"Comrade Khrushchev is concerned about the state of affairs in the field of tank technology": 1962 transcript
Object 775 is the apotheosis of the concept voiced by Khrushchev himself
August 1962 years
History domestic tank industry is full of twists and turns. This is especially true for the first post-war decades, when the concept of the main battle tank of the Soviet Union was being developed. The 50s and 60s are notable first of all - it was during this time that the most bizarre designs of armored vehicles appeared. Engineers had to maneuver between the requirements for protection against weapons mass destruction, which was becoming more and more powerful, elementary ergonomics, speed and firepower. And the tank was also supposed to fight with its own kind, infantry and other tank-hazardous targets. As a result, compromise machines were born, such as Object 911B, considered the prototype of the BMP-1, or the floating light tank Object 906B, which was planned to replace the PT-76. Even a cursory glance at the outline of these tanks makes you think about the idea of reducing visibility on the battlefield, taken to the point of absurdity.
The leadership of the Chelyabinsk region and plant No. 100 (Kirov Plant of the People's Commissariat of Tank Industry in Chelyabinsk, ChKZ) at the T-34 tank. From left to right: Chief Engineer of Plant No. 100 Sergei Nesterovich Manokhin (19.10.1900 - 07.07.1980), 2nd Secretary of the Chelyabinsk Regional Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) Leonid Semenovich Baranov (24.04.1909 - 11.11.1953), Director of Plant No. 100 Isaac Moiseevich Zaltsman (09.12.1905 - 17.07.1988), Chief Designer of Plant No. 100 Joseph Yakovlevich Kotin (10.03.1908 - 21.10.1979), 1st Secretary of the Chelyabinsk Regional Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) Nikolai Semenovich Patolichev (23.09.1908 - 01.12.1989). 1943 - 1944
An important source of information about the events of the 1962th century in the Soviet Union is the Russian State Archive of Economics. It is here that you can find unique and already declassified documents of a bygone era. One of them is offered to the attention of the readers of "Military Review". We are talking about the transcript of a meeting of the heads of the military-industrial complex under the leadership of the Deputy Chairman of the State Committee of the Council of Ministers of the USSR for Defense Technology Sergei Nestorovich Makhonin. The meeting dates back to August XNUMX and lasted four days.
Among those present is Vasily Stepanovich Starovoytov, director of VNII-100 (All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Transport Engineering), the main institute in tank research in the Soviet Union. Among those invited is Vsevolod Vasilyevich Ierusalimsky, deputy director for research at the Moscow branch of VNII-100, and many others.
The meeting was built around Starovoitov's report, which outlined the prospects for developing the design of a new generation tank. It was supposed to be rocket and qualitatively surpass the T-64, which was being developed at the time. That is, those present literally looked beyond the horizon. The transcript of the meeting has been preserved in a single copy, of sufficient size, and, if readers of "Military Review" are interested, it may well be published in full.
The transcript allows not only to feel the atmosphere of that time, but also to understand how decisions were made in the domestic military industry. And they were made under the serious influence of senior comrades, if one can say so. Below is the transcript of the speech of Leonid Vasilyevich Smirnov, in 1962 he was the Chairman of the State Committee of the Council of Ministers of the USSR for Defense Technology. It is necessary to take into account that the stenographer recorded direct speech with the corresponding features of sentence construction.
A powerful leap
“Comrades, last night we returned from the North, where we conducted tests and inspections of training and a demonstration of the Naval weapons. Fleet. Yesterday I shared my impressions with some comrades, and we said that there is much that is instructive here for other industries, especially for the tank industry. I want to share, because you will be working here for four days.
Comrade Khrushchev said that we will soon arrange a review of the state of tank equipment. Now he has named a specific date - September.
Comrade Khrushchev is concerned about the state of affairs in the field of tank technology. He said that recently we had an unfavorable situation in the Navy, but now he highly praised the results of the work of designers, developers, weapons developers and naval officers. This reflects both concern and anxiety about the state of affairs in the tank field. He said that, unfortunately, we still have strong traditions from the previous period of time, the previous war, and often both developers and military specialists and the military who operate this weaponry do not always actively and revolutionary approach the solution of fundamental problems. He said that several years ago he was in the Pacific Fleet, that his comrades there showed him coastal defense guns and said - this is the thickness of the casemate walls, this is the caliber of the gun, this is how many kilometers it can hit, and he said that I was concerned about the attitude of the people - their satisfaction with the existing situation.
But we are taking measures. A lot of work has been done with developers, naval personnel, design institutes, and now fundamental changes have taken place in the Navy. And there is a powerful leap there that can satisfy the requirements of our sea borders. N. S. Khrushchev expressed concern that there is no real new leap in tank technology, although there are improvements. We offer practically nothing.
If there were designers and naval officers left in this area, they would have installed heavier armor and a better caliber, a longer barrel, a weight of 40-60, but that’s not it.
When people put jet weapons on ships and individual types of distances became thousands of kilometers. N. S. Khrushchev expressed the opinion that this ancient competition of armor and projectiles still has a very wide and is able to keep both the military and developers at the level of old traditions. How to better think through and improve the caliber.
Today the question was asked - are these mods or calculations? This is a typical question.
Is it possible to consider prospective tank armament in this way now? Mods change periodically.
We had artillery, and now it has been replaced by a reactive part. This is better than any artillery. Artillery will not return. Artillery in tanks will follow this path. For this, tank crews, instrument operators, and weaponeers will have to work very hard.
Comrade Khrushchev is worried that we currently do not have such a direction, a fundamental change, an improvement in tank armament. He expressed thoughts that now the competition between armor and projectiles seems to be futile. Now these projectiles pierce powerful armor, and by the time they have to be put into action, then the "Bumblebee" will sharpen its sting even more. The idea of going down the path of thickening the armor is apparently a futile direction. He went on to say that a tank must be reliably protected from a shock wave, from fragments and bullets, from radiation, from bacteriological and chemical weapons, from powerful light radiation, but one cannot count on the fact that the tank's protection should withstand any direct hit. This is certainly true, and therefore its protection from a direct hit is in camouflage in the folds of the terrain, in its dimensions, this is a sharp decrease in dimensions, this is squatting and its self-entrenching.
Now the main force in the Navy is nuclear and non-nuclear submarines, they go deep, they are not visible, they have a large radius of autonomous navigation and carry powerful missile weapons. And we need to think about protecting the tank from a direct shot, and this is a question of reducing the dimensions. We must go this way, you can't take armor here.
287 object
We need to find certain fundamental paths, a leap, a breakaway from the level of technology of our potential enemy, we need to find ways to comprehensively solve a number of problems here. In addition to the fact that tankers and engine specialists themselves must work, we must pay great attention to our own work on weapons. Our developers here do not have a very broad approach to solving the problem. The weaponry specialists need to work a lot so that this weapon can be launched from a round pipe. Instrument operators, managers, sighters need to work seriously, especially in night vision, where things are bad, we need to seriously go along the line of improving communications. Is it possible to leave such large-sized equipment? Here the question was asked how much space will be allocated for the equipment. I would like to say that we should not demand an answer from the speaker (V.S. Starovoytov - editor's note) to the question of whether the background is taken into account or not, and other things. If a promising tank were being defended now, these questions could be answered, but now this is not the question.
But now it is not like that. The armament specialists, the instrument specialists have come forward with questions that you are not making the necessary demands. This is the task, to go down this path specifically now. Conventional elements have dimensions, film elements reduce the dimensions by two orders of magnitude - give them to us. There must be fundamental, big changes. If everyone argues - give them to me, the task will not be solved. We understand the difficulties. You must definitely, as a result of the discussion, develop a technical line, a direction for all organizations, which would allow us to really have a leap. This includes jet weapons, and the overall part, and protection from bacteria and radiation, range and accuracy.
In conclusion, I want to say - you need to work more actively, think, argue: so that there are no passive people in the sections. You can't say that we can't, and don't make demands on us.
In September, there will be a review of equipment. Some of those sitting there will directly report on the prospects: these are tankers, instrument operators, and weapon specialists. We have some experience. There will not be a single chief designer who would not report: what are the shortcomings, how can they be eliminated, how can the problems be solved, and in what time frame. It will not be possible to approach it formally. We must develop a line, find a solution in disputes. Your decision will be the technical focus. We will report to the government on this decision. I do not want any of you to end up in a bad position.
In the end, I ask you to think more deeply and argue with each other during these four days. When N. S. Khrushchev spoke to us for the first time in June, we gathered only developers and said what the main direction was. A month has passed. Now, in four days, we need to work out the main directions so that the prospects are clear. Much will depend on your work. We are giving you the opportunity to think again, to know more about solving technical problems, where there are reserves and achievements in the creation of submarines and spaceships. In conversations with individual comrades, one feels isolation.
They tell me that we need to create dehumidifiers – small cabins in tanks, and therefore we need to ensure life support. We have done a lot of work in this area to ensure life support for submarines and spaceships. We can communicate with satellites.
You developers need to do more, study the issues better, and if there are no conditions, we will be able to create them so that you study them and so that you don’t reinvent the wheel with wooden wheels.
In conclusion, allow me to wish you active creative work. The purpose of my speech was to convey the thoughts and instructions that Comrade Khrushchev expressed, and to appeal to you with a request to approach the work of this conference more seriously and more actively over the course of four days, because we will rely on your conference, and you will have to speak in September. I wanted to express my point of view in this part and wish you active fruitful work in your conference."
Information