
      technology of the required quality is an integral part of the blitzkrieg. without including its blitzkrieg will not work.
      1. smaug78
        smaug78 13 January 2022 18: 26
        0
        only the technique of the Germans was mediocre enough ...
        1. vl903
          vl903 13 January 2022 18: 45
          +1
          everything is very relative. she was outstanding in some way. but most importantly, it met their goal - blitzkrieg. and kept the whole world in a cold sweat for 5 years
          1. smaug78
            smaug78 13 January 2022 20: 43
            -2
            You decide, outstanding or not? In general, go on, I won't get tired of dunking you, demagogue
            1. vl903
              vl903 14 January 2022 09: 57
              0
              Am I a demagogue? probably an ordinary sofa expert.
              Is the technique outstanding? - yes, it significantly influenced the development of technology in the world, some are still used directly or in the next generations. our technology is significantly, maybe a third has German roots.
  16. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 17 January 2022 15: 12
    +1
    So what are the versions? When you make a tank like the KV and T34, you understand that the enemy may have a similar one and create an antidote. Genius makes weapons that will be needed tomorrow, not yesterday.
    The version about excessive power was invented by someone very "smart" in order to hide the shortcomings of the economy, and all the idiots liked it. The barrel was long, a lot of marriage in production, expensive, so they removed it, and then American machines arrived, and even pressed so that the marriage became nonsense and the guns went.