Military Review

PzKpfw 9 / 10 IS in German?

10
Immediately make a reservation that the authentic stories these tanks it is covered with darkness, since most of the available foreign sources either do not mention it at all, or mention it in passing. Therefore, we propose to draw conclusions from the above to the reader himself.


Fantastic battle with the participation of the new German "all-destructive" tank PzKpfw 10. Illustration from the "Berliner Play Zeitung" 1944


IN MARCH 1944 G. ON THE TABLE I.O. the head of the OGK NKTP Bera laid down a message with the following content:

"According to available data, German tank builders create a heavy 60-ton tank of a new type, called the T-9 or T-10 ...

The armament of the new tank is very strong and consists of a new 88-mm or 128-mm cannon with a long barrel and 3-x machine guns (1 anti-aircraft guns).

Presumably, the tank has a powerful aviation Daimler-Benz engine and a gas-electric transmission in the form of a transmission of the Ferdinand self-propelled guns ...

The armor protection of the new tank is not less than 150-200 mm from course fire angles ...

The main feature of the new German tank is the extensive use of large cast armor parts in the era construction of the hull and turret (there is information on the use in the tank design of the solid cast hull and turret), making it suitable for mass production and giving it a form that is very advantageous from the point of view of the propensity of armor-piercing shells to ricochet ... Currently, German enterprises are already leading the mass production of casting towers for a new heavy tank, which is expected in the fall ...

It is possible that the appearance of this tank was caused by the study of the German designers of cast turrets and hull parts of T-34, KV-1 tanks and our new heavy IS tank. "


Where this information was obtained from is unknown, how exact the exact date of its appearance in the USSR is unknown. Apparently, there are intertwined scattered data about the new Tiger Ausl V. sneaker better known under the name "Royal Tiger" (good, the first cars of this type actually carried the cast towers of F.Porsche construction), as well as rumors about an already tested "little mouse" and German propaganda editions second half of the war. Rather, it was all of this kind of fantastic patriotic publication in the Berliner Illustrator Zeitung (pictures from which are shown here}, and that was the source referred to in the above letter. It is unlikely that such a mythical project took place in Germany at the end war, but in the USSR, he caused some confusion.

Appearance of "IP in German" - PzKpfw 9 and PzKpfw 10. Illustration from "Berliner Illustrate Zeitung" 1944


In May, 1944, Mr. W. Behr receives a letter from NII-48:

"According to your request from 18.04.44, we have the following to report:

.

3. We believe that the German industry mastered armor casting of towers and tank hulls is impossible due to the lack of the necessary range of alloying components in Germany at present, which is confirmed by studies of the chemical composition of rolled and cast armor tanks Tiger and Panther ...

6. German cast armor of high hardness of large thickness is not reliable protection against armor-piercing shells of large masses ... "


From this we can conclude that the head of the OGK NKTP apparently attracted armor specialists to study the scattered data on the new German tank with the "cast armor hull and turret", which was natural for those conditions.

And in June, 1944, pusg.mo, which features a "new heavy tank with cast armor," receives and the beginning. TsAKK V.Grabin:
"... According to the data obtained in Germany, the development of a new heavy tank protected by cast armor 150-200 mm thick is being completed in Germany ... Please complete the plans for testing new anti-tank guns of a large caliber, including 122-mm caliber and 130-mm ... In the program of their tests include a clause on the mandatory verification of penetration of cast armor with a thickness of 200-mm Obtaining samples of cast armor of the specified thickness agreed with UZTM (Muzurukov).

On the performance report.
Signed - D.Ustinov
"


Shortly after the noted activity in the correspondence on the battlefields, new German heavy tanks really came out, which caused a surge of interest in their person, but they had almost nothing to do with what was expected, which was reflected in the research institute 18’s study of the Royal armor samples. tiger "next sentence:
"... contrary to the information received from the head of the OGK NKTP, the new German heavy tank has no large parts obtained from liquid armor in the hull structure and turret ..."


It seemed you, the question was removed from the agenda, however, the T 9 and T-10 indices were still heard in the Soviet documents of that time. In the note accompanying the certificate of the most interesting samples of trophy combat equipment discovered on the territory of Germany, there was a small but very capacious postscript:
"Studying the received technical and project documentation, as well as conversations with German specialists ... it was not possible to detect the projects of the heavy 60-ton tank T-10."


So the question is; "Was there a boy?" - Everyone can answer within their own personal opinions.
Author:
10 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Tan4ik
    Tan4ik April 3 2013 08: 26 New
    10
    Now they will come from WOT to criticize.
    1. Peacemaker
      Peacemaker April 3 2013 09: 00 New
      +9
      Candidates for the third line of German heavy tanks wink
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets April 3 2013 10: 47 New
        +6
        Comics have not been discussed for a long time. wink
    2. Srgsoap
      Srgsoap April 3 2013 11: 25 New
      0
      That's for sure, 5 points good good good
  2. 755962
    755962 April 3 2013 09: 04 New
    +1
    Cast body and tower for the "gloomy genius," I think it would not be such a big problem. The technology of the Germans took great strides. Cast hulls had a limited distribution from the 1930s to the 1960s, but also gave way to welded, which became the standard on modern tanks. Well, this is too time-consuming occupation. IMHO
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris April 3 2013 09: 34 New
      +6
      Oversized casting was a problem for the Germans. It is now a problem. For not everything is as simple as it seems.
  3. svp67
    svp67 April 3 2013 09: 18 New
    +2
    According to reports, German tank builders are creating a new type of heavy 60-ton tank called the T-9 or T-10



    Information from the category of OBS - one grandmother said, apparently our scouts managed to learn something about the development of the German "Royal Tiger", but this turned out to be so vague that everyone else had to think out the rest. Well, here at least they did not lose the direction of the development of the German tank industry, and before the 1942 year, the same informed sources wrote about the imminent appearance in the Wehrmacht of new tanks that differ in relatively good armor and low weight ...
    1. Gazprom
      Gazprom April 3 2013 09: 40 New
      +1
      gold words,
      tank ball, quarter with armor of 165 cm and other reconnaissance nonsense, "oh don’t shoot me, I know the secret of the new German tank manure barrel ...."
  4. avt
    avt April 3 2013 09: 20 New
    0
    Not the most successful article from Mikhail’s books, he has a much more interesting right. With links to documents. It works well and the syllable is good, not abstruse. For the reader, that’s it. good
  5. the47th
    the47th April 3 2013 09: 27 New
    +1
    The tanks of the tanks are covered with cast armor from the sides. Poor mechanics who would have to repair the chassis. And in general, the design from the French AMX-40 is laced.
  6. bazilio
    bazilio April 3 2013 09: 29 New
    +5
    Hmm, they painted a beast. The wunderval is excellent. Although what the Germans just did not come up with
    Flying basins for example
  7. Alexey M
    Alexey M April 3 2013 10: 51 New
    +1
    Striking intelligence. There is reason to be proud.
  8. Prohor
    Prohor April 3 2013 10: 58 New
    +1
    For some reason, I had the opinion that "intelligence" was invented to confirm the correct launch of a series of IPs. They started to release them somewhere at the beginning of the 44th, there were probably doubters, so here you are - the Germans want to do something similar, but we got ahead of them!
  9. Gari
    Gari April 3 2013 11: 50 New
    +4
    60 tons yes with such forms yes arable land interesting, well, and see the snow
    1. smirnov
      smirnov April 3 2013 21: 15 New
      +1
      Yes, and a rare freak)))
  10. Romn
    Romn April 3 2013 12: 10 New
    +1
    It seems to me in 44 the Germans had something to think about and besides the production of this tank!)
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris April 3 2013 12: 30 New
      +2
      Well, by the end of the war, the gloomy Teutonic genius invented a lot of things. Some things were brought to mind after the war, some ideas were unclaimed, but what do we still not know about (quite possibly we will never know)?
    2. Peacemaker
      Peacemaker April 3 2013 12: 39 New
      +2
      Yeah, about the production of Mouse and E-100 wink
  11. Prapor Afonya
    Prapor Afonya April 3 2013 12: 13 New
    0
    Quote: bazilio
    Hmm, they painted a beast. The wunderval is excellent. Although what the Germans just did not come up with
    Flying basins for example

    This is the "circularism" style, in the fashion of military equipment 3 Reich laughing
  12. cth; fyn
    cth; fyn April 3 2013 12: 19 New
    0
    A game of intelligence on the face.
  13. Smirnov Vadim
    April 3 2013 12: 37 New
    0
    Comment check
  14. Kars
    Kars April 3 2013 13: 22 New
    0
    Somewhere there is the cover of a German propaganda magazine .. a signal .. or something like that with this instance. Maybe it fell into the hands of our partisans.))) And then))
    In 1940, there were also rumors of German heavy-armored tanks, to which the USSR responded with a series from KV-3 to KV -8 with a combat weight of up to 100 tons
    1. postman
      postman April 3 2013 18: 03 New
      0
      Quote: Kars
      In 1940, there were also rumors of German thick-armored

      November 1941 the beginning of Fa research. Krupp by PzKpfw VII (Leichte) Löwe


      February 1942, Krupp received orders to begin the design process of the new PzKpfw VII heavy tank designated Lowe (VK7201)

      June 23, 1942 proposal (concept presented to Adolf) P100
      It used to be like that.
      Or do you mean Grosstraktor?

      ====================
      To collection:
      "American tank, British crew, Italians knocked out"





    2. postman
      postman April 3 2013 18: 05 New
      +4
      Quote: Kars
      In 1940, there were also rumors of German thick-armored

      November 1941 the beginning of Fa research. Krupp by PzKpfw VII (Leichte) Löwe


      February 1942, Krupp received orders to begin the design process of the new PzKpfw VII heavy tank designated Lowe (VK7201)

      June 23, 1942 proposal (concept presented to Adolf) P100
      It used to be like that.
      Or do you mean Grosstraktor?

      ====================
      To collection:




      -------------------------------------------------- -
      "American tank, British crew, Italians knocked out"
      1. Kars
        Kars April 3 2013 18: 19 New
        0
        Already in the summer of 1940, after the start of serial production of the KV-1 tank, the question arose of strengthening its armor protection. On June 17, 1940, the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR and the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted Resolution No. 1288-495ss, which, inter alia, said:

        “By November 1, 1940, the Kirov plant would manufacture two KV tanks with 90 mm armor: one with a 76 mm F-32 gun, another with a 85 mm gun. One hull will be delivered from the Izhora plant in late October, the tank is scheduled to be finished by November 5 The second case will be made in November.
        By December 1, 1940, the Kirov plant would manufacture two KV tanks with 100 mm armor: one with a 76 mm F-32 gun, the other with an 85 mm gun. One case will be filed in late October, the second in November. "



        The plant began preparations for the mass production of the tank, but "His Majesty the case" intervened. The fact is that in March 1941 the command of the Red Army received intelligence information that work on the creation of tanks with powerful armor had been completed in Germany, and they were already entering the troops. Moreover, intelligence reports emphasized that Soviet tank and anti-tank guns could not penetrate their armor. Much later, it turned out that Soviet intelligence fell victim to German misinformation, that all this was untrue - they did not develop heavy tanks in Germany at that time. Most likely, the matter was as follows: in the spring of 1941, the German Panzerwaffe began to receive captured French V-1 tanks, which had 80 mm thick armor. In addition, according to the experience of France, the V-1 and Matilda tanks were destroyed by German anti-tank guns fire (much later it became clear that they were not anti-tank, but 88-mm anti-aircraft guns Flak-18 and Flak-36). Apparently, this was the reason for the rumors of "new German tanks with powerful armor."

        Quote: Postman
        "American tank, British crew, Italians knocked out

        I don’t recognize from this angle. I sin most of all on Valentine but then Canadian.
        1. postman
          postman April 3 2013 19: 04 New
          +1
          Quote: Kars
          Already in the summer of 1940

          But why not? (It’s not connected with the heavy armored tanks of Germany), because: on May 17, 1936 there was a meeting of the Labor and Defense Council.
          (I wrote below)
          the Germans (before meeting dreams) had real combat experience, which showed them that thick-armored tanks are not needed (Polish lancers for example)

          Quote: Kars
          I don’t recognize from this angle. I sin most of all on Valentine but then Canadian.

          Well it's written right there!!!!!
          "Tanto americanBritish crew knocked down Italians "
          Well, tell me some. Most interesting ...
          1. Kars
            Kars April 5 2013 00: 54 New
            0
            Quote: Postman
            Germans (before meeting dreams) had real combat experience,

            But what about the French? And the English matilda?
            Quote: Postman
            Well, tell me some. Most interesting

            I wrote that I sin on Valentine, but the rollers are not particularly suitable, but who else has such a narrow caterpillar. I don’t know. On Chaffee, the rollers seem to be, but the caterpillar is not very.
  15. ObnaPur
    ObnaPur April 3 2013 13: 35 New
    +2
    The medium (!) Panther tank is comparable in weight to the IS-2 TT because it is so heavy that by the middle of the war the Germans really had a problem with alloying additives to steel. IMHO: in occupied countries, local coins (and also dishes (silverware) were withdrawn from circulation laughing cigarette cases, watches, etc.), consisting of alloys of various metals, for remelting and additives as alloying elements of tank armor.
    1. Kars
      Kars April 3 2013 16: 33 New
      0
      Quote: ObnaPur
      that’s why it’s so hard that by the middle of the war the Germans really had a problem with alloying additives to steel

      This has nothing to do with the masses. The thing is more about the layout of German tanks.
      A 80 mm armor plate with vanadium, weighs about the same as with nickel - there percentages of the mass of steel are not more than 5-7%
      1. postman
        postman April 3 2013 17: 30 New
        +3
        Quote: Kars
        A 80 mm armor plate with vanadium, weighs about the same as with nickel

        V = 6,11 g / cm³
        Ni = 8,902 g / cm³
        Ni is 45,7% heavier!
        T.ch. for a 1mx1mx0,8m slab (V = 0,8m3) Ni containing will be 1,83% -2,56% HEAVIER.
        That agree a lot, yet not a statistical error
        according to rough estimates (excluding remote control, transmission, chassis and shells) for 60 tons this will give 1,1-2,0 tons of additives.
        and since it’s heavier, in order to transport this extra ton it will be required more powerful (its weight will increase), suspension (the same thing), fuel supply (the same thing).
        All other things being equal, of course (thickness, speed, range)
        1. Kars
          Kars April 3 2013 17: 48 New
          0
          Fighting not received
          http://vn-parabellum.com/ger/pz6b-art.html

          at the same time I brought the ligating elements to guess
          then the armor of different areas has a different composition.
          maybe not a statistical error, but against the background of the line-up, it may not pass for it
          1. postman
            postman April 3 2013 18: 35 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars
            Fighting not received

            1. "scissors" - if 7, for Khryushn "cut the screen" is a lot of prog.
            2. print in the MS XPS Document and "rip"
            1. Kars
              Kars April 3 2013 19: 00 New
              0
              It turned out to be easier to get through the proxy with the Java script disabled, although it can be disabled in the browser too.

              Quote: Postman
              I love specific numbers



              repeat
        2. Kars
          Kars April 3 2013 17: 53 New
          +1
          happened
          PP793 alloy had a composition of 0.34% carbon, 0.42% manganese, 0.39% silicon, 2.32% chromium, 0.22% molybdenum. In May 1942, it was decided to replace PP793 with the richer PP7182 alloy. The new alloy had the same amount of carbon, manganese, silicon, and molybdenum as in PP793, but with a slightly higher chromium content (1.7–2.3%) and the addition of nickel (0.40–1.00%). The combined percentage of chromium and nickel in PP7182 should have been at least 2.7%. The list of towers suggests that PP793 was used in towers with numbers up to 150116, and PP7182 was used in towers up to 150111.

          The composition of each of the standard armor plates varied greatly - thicker plates had more alloys saturated in percentage terms, and thick frontal plates contained deficient nickel, which is shown in the following table:

          Armor steel recipe as a percentage

          C Mn Si Cr Ni Mo V P&S
          E22 0.37-0.47 0.60-0.90 0.20-0.50 1.60-1.90 - - <0.15 <0.05
          E32 0.37-0.47 0.60-0.90 0.20-0.50 1.20-1.60 1.30-1.70 - <0.15 <0.05
          E40 0.32-0.42 0.3-0.65 0.15-0.50 2.00-2.40 - 0.15-0.30 - <0.05
          E41 0.30-0.40 0.60-0.90 0.20-0.50 2.30-2.70 1.00-1.50 - <0.15 <0.05
          E43 0.28-0.33 0.60-0.90 0.20-0.50 2.80-3.20 0.90-1.10 - - <0.05

          There is no evidence that poor German armor was used in the last years of the war. Throughout the war, all original documents are aligned with standard standards. In accordance with the guidelines of these standards, armor suppliers were required to request permission for the slightest deviation from the parameters of chemical composition or hardening. Requests for deviations were handled most carefully and were often rejected. The standards for resistance to penetration and rejection were carried out by firing armor-piercing shells at the submitted test samples from each heat. Then an analysis was carried out to understand why the rejected armor plates did not meet the requirements. A military inspector from the acceptance committee at the Krupa plant in Essen reported on May 5, 1944: "Test firing was carried out for Schmelze 594 (melt 594) and was successful. Schmelze 414 did not pass test firing. Plates made from this melt are rejected." And again, on May 10, 1944, the inspector reported: "The swimming trunks 9552 and 9553 did not pass the test firing and 10 rolled plates for the Tiger II towers made from these swimming trunks are rejected."

          The British studied the captured Tiger II (Fgst.Nr.280093) and in Report No. 17 compiled by AFV (T) 21 Army Group it says:
          "There are no signs of front hardening of the armor, although this was on some sheets of the prototype tower. Some values ​​of the hardness of the front side were obtained by the method of" Poldi "and Brinell and are as follows:

          The front sheet of the tower (180mm at 10 °) 190-200 according to Brinell
          The upper frontal sheet of the body (150mm at 50 °) 210-220 according to Brinell
          Side sheet of the tower (80mm at 20 °) 230-240 Brinell
          Side plate of the body (80mm at 25 °) 260-289 according to Brinell

          It should be noted that these values ​​were obtained on the surface of the armor without grinding away the surface of the armor: thus, it is possible that the hardness values ​​are slightly lower, since there are probably several degrees of surface decarburization. "
          1. postman
            postman April 3 2013 18: 50 New
            0
            Quote: Kars
            happened

            I love specific numbers.

            Quote: Kars
            and the addition of nickel (0.40-1.00%).

            You see the 1% and 7% difference, then my calculations by weight are not relevant, respectively REALLY (ceteris paribus) the specific gravity (density) of the armored plate with V and Ni = DO NOT PRACTICALLY DIFFERENT (since 7 is already an order, and not Tons and a hundred kg difference, tea is not a plane, will not fail)
            1930s (middle):
            at the Izhora plant decided to test the armor of Soviet tanks, the maximum thickness of which reached 15 and 20 mm. 37 mm caliber armor-piercing shells were fired at. "The results were shocking! Even at a very low speed, the projectile pierced or split armor. This meant that our tanks were not protected even from weak enough anti-tank artillery, when fired not only from short, but also from long ranges!" - the president of the Central Research Institute of CM "Prometheus", academician of the RAS Igor Gorynin writes in notes.

            young engineers Zavyalov and Popov (after they were accused of discrediting tank units of the Red Army) in May 1935 had to write a letter to a member of the Politburo, secretary of the Leningrad regional committee and city committee of the CPSU (b) Zhdanov

            May 17, 1936 Zavyalov and Popov were at a meeting of the Council of Labor and Defense.

            As a result of the meeting, the Council of Labor and Defense decided: to transfer the armored plants to the management of Spetsstal, to carry out the reconstruction of the Izhora and Mariupol plants, to carry out activities to create tanks, which would protect not only from bullets, but also from small-caliber shells. Zavyalov and Popov were reinstated at work. Director of Izhora plant fired.


            German military magazine "Soldat und Technik" in his article on the 25th anniversary of the creation of the T-34 wrote:
            "This tank, undoubtedly, was a true masterpiece in the history of the development of military equipment. It successfully combined the technical elements of a high-speed cruising tank with the high invulnerability inherent in the tank of direct infantry support."
          2. postman
            postman April 3 2013 18: 50 New
            +2
            Quote: Kars
            happened

            I love specific numbers.

            Quote: Kars
            and the addition of nickel (0.40-1.00%).

            You see the 1% and 7% difference, then my calculations by weight are not relevant, respectively REALLY (ceteris paribus) the specific gravity (density) of the armored plate with V and Ni = DO NOT PRACTICALLY DIFFERENT (since 7 is already an order, and not Tons and a hundred kg difference, tea is not a plane, will not fail)
            1930s (middle):
            at the Izhora plant decided to test the armor of Soviet tanks, the maximum thickness of which reached 15 and 20 mm. 37 mm caliber armor-piercing shells were fired at. "The results were shocking! Even at a very low speed, the projectile pierced or split armor. This meant that our tanks were not protected even from weak enough anti-tank artillery, when fired not only from short, but also from long ranges!" - the president of the Central Research Institute of CM "Prometheus", academician of the RAS Igor Gorynin writes in notes.

            young engineers Zavyalov and Popov (after they were accused of discrediting tank units of the Red Army) in May 1935 had to write a letter to a member of the Politburo, secretary of the Leningrad regional committee and city committee of the CPSU (b) Zhdanov

            May 17, 1936 Zavyalov and Popov were at a meeting of the Council of Labor and Defense.

            As a result of the meeting, the Council of Labor and Defense decided: to transfer the armored plants to the management of Spetsstal, to carry out the reconstruction of the Izhora and Mariupol plants, to carry out activities to create tanks, which would protect not only from bullets, but also from small-caliber shells. Zavyalov and Popov were reinstated at work. Director of Izhora plant fired.


            German military magazine "Soldat und Technik" in his article on the 25th anniversary of the creation of the T-34 wrote:
            "This tank, undoubtedly, was a true masterpiece in the history of the development of military equipment. It successfully combined the technical elements of a high-speed cruising tank with the high invulnerability inherent in the tank of direct infantry support."
          3. postman
            postman April 3 2013 18: 58 New
            0
            Quote: Kars
            happened
            № 2

            In the description of T-3 there is a table material consumption per T-3
            Eisen: 39.000 kg
            Kautschuk: 125 kg
            Aluminum: 90 kg
            Blei: 72 kg
            Kupfer: 60 kg
            Zink: 49 kg
            Zinn: 1,4 kg


            approx. on Eisen (German Werkstoff iron) of course you do not need to pay literal attention
            combining (in alloy) Eisen with other, except rubber and essium essno repeat get Stahl (Legierung)


            =======
            be proud
  16. postman
    postman April 3 2013 16: 59 New
    +2
    Quote: Author
    So the question is; "Was there a boy?" - everyone can answer within their own personal opinions

    According to (cover photo below)
    Jentz, Thomas L; Doyle, Hilary Louis (2001). Panzer Tracts 20-1: Paper Panzers, Panzerkampfwagen, Sturmgeschuetz, and Jagdpanzer. Boyds, MD: Panzer Tracts.
    (p. 60)

    This project belongs to the category of "paper". Nothing was done, and not done.
    PURPOSE: TO DECEATE AN ENEMY'S COUNTERPRECISION (CI)
    1. huut
      huut April 3 2013 18: 08 New
      +1
      I will support: Projects of Panzer IX and Panzer X tanks existed only on the drawing board. The Pz.Kpfw.X was supposed to be wider, but less low than the Maus, and had to be armed with an 88-mm or 128-mm gun.
      According to recent studies, the designers did not even develop or improve these projects, and these were just sketches (published in the journal Signal, 1944) created by propaganda to misinform the Allies about German tank building.


      I found this on a tank site for a long time, I don’t remember which one.
      1. postman
        postman April 3 2013 20: 13 New
        0
        Quote: huut
        I found this on a tank site for a long time, I don’t remember which one.

        Probably:
        http://www.panzer-archiv.de/startseite/index.php
        ?
  17. postman
    postman April 3 2013 17: 13 New
    +1
    More real projects were from Comrade Krupp (Dir. Dip. Ing. Grote and Dr. Hacker)
    PzKpfw P 1000/1500, so-called for the German Navy (Kriegsmarine) to protect the coast from the landing of the Allies.





    It was supposed to be a series of 14 different platforms from R1 to R14.
    VLD from 150mm to 380mm. Guns, for R2 e.g. 280mm

    The Germans were generally strong in "projects"
    PzJag. 38 (d)

    ===============
    Specification P1000 (?)
    1. Alex
      Alex 1 October 2013 23: 08 New
      +3
      Quote: Postman (3)
      More real projects were from Comrade Krupp (Dir. Dip. Ing. Grote and Dr. Hacker)
      PzKpfw P 1000 / 1500

      No more than anything else. Such a monster could hardly even move on its own, not that it’s possible to stamp somewhere under its own power. Not to mention the soul festival for aviation. It is simply strange to what insanity Grotte has come after his very decent TG, which was almost accepted for service in the Red Army.
  18. Ivan Tarasov
    Ivan Tarasov April 3 2013 19: 29 New
    0
    The German tank design school came to a standstill in the late 30s, and remained in it throughout the war.
    The Soviet design school, on the contrary, was moving in the right direction and developing.
    That's the whole secret.
    The Germans could apply incredible inventions by creating various models, but still, the very concept of the layout of the tank remained incorrect.
  19. postman
    postman April 3 2013 20: 46 New
    0
    Quote: Ivan Tarasov
    German tank design school stalled at the end of the 30s


    The German tank-building school relied on suspension, increased armor and gun lengths, improved surveillance devices (including infrared night-vision devices), guidance, and the USSR on flow.
    From a technical and engineering point of view (it seems to me), but not practical, German tanks are more interesting.


    The report of the deputy head of the Office for the mechanization and motorization of the Red Army I.K. Gryaznov Voroshilov dated March 14, 1932 noted that familiarization of our engineers with the material of German combat vehicles, as well as the study of their drawings and test conclusions made it possible to practically use the German experience, and it was further listed that it was from German achievements that it was used in Soviet tanks: in T-28 - Krupp tank suspensions, in T-26, BT and T-28 - welded hulls of German tanks, in T-28 and T-35 - internal placement teams in the bow, in T-26, BT, T-28 - surveillance devices, sights, the idea of ​​pairing guns with a machine gun, electrical equipment, radio equipment.
    Valuable acquisitions were made in other areas. So, licenses for a number of artillery systems were purchased from the German company Rheinmetall. This is, in particular, the 76 mm anti-aircraft gun of the 1931 model. Later, as a result of its modernization, Soviet designers created the 76-mm anti-aircraft gun of the 1938 model and the 85-mm anti-aircraft gun of the 1939 model. In addition, a system of shipboard 76-mm anti-aircraft guns was developed on its basis.
    Another German-acquired artillery system was the 37 mm anti-tank gun. On its basis, the famous “forty-five” was created - a 1930-mm anti-tank gun of the 45 model.
    1. Ivan Tarasov
      Ivan Tarasov April 3 2013 22: 37 New
      0
      Tanks with a front transmission - utopia.
      Be the Germans a little farsighted, bet on the seal layout, using a transverse engine ...
      With this arrangement, with a tank mass of 40 tons, it was possible to get a speed of 60 km / h (engine 700 hp) and a reservation of 150-200 mm in the front projection, and 80-100 in the side (armament 75 / L70).
      1. postman
        postman April 4 2013 01: 09 New
        0
        Quote: Ivan Tarasov
        Tanks with a front transmission - utopia.

        ?
        1, USSR (1941) A-44 (A. A. Morozov-KB-24 at Kharkov Plant No. 183)

        2. USSR (1950) medium tank "Object 416"

        3.SSSR (late 80s early 90s) "Leader 2000-2005" Design Bureau of the Kirov Plant (LKZ)


        We take the drawings of the T-34, the ruler and measure the Panther T-34 overtaken by a miserable 10 centimeters- HEIGHT.
        "Tanks. Design and calculation" 1943 / USSR
        LOCATION OF THE TRANSMISSION IN THE FEED
        Facilities.
        a) in the fighting compartment, free from units and mechanisms of the force group, favorable conditions are created for better placement of weapons, ammunition and crew.
        b) the transmission as a source of noise generation is located outside the fighting compartment

        Disadvantages.
        a) Difficulties in locating the center of gravity of light tanks at the desired point along the longitudinal axis.
        b) Inspection and maintenance of the engine and transmission requires the crew to leave the tank
        c) A relatively complex system of control drives — rods to the gearbox and the steering mechanisms extend along the entire length of the tank, and access to them is difficult — due to the fact that the rods work not only in tension, but also in compression, they must be massive and divided by a system of rollers to a number of sites. -In winter, it is possible to freeze the rods to the bottom, especially after draining the water from the engine.

        ACCOMMODATION OF TRANSMISSION IN THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT
        Benefits.
        1. The ease of ensuring the position of the central heating point at the desired point and the smoothness of the oscillations due to the dispersal of the heaviest units at the ends of the tank
        2. The ability to place light tank weapons in the middle part of the tank, which is least exposed to longitudinal vibrations.
        3. The ability to inspect and maintain the transmission without leaving the tank. 4. Reducing the number and length of control rods
        5. Reducing the total length of the tank (by combining the transmission compartment with the control compartment), and with it the weight of the tank.
        Disadvantages.
        1. The deterioration of the conditions for the placement of weapons, crew and ammunition due to the passage of the transmission through the fighting compartment. 2. The front location of the drive wheel and the associated large possibility of defeating the tracked engine.
        1. postman
          postman April 4 2013 01: 09 New
          0
          =================
          So you’ll think, which is flawed
          Well this one everyone knows



          Utopia?
          1. Kars
            Kars April 4 2013 01: 22 New
            0
            Quote: Postman
            Quote: Ivan Tarasov
            Tanks with a front transmission - utopia.
            ?

            Do not confuse the front placement of the MTO, and the placement of the transmission in the bow, and the engine in the stern. As was done in German tanks.
            1. postman
              postman April 4 2013 03: 08 New
              +1
              Quote: Kars
              Do not confuse the front placement of the MTO

              I do not confuse.
              But the transmission is FRONT!
              1. Kars
                Kars April 4 2013 14: 05 New
                0
                Quote: Postman
                But the transmission is FRONT!

                But along with the engine. By the way a very scary version of the Tiger, the Germans did not have enough
                originality.
          2. Kars
            Kars April 4 2013 01: 24 New
            0
            _____________________________
  20. svp67
    svp67 April 3 2013 20: 55 New
    0
    Quote: Ivan Tarasov
    The Germans could apply incredible inventions by creating various models, but still, the very concept of the layout of the tank remained incorrect.



    The Americans used the same layout principle and released the 49 234 of the Shermans alone, so what? Apparently the matter is something else. Maybe the Germans overestimated their capabilities and they shouldn’t be so "sprayed" - to put on the conveyor, from scratch, two types of new tanks. Maybe it was necessary to do it somehow differently. For example, at the first stage, abandon the production of a new "medium" tank, and increase the production of the "well-deserved" Quartet. " And as a heavy one, take not a “tiger”, but a tank with the shapes and dimensions of a “panther”, but with an 88 mm gun
    1. Ivan Tarasov
      Ivan Tarasov April 3 2013 22: 40 New
      0
      Belatedly, the Americans came to their senses, realizing that they had reached an impasse, and switched to a more correct layout (Pershing tank).
      1. Kars
        Kars April 3 2013 22: 47 New
        0
        Quote: Ivan Tarasov
        realizing that they had reached an impasse, and switched to a more correct layout (Pershing tank)

        And how is the layout of Pershing (by the way a heavy tank) different from Sherman?
        1. postman
          postman April 4 2013 01: 20 New
          +2
          Quote: Kars
          different from Sherman?

          Sherman is so "smooth"

          You got a T25 (equipped with an electric transmission and suspension from Sherman)

          You can see it clearly


          Well, plus “Torquematic" and torsion bar suspension from T25E1
          1. Kars
            Kars April 4 2013 01: 29 New
            0
            Quote: Postman
            You with T25 beguiled

            Not then you need rabiratsa - the general layout, or the layout of the MTO.
            1. postman
              postman April 4 2013 03: 24 New
              +2
              Quote: Kars
              Not then you need rabiratsa - the general layout, or the layout of the MTO.

              Pershing: like ours
              M4 Sherman: like the Germans
              T25 (USA)


              Sherman is the other way around (with the same HVSS suspension and electric transmission), but it's all in the back.
              But the scheme is the rear, transmission front,not
              Quote: Ivan Tarasov
              Front Transmission Tanks - Utopia..


              Chaffee M24
              1. Kars
                Kars April 4 2013 14: 03 New
                -1
                Quote: Postman
                Pershing: like ours
                M4 Sherman: like the Germans


                Well, I think Pershing is still a purely American tank, and I don’t see the point of looking for roots. We’ll get to Renault 17.

                But AMX is also a representative of the front placement of the MTO. A stone in the garden of Merkava.
          2. Kars
            Kars April 4 2013 01: 32 New
            0
            _________________
  21. Landwarrior
    Landwarrior April 4 2013 08: 28 New
    0
    M-ya .... The closer the Soviet Army approached Berlin, the more "wunderwaffles" appeared on paper laughing
  22. awerkiev
    awerkiev April 4 2013 12: 05 New
    -3
    Yes, they stole from the Germans godless projects laughing What do you do ?! There was a war!
    1. Alex
      Alex 2 October 2013 09: 18 New
      +2
      Quote: awerkiev

      Yes, they stole from the Germans godless projects

      But more precisely thought can be developed?
  23. Alex
    Alex 2 October 2013 09: 25 New
    +3
    They wanted everything at once: the armor was indestructible, and the all-astonishing gun, and unprecedented maneuverability. But you can’t get everything for one price (this is Malcolm McDowell in the film Caligula said).
    Similar “miracle projects” in Germany seem to be a tradition. The worse things are at the front, the more delusional designs appear. What is only one "Colossal" in the WWI is. All these “Lions”, “Bears” and “Rats” with “Mice” are worth the same. Sober-minded pragmatists win the war, not brilliant, but “doctors” and “academics” hovering in the clouds.
  24. BM-13
    BM-13 7 August 2014 15: 39 New
    +3
    Paper can stand it.