T-50: An infantry escort tank that never became the most massive armored vehicle in the Red Army

In the 30s, the only a tank infantry escort in the USSR was the T-26, built on the basis of the British Vickers Mk.E. However, by the end of the decade, due to the increase in the power of artillery, a vehicle with 15 mm armor did not have a single chance to survive on the battlefield.

So, already in the summer of 1940, thanks to the efforts of the designers of the Leningrad Pilot Machine Building Plant No. 185 named after S.M. Kirov, a tank was proposed to replace the T-26, called the T-126SP.

45-mm armor protection (except for the roof and bottom, where it was 20 mm) of the new machine was practically in no way inferior to the T-34. But in terms of visibility, the light T-126SP was superior to its average "brother".

The new infantry escort tank was armed with a 45-mm cannon, as well as DT and DS-39 machine guns of 7,62 mm caliber.

Six-cylinder V-3 engine with a capacity of 250 hp. allowed a 17-ton machine to reach speeds of up to 35 km / h. At the same time, the supply of fuel tanks was enough to cover a distance of up to 270 km.

Despite the fact that the tank proved to be quite good at factory tests. It was decided to reduce its weight by reducing the armor. It was also recommended to increase the space for the crew. For these purposes, the designers planned to remove the DS-39 machine gun.

Already in the autumn of the 40th year, a new tank was created at the Leningrad Machine-Building Plant No. 174 named after K.E. Voroshilov, which received the designation "object 135". Tellingly, the T-126SP was transferred to the enterprise for revision, however, in some sources you can find information that the "object 135" was developed in parallel.

Already at the beginning of 1941, the machine was made in metal and successfully passed factory tests. The new infantry escort tank entered the troops under the T-50 index.

Unlike the T-126SP, the new vehicle had a welded hull and turret. The latter, with its streamlined shape, resembled that of the T-34.

The mass of the T-50 was 13,8 tons, although for this the designers had to reduce the thickness of the armor (when compared with the T-126SP): the tower - up to 37 mm, the feed - up to 25 mm, and the bottom and roof - up to 15 mm.

As armament, the vehicle received a 45-mm cannon paired with two DT machine guns, which is rather atypical for Soviet-made tanks.

The 300-horsepower V-4 engine allowed the T-50 to reach speeds of up to 52 km / h, and two tanks of 50 liters each - to cover a distance of up to 344 km.

Despite the fact that, due to its excellent performance, this tank was planned to be the most massive in the Red Army, its fate turned out to be extremely difficult. Due to a number of difficulties, the production of the tank, which, by the way, did not become massive, was discontinued in 1942. By that time, about 60 cars had been produced.

Comments

[dmi.pris1]

The industry in those conditions simply could not produce this tank. The capacities are limited, so it was necessary to produce an assortment of the most necessary and proven military equipment.

[fa2998]

Couldn't? Should I? The gun is 45 mm, the tanks are increasing their protection. And the high-explosive projectile is also low-power. If the 76 mm gun on the T-34 was replaced with 85 mm, then 45 is not enough.
By booking, yes, they strengthened it, no longer the T-26 and BT. But the anti-tank guns also became more powerful. German 50 mm. easily cope. I think such a tank was not needed.

[dmi.pris1]

You probably know what tanks our industry produced in the 41st. On the same GAZ. With much weaker armor and guns. They were just worked out, with automotive units and so on. Yes, a year later such tanks were already nothing

[Illanatol]

Quote: dmi.pris

The industry in those conditions simply could not produce this tank. The capacities are limited, so it was necessary to produce an assortment of the most necessary and proven military equipment.

In general, our industry mass-produced light tanks in the initial period of the war. It was just that there were more technologically advanced and easier-to-manufacture analogues, which also had gasoline engines. They were produced at automobile factories.
However, practice clearly showed that the time of light tanks was passing and the front needed medium and heavy tanks. Light - had a limited range of combat applications.

[mark1]

A dead-end direction, in this form, even sensible modernization is impossible. But with the transverse arrangement of the V-4 (and this option was first considered, but for some reason it was rejected), it would be possible to install a tower from the T-34 76, and this is a different quality level for a light tank.

[fa2998]

Quote: dmi.pris

what tanks our industry produced in the 41st. On the same GAZ. With much weaker armor and a gun

In the course. But they were produced from DESIRE! A colossal loss of tanks in the summer, and the infantry willingly goes on the attack after the tanks, and defends with an eye on the tanks. And no one measured armor with a caliper. A tank is a tank.
And the T-50 is a new model, to put it in a series - but it has few prospects.

[Viktor Sergeev]

Difficult for a light and mass tank, the ability to upgrade is close to zero, a weak gun, a small turret. It would be better, following the example of the Germans, to straighten the frontal armor and make a tower for 3 people.

[DMFalke]

And was he really needed? No, on the one hand, the front in 41 tanks needed any, so even Valentines and Matildas took it and did not complain.
On the other hand, the T-50 used 45 mm rolled metal for the front plate. "Like the T-34." And if we already have the T-34 and there may not be enough rental for it (war, evacuation), then why the T-50? And why the T-50 with weakened armor, when there is already a T-60? And the T-70 with 35 mm armor plate released 8000 at all, and then also the SU-76.

An attempt to make a "small mobile medium" out of a light tank logically ended in nothing. There is no reserve in terms of weight and dimensions, as a result, even the crude T-34 is still better in its niche, and for the role of the lung there were cheaper and simpler options.

Of course, it is now easy for us to reason with all the performance characteristics for all armored vehicles and artillery.

[Frank Muller]

Regarding this tank, Joseph Kotin spoke something like this: “Fifty” can be safely certified as “thirty-four” of smaller sizes, but with a much less successful fate. In fact, initially a very good fighting vehicle did not become the main light tank of the Red Army, and not at all because of insufficiently suitable combat characteristics. Intervened, mainly, unsuccessful organizational and economic circumstances: the inability to establish a fairly complex production in the evacuation, where the plant-manufacturer had to relocate; difficulties of cooperation with subcontractors; different aspects of logistics, which there was no timely opportunity to establish. Approximately the same reasons were in other areas of the military industry, including aviation and artillery. More often, the question was point-blank: either to establish the production of new, more modern designs, then risking a delay in the release of the required volume of military equipment, or to continue the in-line, well-established mass production of combat units of weapons, albeit not the most modern, but extremely necessary on the fronts. Many examples can be cited where the second option was given preference. Although the production of "fifty" several times and tried to resume all the same, but by 1943 this was completely abandoned. Partly for the reasons mentioned above, partly because Lend-Lease replenished the fleet of the Red Army with Valentine light tanks, which our tankers jokingly and respectfully called the Valentines, speaking quite friendly about these vehicles (unlike the American Stuarts, which some our tankers called "Bitch"). According to their characteristics, these British cars, in general, were close to the "fifties", although they were inferior to them in the convenience of crew maintenance. The only serial copy of the T - 50 that has been preserved in Russia I somehow happened to see in the museum of armored vehicles in Kubinka.

[certero]

Instead, they spent resources on releasing the T-60 there, which was complete shit.