Military Review

Red Star Foreigners

71
The role in the victory over the enemy, the quality and capabilities of the combat equipment supplied by the allies under the Lend-Lease, remain at the center of the heated debates that are conducted by both professional historians and amateurs. Often in the debate on "what is better - Sherman or T-34?" Dominated by emotions and politics. However, a sober look at the facts and figures do not give a clear answer to such questions.


Deliveries of armored vehicles to the USSR began in the fall of 1941. On September 3, Stalin sent a letter to Churchill, the content of which the prime minister had brought to President Roosevelt. Stalin’s message spoke of a deadly threat looming over the Soviet Union, which could only be removed by opening a second front and urgently sending 30 tons of aluminum to the USSR, as well as at least 000 aircraft and 400 tanks monthly. In accordance with the First (Moscow) Protocol, the United States and Great Britain pledged to supply 4500 tanks and 1800 tankettes within nine months.

Armor is strong

The first in the USSR in October 1941 with the convoy PQ-1 were the English Matilda. The British adopted the infantry tank Mk II Matilda on the eve of the Second World War, it was most widely used in North Africa and on the Soviet-German front. This 27 ton machine was protected by a 78-mm frontal armor and armed with an 42-mm cannon. Depending on the modification, two 6-cylinder AES or Leyland diesel engines were installed in tanks with a total power of 174 or 190 hp, the maximum speed reached 24 km / h - more for an infantry direct support vehicle and was not required.

For the 1941 – 1942, the Matilda was the least vulnerable machine, surpassing our KB in this respect: only shells of the German 88-mm anti-aircraft guns could "take" it, but not tank and anti-tank guns. The “Matilda” cannon was not inferior to our “forty-five” and, like her, until the summer of 1942, German tanks of all types were struck.

The power plant and the Matilda planetary gearbox were very reliable, but the well-protected undercarriage was difficult. It worked perfectly on flat solid ground, but it was quickly breaking down on Russian roads. The small volume of the three-seat turret and the small diameter of the turret charm did not allow the artillery system of a larger caliber to be placed in it, which predetermined the fate of the Matilda: by the 1943, it was no longer used in the combat units of the British army. Until August, 1943 "Matild" was released by 2987, of which the British delivered 1084 to the USSR.

Tank crew favorite

The McI Valentine was also an infantry tank. By weight (16 t), he rather belonged to light ones, although by thickness of armor (65 mm) exceeded other heavy machines. Its maximum speed was the same as that of the “Matilda”, which was explained by a less powerful engine. The Valentine I installed a carburetor engine with 135 horsepower, while the rest of the modifications were diesel engines AES and GMC with 131, 138 and 165 hp engines.

Despite the increase in power, the dynamic characteristics of the machine did not change, since its mass increased: starting with Valentine VIII instead of 40-mm they put 57-mm cannon, and on Valentine XI - with a gun of 75 mm.

A special feature of this tank was the lack of skeletons to build the hull and turret; Bronelists processed by templates and sizes so that they mutually closed. When assembling the housing separate units joined by bolts and rivets. In contrast to the "Matilde", the chassis of "Valentine" was not booked: moreover, the brake drums were located outside the body, which adversely affected their survivability. The drawback was the dense layout of the fighting compartment, especially for vehicles with a three-seat tower models III and V.

British and 2394 Canadian Valentines were sent to the Soviet Union; in the latter, instead of the English coaxial 1388-mm BESA machine gun, the American 7,92-mm Browning М7,62А1914 was installed. Machines were supplied with 1- and 40-mm guns. The Soviet tankmen "Valentine" was the most popular of British tanks. Suffice it to say that in 57 – 1944, its production was preserved solely for the satisfaction of Soviet applications.

Namesake premiere

The heavy infantry tank Mk IV Churchill is better known from the phrase allegedly said by the legendary English prime minister: “The tank that bears my name has more flaws than me.” Yes, his device was very archaic: in order to increase the volume of the hull, the designers of the Vauxhall motors company placed the undercarriage elements under the hull, the caterpillar skirted it, like those of the First World War period.

But they achieved this goal: in the power compartment they installed a Bedford 12-cylinder horizontal engine with an 350 horsepower, and thanks to a wide sheet sheet, they used a tower with 57-mm (starting with Churchill III) and then with 75-mm cannons . A 40-mm gun was installed on Churchill I and Churchill II, which was not enough for a heavy tank, so an 76-mm howitzer was also mounted in the front plate. 152-toned machine protected by 40-mm armor developed speed up to 25 km / h.

Reliable, in general, the undercarriage had significant drawbacks: the high frontal branch of the caterpillar was vulnerable to artillery fire, and the caterpillar itself often wedged the tower. Nevertheless, until the end of the war we released 5460 «Churchill". In the 1942 – 1943 in the USSR, the 301 tank modifications III and IV were installed, differing only in the method of manufacturing the tower. Perhaps they sent several Churchill-Crocodile flame-thrower tanks (such a machine is on display at the Museum of armored vehicles in Kubinka).

A typical drawback of British infantry tanks, typical of Soviet tanks of the first period of the war (excluding KB), was a small amount of combat compartment and the inability of the undercarriage to Russian conditions. In general, these were reliable vehicles, superior to the German ones in terms of armor protection, and capable of effectively fighting them in terms of armor until the Tigers and Panthers appeared on the battlefield.

Full speed ahead on good gasoline!

The first American tanks that arrived in the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease program were the lightweight M3 General Stuart and the average M3 General Lee, better known as the M3 and M3. The M3 is deservedly considered the best light tank of World War II. The British tankers who fought in North Africa forgave him both the weak armament and the fire hazard of the aircraft engine, but the Stuart allowed them to constantly hang on the tail of the pursued German-Italian troops.

The tank’s dynamic performance was excellent: a Continental 7 cylinder engine with an HP 250 power. clocked up a 12-ton car to 58 km / h; tank mobility and efficiency of its running gear found amazing. That's just the 37-mm gun, which is not inferior to the Soviet 45-mm in terms of armor penetration, turned out to be rather weak by the 1942 year. Place the same more powerful artillery system did not allow the size of the tower. Nevertheless, the M3l was produced before 1943, until it was replaced by a more advanced M5, which had both advantages and disadvantages of its predecessor.

In 1942–1943, the Red Army received 1665 M3 and M3A1 tanks, which, if they were not superior, then not inferior to the Soviet T-60 and T-70. With the general simplicity and reliability, the M3l showed a significant drawback: if the T-60 and T-70 automobile engines willingly consumed low-grade gasoline, the Stuart motor preferred exclusively high-octane aviation, on our fuel, it quickly failed.

Vulnerable three-story building

The other "general" - М3с - our tankers dubbed the "common grave for seven". Having met the war with virtually no tanks, the Americans often made decisions lying on the surface, because there was no time for a deep elaboration of the projects. Therefore, 75-mm cannon was placed in the side sponsor (ledge), which was much easier and faster than developing the original tower. The limited firing angle of the 75-mm gun was compensated by installing a turret with an 37-mm cannon, and a machine gun above the turret.

Thus, a 27-ton three-story mastodon with a height of 3 m was formed; The 340-strong nine-cylinder star-shaped aircraft engine Continental accelerated this multi-magnificence up to 42 km / h, so the M3s were as good as German tanks for mobility. As for weapons, for all the flaws in its layout, it remained quite powerful until 1942.

According to the British, General Lee turned out to be the strongest tank they had in North Africa: its 75-mm cannon cracked any German machines as a nut, and 37-mm armor confidently held the attacks of enemy shells. It was worse with the survivability of the chassis. In the 1941 – 1942, the 6258 “Lee” produced six modifications that differed only in manufacturing technology. 1386 tanks M3 arrived to us. Despite the impressive appearance, the Red Army men and commanders did not care about them what the nickname given to them meant so much.

M4 Sherman and T-34: not twins, but brothers

Realizing the inborn flaws of the “General Lee”, the Americans engaged in the creation of a medium tank with an 75-mm gun in a bash-not circular rotation. All models of this tank, which received the army name М4 General Sherman, were similar in appearance. Only the type of power plant differed, and the guns, turrets, and layout were the same. Outwardly, only the M4А1 with a molded case stood out. Baptism "Shermans" received in November 1942 of the year in North Africa near El Alaimen and proved to be the strongest in this theater of operations.

At the beginning of 1943, they appeared on the Soviet-German front. Since the US Army was considered the standard carburetor engine, the model M4A2 with two 6-cylinder diesel engines GMC 6046 power 375 hp it did not find use in it and was mainly exported to England and the USSR.

Armament and booking "Sherman" are not inferior to the T-34. The smaller tilt angle of the armor plates was compensated for by their greater thickness, and the 75-mm gun before the appearance of the Tigers and the Panthers hit German tanks of all types. However, a new gun with a caliber of 76 mm with an initial speed of an armor-piercing projectile 810 m / s allowed the Sherman to hit the enemy's heavy tanks at a distance of up to 1 km. Soviet tankers liked the Shermans with their viscous armor 50 – 75 mm thick; on 1944 – 1945 machines, its thickness reached 75 – 100 mm.

Patency МХNUMXА4 of the first series, equipped with rubberized tracks, was limited, and soon they were replaced with new ones - with a rubber-metal hinge (silent-block), which increased the survivability of the fingers connecting the tracks. In addition, the grouser spurs were attached to the tracks. With rubber caterpillars, the Sherman accelerated to 2 km / h.

Significant deficiencies had a suspension of this tank - the same as the M3. At the end of March, the 1945 of the year changed its structure: instead of two rollers in the cart, two paired ones were used, the buffer springs were made horizontal, rather than vertical, as before; on the carts put the shock absorbers. At the same time solved the problem of lubrication.

An important advantage of the Shermans - like other American and British tanks - was the presence of a conventional or large caliber anti-aircraft machine gun; on the Soviet EC-2 and heavy self-propelled guns they appeared only in 1944 year. A total of 10 960 tanks МNNUMXА4 were manufactured, 2 vehicles arrived in the USSR - including 4063 with 1990-mm gun and 75 - with 2073-mm gun. In May-June, the 76 of the year received several vehicles with horizontal suspension, which, as part of the 1945 mechanized corps, participated in the defeat of the Kwantung Army.

In general, the Sherman was reliable and easy to use, which was confirmed by its tests in the winter and summer of 1943. By the end of tests М4А2 passed 3050 km without serious damage. Losing T-34 in the dynamics of movement (due to a less powerful power plant) and in side stability (the higher and narrower Sherman often fell on its side), the American tank had a number of important advantages.

In particular, one additional crew member (5 man at Sherman versus 4 man in T-34) allowed the functions of the gunner and the tank commander to be separated. The combination of these functions in the Soviet tank often led to a slow reaction to enemy fire and, as a result, to defeat in tank duels.


Red Star Foreigners

British women are preparing the tank "Matilda" for shipment to the USSR under the Lend-Lease. In the UK then everything Soviet was very fashionable and popular, so that the workers with sincere pleasure displayed Russian words on the tank's armor.


The crew of the British medium tank Mk II Matilda II, delivered to the USSR under the Lend-Lease. Bryansk Front, summer 1942 of the year.


Loading tanks "Matilda" in one of the British ports to be sent to the USSR.


Cromwell MK VII The story of the lend-lease armored vehicles would be incomplete, if not to mention a few cars sent specifically for testing. These are five American tanks М5, two М24 "Chaffee" and one М26 "General Pershing", as well as six British "Cromwell". Add 115 armored repair and recovery vehicles M31, created on the basis of the medium tank M3, and 25 of the Valentine Bridalleader roadblocks.


A company of General Li, the M3s of American tanks, supplied under Lend-Lease in the USSR, is being pushed to the front line of the Soviet 6 Guards Army. July 1943 of the year.


The jubilant residents of Sofia greet Soviet soldiers entering the Bulgarian capital on “Valentine” tanks, which were supplied to the USSR under Lend-Lease.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.popmech.ru/
71 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Best novel
    Best novel 25 May 2013 07: 33 New
    -3
    "In particular, one additional crew member (5 people at Sherman versus 4 people in the T-34) made it possible to separate the functions of a gunner and a tank commander. Combining these functions in a Soviet tank often led to a delayed reaction to enemy fire and ultimately to defeat in tank duels. "Where is the information from? T-34 crew: commander, gunner, loader, mech-water and gunner-radio operator. If in the future the crew was reduced to 4 people, it was exclusively the abolition of the gunner-radio operator, but not the combination of commander and gunner . These are the original Swedes, they shoot mech-water, he is the same gunner (tank STRV), and we are not like that.
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 25 May 2013 07: 50 New
      10
      memoirs of fur-waters Sherman Romanenko Anatoly (comments on his grandson)

      From his memories:
      1. Very good viscous armor. At the Berlin exhibition, the tank had either 5 or 12 (I don’t remember) stuck shells in the frontal.
      2. Ammunition either in glycol or in water (I don’t remember), very high explosion safety. Grandfather said that “Sherman” gave the crew MUCH time to evacuate.
      3. An excellent cannon and shells for it, according to my grandfather, even compared with the T-34-85, "my hand was more authentic and a half times", although the T-34-85 was considered a good machine.
      4. A large nomenclature of shells, even propaganda.
      5. Good quality optics.
      6. A very easy-to-drive car, "the drivers were very fond of it, but what, we are constantly on the march, in a breakthrough."
      7. "Inside, everything was painted with white paint, the first tanks when they received it, inside there was a set of fur leather raglans for the whole crew and a box of cigarettes with a camel on a pack without a filter. Then the rear crews left nothing."
      8. Very reliable and high-torque Cummings diesels (or GMC ??? I will clarify). "Just luxury, not motors!" "
      9. I remember my grandfather stubbornly talked about the mortar on the roof of the tower — has anyone heard of such a modification of the Sherman? I told him that maybe he confuses the mortar and the heavy machine gun - my grandfather laughed and said, “if you stick your hand out of the hatch and lower the mine into the pipe, what kind of machine gun is it? It helped us in the city ..” Maybe the homemade craftsmen from the Rombat ?.
      1. Denis
        Denis 25 May 2013 08: 17 New
        +2
        Quote: Vadivak
        I remember my grandfather stubbornly talked about the mortar on the roof of the tower, has anyone heard of such a modification of the "Sherman"
        Maybe on Churchill? There 50,8 mm mortar with smoke grenades
        1. Vadivak
          Vadivak 25 May 2013 23: 52 New
          +3
          Quote: Denis
          Maybe on Churchill? There 50,8 mm mortar with smoke grenades

          Kars knows for sure, I think some kind of homemade
          1. Denis
            Denis 26 May 2013 00: 53 New
            +3
            All I could find
            I read in Russian tanks №62, but there is nothing to scan

            TACTICAL AND TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INFANTRY TANK Mark IV Churchill III
            BATTLE WEIGHT, t: 39,574.

            CREW, pers .: 5.

            OVERALL DIMENSIONS, mm: length - 7442, width - 3251, height - 2450, clearance - 530.

            WEAPONS: 1 gun Mk III or Mk IV caliber b pounds, 2 machine gun BESA caliber 7,92 mm, 1 anti-aircraft machine gun Vgep caliber 7,7 mm, 1 smoke grenade launcher caliber 50,5 mm.

            Ammunition: 84 artillery rounds, 4950 cartridges for machine guns BESA, 600 cartridges for machine gun Vgep, 30 smoke grenades.
            Quote: Vadivak
            I think some kind of homemade
          2. Kars
            Kars 26 May 2013 09: 45 New
            +2
            ___________________
            1. Kars
              Kars 26 May 2013 09: 46 New
              +2
              ________________
      2. Drummer
        Drummer 25 May 2013 17: 42 New
        +4
        On the miller are the memoirs of Vasily Loza "Tanker on a foreign car", there is much written about Matilda and Sherman. About Sherman, unlike Matilda, he responds very warmly, basically, his impressions agree with what you wrote: a reliable engine with a huge, by our standards, resource, an accurate and powerful gun, an excellent sight, a good walkie-talkie.
      3. Karlsonn
        Karlsonn 25 May 2013 18: 55 New
        +3
        Quote: Vadivak
        inside was a set of fur leather raglans for the whole crew and a box of cigarettes with a camel in a pack without a filter. Then the rear did not leave anything. "


        on the picture:

        A rare photo of Soviet tank crews with the Stunt M3A1, in American headsets, with the Thompson M1928A1 submachine gun and the M1919A4 machine gun. American technology was left fully leased by Lend-Lease - with equipment and even small arms for the crew.
      4. Vovka levka
        Vovka levka 25 May 2013 21: 19 New
        +9
        Quote: Vadivak
        memoirs of fur-waters Sherman Romanenko Anatoly (comments on his grandson)

        From his memories:
        1. Very good viscous armor. At the Berlin exhibition, the tank had either 5 or 12 (I don’t remember) stuck shells in the frontal.
        2. Ammunition either in glycol or in water (I don’t remember), very high explosion safety. Grandfather said that “Sherman” gave the crew MUCH time to evacuate.
        3. An excellent cannon and shells for it, according to my grandfather, even compared with the T-34-85, "my hand was more authentic and a half times", although the T-34-85 was considered a good machine.
        4. A large nomenclature of shells, even propaganda.
        5. Good quality optics.
        6. A very easy-to-drive car, "the drivers were very fond of it, but what, we are constantly on the march, in a breakthrough."
        7. "Inside, everything was painted with white paint, the first tanks when they received it, inside there was a set of fur leather raglans for the whole crew and a box of cigarettes with a camel on a pack without a filter. Then the rear crews left nothing."
        8. Very reliable and high-torque Cummings diesels (or GMC ??? I will clarify). "Just luxury, not motors!" "
        9. I remember my grandfather stubbornly talked about the mortar on the roof of the tower — has anyone heard of such a modification of the Sherman? I told him that maybe he confuses the mortar and the heavy machine gun - my grandfather laughed and said, “if you stick your hand out of the hatch and lower the mine into the pipe, what kind of machine gun is it? It helped us in the city ..” Maybe the homemade craftsmen from the Rombat ?.

        We were told from childhood what everything is bad in the bourgeoisie. It is good that articles and comments appear where there is no Ur patriotism, but the real state of affairs is shown. Because hatred leads to trouble.
    2. svp67
      svp67 25 May 2013 09: 48 New
      +5
      Quote: Roman Best
      T-34 crew: commander, gunner, loader, mech-water and gunner-radio operator.

      This corresponds to the Т34-85 tank, in the T-34-76 tank there was simply not enough space for the third crew member in the tower, so the tank commander was acting as a gunner
    3. Bigriver
      Bigriver 25 May 2013 09: 59 New
      +2
      Quote: Roman Best
      ... Where is the information from? T-34 crew: commander, gunner, loader, mech-vod and gunner-radio operator ....

      There we are talking about the winter-summer of the 43rd.
      So, respectively, the T-34-75 with a double tower. In it, the commander and gunner are one person.
      "Nut" arr. 43rd, of course, wider than the "pie" :) But, one figs, shoulder straps did not allow three places to equip. It happened only on the T-34-85.
    4. Kars
      Kars 25 May 2013 10: 05 New
      +4
      Quote: Roman Best
      T-34: commander, gunner, loader, mech-water and gunner for the sake of

      Specify T-34 - T-34-76 or T-34-85
    5. Explore
      Explore 25 May 2013 11: 14 New
      +1
      There were really 34 crew members in the T-76-4, of which 2 were in the tower (commander-gunner and loader).
      With the adoption of the T-34-85 with a larger tower in the tower were able to accommodate the 3rd crew member (i.e. to separate the responsibilities of commander and gunner).
      In the future, indeed, the process of decreasing the number of people went (at first they removed the radio operator arrow, and after a while the charging one).

      So there is no mistake.
    6. Drummer
      Drummer 25 May 2013 17: 31 New
      +3
      Five people became in the T-34-85, the T-34 - 4.
    7. Nord007hold
      Nord007hold 26 May 2013 16: 39 New
      0
      Here, apparently, I mean the T-34 with a double tower of models from 1940-1943.
      In 1943, the T-34 \ 85 was released, in the new tower of which a third person was added.
    8. sscha
      sscha 27 May 2013 15: 33 New
      0
      Here in such T-34 \ 76 crew 4 people, five - in the T-34 \ 85. hi
      Sorry - the picture "evaporated." hi
  2. Denis
    Denis 25 May 2013 07: 55 New
    +4
    An 40-mm cannon was installed on Churchill I and Churchill II, which was not enough for a heavy tank, so the 76-mm howitzer was also mounted in the front sheet
    He also had an 50,8 mm mortar in the tower, an ammunition load of 30 smoke mines
    I heard the most good reviews about Matilda
    But here is the exactingness to fuel and manufacturability ...
    If most 34-k were repaired with a sledgehammer and such a mother in the front line, then Lend-Lease had to be transported to repair plants
    By the way, like tigers

    In winter, on the Leningrad front, at the request of the crews, Churchill's regular catalytic heaters were replaced with domestic stoves
    According to all the complaints about the cross, the cars were designed for Europe
  3. Sour
    Sour 25 May 2013 14: 36 New
    +6
    The advantage of “Sherman” was also the presence of a radio station, and, as a rule, even two - HF and VHF. It was even cooler than the Fritz on the T-3 and T-4. There, VHF radio stations had only tanks from the commander’s platoon and above (like ours on the T-34), while the rest had only VHF receivers (which was also a big plus compared to the T-34). Only on the Tigers and Panthers did radio stations begin to be massively introduced (and that didn’t always work out), which speaks of the Germans lagging behind the Americans in this matter.
    A big minus of “Sherman” was a large turning radius. The transmission did not allow to deploy it in place, like Soviet tanks. If I’m not mistaken, there was no PMP on the Sherman, so the rotation was carried out using a system of differentials. This was a huge minus in the battle in the woods or in the village. The turning radius of the Sherman roughly corresponded to the turning radius of a truck of a similar length. Thus, on a narrow street or forest clearing, he was forced to turn around in 2-3 receptions, which made it possible for the enemy to shoot well.
    The high center of gravity made Sherman prone to tipping over on a slope and on steep climbs.
    The advantage of the “Sherman” was the rather quiet, quiet operation of the chassis, which often misled the German intelligence. “Sherman” on the march, not a lot of gas, made a noise like a large truck, the tracks clanked weakly.
    The disadvantage of the Sherman was a decent height, which facilitated the work of the gunners of the German anti-tank guns.
  4. Sour
    Sour 25 May 2013 15: 07 New
    +3
    Something else.
    In the USSR, the Sherman tank was supplied with a General Motors diesel engine with a power of 375 hp, to Great Britain mainly with a Continental gas engine with a power of 350 hp
    The Americans themselves preferred the Shermans with a 500-hp Ford gas engine.
    Gearbox 5-speed manual with synchronizers in 2-3 and 4-5 gears. The checkpoint is located in front of the tank, which is also characteristic of German tanks.
  5. Larus
    Larus 25 May 2013 15: 42 New
    -2
    I don’t know how much they are discussing, but our liberal fosterlings already specifically declare that if it were not for Lindlis, then the USSR would have definitely lost, because. there was nothing of their own and they no longer accept the other
    1. Sour
      Sour 25 May 2013 18: 19 New
      +6
      I would not lose, but it would have been harder.
      Our tank crews and pilots would somehow do without lendlise, but motorists and signalmen would be so awesome. Explosives, food, medicines and equipment for hospitals were also not superfluous, and were delivered properly. And supplies of aluminum with rubber gave a lot to our industry. Do not believe me - read “Wings of Victory”, memoirs of Shakhurin, the People’s Commissar of the aircraft industry.
      It is clear that they would have won anyway. But more blood would be shed.
      1. Larus
        Larus 25 May 2013 18: 49 New
        +1
        It’s clear that they helped, well, but I’m talking about something else, they are about these mantras, if it weren’t for help, the USSR had lost, they are already singing for granted.
      2. Karlsonn
        Karlsonn 25 May 2013 18: 57 New
        +1
        Quote: Sour
        but motorists and signalmen would be oh, how difficult. Explosives, food, medicines and equipment for hospitals were also not superfluous, and were delivered properly. And supplies of aluminum with rubber gave a lot to our industry.
        yes

        on the picture:

        Soviet machine gunners on the American Harley-Davidson WLA-42 motorcycle with a sidecar from the Soviet M-72 and a DP-27 machine gun in one of the German settlements.
        1. Karlsonn
          Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 05 New
          +1
          on the picture:

          Sending the Valentine tank to the USSR under the Lend-Lease program. The tank with the inscription "Stalin" is transported by truck from the factory to the port.

          The photo was taken on September 22, 1941, when at the tank factory Birmingham Railway Carriage and Wagon Co. a solemn meeting was held, to which the Soviet ambassador Ivan Maysky was invited. On the photo "Valentine" modifications Mk.II.
          1. Karlsonn
            Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 06 New
            0
            on the picture:

            Soviet gunners on the march - jeeps are pulling 45 mm guns.
            1. Karlsonn
              Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 12 New
              0
              on the picture:

              M16 MGMC air defense mobile gun in Berlin. 1st mechanized corps. May 1945.
              1. Karlsonn
                Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 14 New
                +1
                on the picture:

                "Forward to Berlin." Column of Soviet armored vehicles.
                These are American-made MZA1 Scout Car armored vehicles armed with Colt-Browning M1919 and M2 machine guns (7,62 and 12,7 mm caliber, respectively).
    2. Karlsonn
      Karlsonn 25 May 2013 18: 20 New
      +6
      Quote: Larus
      but our liberal fosterlings already specifically declare that if not for Lindliz, then the USSR would have definitely lost, because there was nothing of their own and they no longer accept the other


      Well, they don’t understand what’s going on in their heads (uplifters), but to say that Lend-Lease is not necessary is to spit on the graves of sailors of the North Sea, submariners, pilots who died during the caravans and individual ships, as well as border guards and The Northern and Karelian (from September 1, 1941) fronts frustrated the attempts of the German-Finnish troops to seize our ice-free ports and the railway connecting the port of Murmansk with the main part of the country.

      on the picture:

      Studebaker trucks in the transport reserve of the Red Army command.
      1. Karlsonn
        Karlsonn 25 May 2013 18: 28 New
        0
        on the picture:

        Reception of marines on torpedo boats of American construction, type A-1 "Vosper" Vosper) in the Romanian port of Constanta (Constanţa).
        In July 1944, torpedo boats of the Vper type A-1 delivered by Lend-Lease were transferred to the Black Sea Fleet from the Northern Fleet: TK-220, 221, 223,225, 227, 229, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236 .
        Boats from the 3 of the Konstanz Division torpedo boats of the Black Sea Fleet.
        1. Karlsonn
          Karlsonn 25 May 2013 18: 49 New
          +3
          can't resist repeat - fighting bears in the Soviet fleet WERE !!!

          on the picture:

          Sailor of the Guards cruiser of the Black Sea Fleet of project 815 "Red Caucasus" (until December 14, 1926 - "Admiral Lazarev") with a ship's pet on the background of a 100-mm twin-gun twin-mount marine anti-aircraft installation of the Minisini system.
          1. Marek Rozny
            Marek Rozny 26 May 2013 00: 24 New
            +3
            Carlson, thanks for all the pictures.
            1. Karlsonn
              Karlsonn 26 May 2013 01: 36 New
              +1
              Marek Rozny hi
              I can share a photo where there are two fighting teddy bears donated by the Black Sea Fleet to the Northern wink .
    3. Roll
      Roll 25 May 2013 20: 39 New
      -3
      fellow And how do we know would lose the USSR without a land lease. I think I lost. Now it’s easy to speak, and in November 1941 Moscow was mined, and the mummy of Lenin was evacuated and Stalin wondered a week whether to leave Moscow or not. It could well have lost the war. But if the USSR lost the war, the Nazis would crush England and, together with Japan, crush Amerov. Roosevelt and Churchill and Stalin understood this, so Land Liz is not a handout but a coalition aid. Stalin did a lot to make it happen.
      1. Avenger711
        Avenger711 25 May 2013 22: 17 New
        -2
        In November, there was no 41st aid, and Stalin would not have left until the last.
        1. Roll
          Roll 26 May 2013 10: 53 New
          +1
          laughing And why do you have such confidence in Stalin’s actions? If you had 100 confidence that Moscow would not have stood its ground, they would not have created an underground, and so on. I agree that there wasn’t any real help from Lend Lease in 1941, but the fact that we were not alone in the war with the fascists raised the morale of the army very much, at the level of order 227. And in general, no serious historian can say before the victory near Kursk, that victory was directly guaranteed to us.
      2. Karlsonn
        Karlsonn 26 May 2013 01: 37 New
        +3
        Quote: Rolm
        And how do we know would lose the USSR without a land lease. I think I lost.


        no, I didn’t lose!
        I personally do not beg for Lend-Lease, but I know for sure that without Lend-Lease our losses would have been greater.
  6. Snoop
    Snoop 25 May 2013 17: 41 New
    +2
    Very interesting situation. In our historical literature, Sherman was always highly valued, well, some flaws were indicated and that was all. I read the western story. literary, so actually they have an opinion about Sherman that is generally contradictory. Like the tank itself is good, technically, but can not be compared with German tanks for military use. It turns out that during the battles in Normandy, the American department was bombarded with reports and indignation over the Shermans. The main cause of dissatisfaction with Amer. tankers is a guaranteed defeat of Sherman when hit by it. tank and anti-tank shells, moreover, their veterans claim that Sherman broke out immediately. Their military department responded irritably that the Sherman bombings when they were hit by enemy fire were not due to the design flaws of the tank, but to the fact that the crews overloaded the tank with ammunition. Later they had a debate on this subject, but everyone was calmed by the military’s analytical note, even if Amer. tank troops will suffer losses in the amount of 50%, they still surpass the Germans in the number of tanks. And the position is such that talking about the Tigers and Panthers, if the Shermans could not win the duel fights with the T-IV. Like, if the T-IV fell into Sherman, then it was guaranteed to fail, and getting Sherman in his counterpart did not always disable the enemy’s tank, 50/50 depending on where the projectile would hit.
    Strange disagreement.
  7. Avenger711
    Avenger711 25 May 2013 17: 44 New
    +1
    Sherman is a good car with a bad gun. 76 mm was not enough, because her mine is weak. And 75 gave up against the tanks. The 85 mm gun on the T-34-85 has a more reasonable approach.
    1. Bigriver
      Bigriver 25 May 2013 18: 29 New
      +2
      Quote: Avenger711
      Sherman is a good car with a bad gun. 76 mm was not enough, because her mine is weak. And 75 gave up against the tanks. The 85 mm gun on the T-34-85 has a more reasonable approach.

      You are very mistaken.
      Sherman with 75 and 76 mm was delivered to us, approximately the same.
      Penetration of the 75 mm version was comparable to the F-34.
      But 76 mm, with a length of 57 calibers, its effectiveness in German armor was even higher than that of the Zis-S-53.
      1. Avenger711
        Avenger711 25 May 2013 22: 22 New
        0
        B-34 to the 44th was already a very obsolete weapon. A 76 mm American cannon as an anti-tank weapon is really good, but the main task of the tank is not to fight tanks, so taking enemy tanks with a simple caliber buildup with a passing buildup of high-explosive force, without using expensive tubes that accelerate an expensive caliber projectile to monstrous speeds, is a very logical solution. Yes, and medium-caliber shells German armor very well kept, so just breaking it out of the same D-25T on the IS-2 was also very reasonable.
        1. Bigriver
          Bigriver 26 May 2013 05: 12 New
          +1
          Quote: Avenger711
          .... 76 mm American cannon as an anti-tank weapon is really good, but the main task of the tank is not to fight tanks, ..

          So I just didn’t understand you. Here, most often they mean by "goodness" the action on the armor :)
  8. Karlsonn
    Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 02 New
    +2
    on the picture:

    Soviet flying boat American-made PBN-1 "Catalina" in flight to the port of Dalniy for landing.
    1. svp67
      svp67 25 May 2013 19: 19 New
      +2
      Quote: Karlsonn
      on the picture:

      Here is another foreign car (Ford GPA) that turned out to be very useful to the Red Army, significantly brought victory closer and reduced losses ...
      1. Karlsonn
        Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 32 New
        +1
        svp67 hi

        exactly, I forgot about them good .

        on the picture:

        Soviet torpedo bombers of the field modification A-20G "Boston" of the 51st mine and torpedo Tallinn Red Banner Air Regiment in the sky over Berlin. In the center - Boston A-20G-30-DO N5 (43-9561). On the right side of the picture is the tip of the engine nacelle of the left engine of the second Boston. Photo from the photo archive of the Orlenko regiment. On the back of the photo is the caption: “Germany. Airfield Kolberg. Flight to Berlin. May 28, 1945. Remember the friend of the school, the Patriotic War and other joint affairs of Grigory Chekanov (plane N5). Volosovo - Leningrad. September 14, 1945 "

        When the A-20G was converted into a torpedo bomber, torpedo bridges were placed in the lower part of the fuselage, an additional gas tank was installed in the bomb bay, which made it possible to equalize the Boston and IL-4 range, and the four upper machine guns were removed in the bow, glazed and made a navigational cabin.

        Below under the planes you can see: the dark forest in the distance is Tiergarten Park, the Reichstag is visible in front of it, a small white “match” is visible on the territory - this is the Victory Column. Housing estates are the Prenzlauer Berg district, east of Wedding, north of Friedrichsain. In the lower left corner is visible part of the Friedrichshain park.
        1. Karlsonn
          Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 35 New
          0
          on the picture:

          The Soviet Ford GPA "Seep" amphibious car rides along the Muhu (Moon) - Saaremaa (Ezel) dam in the Moonsund archipelago. October 1944

          During the Moonsund landing operation to seize the islands of Saaremaa (Ezel), Hiiumaa (Dago) and Muhu (Moon), the 283rd separate motorized battalion of special purpose was equipped with similar amphibians.

          Source: Estonian History Museum (EAM) / N23007.
          1. Karlsonn
            Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 38 New
            0
            on the picture:

            Spitfire fighter on the catapult of the Molotov cruiser. Spitfire fighters in 1944 were based on the Molotov cruiser to study the problems of using naval aviation.
  9. bublic82009
    bublic82009 25 May 2013 19: 22 New
    0
    so to listen to memoirs to watch films of different programs, so the Allies supplied us with not the best equipment.
    1. Karlsonn
      Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 42 New
      +2
      on the picture:

      Captain Fedor Ivanovich Shikunov, fighter pilot, squadron commander of the 69th Guards Fighter Aviation Regiment of the Guard in the cockpit of his P-39 Aerocobra aircraft (Bell P-39N-1 Airacobra). 1st Ukrainian Front.

      F.I. Shikunov was born in 1921. Since 1939 in the ranks of the Red Army. In 1940 he graduated from the Taganrog Military Aviation School of Pilots named after V.P. Chkalov was left at the same school as an instructor pilot. In the army since October 5, 1943. As part of the 69th GIAP (5th VA), he fought on the Stepnoy, 2nd Ukrainian and 1st Ukrainian fronts. In total, he completed 206 sorties, shot down 52 enemy planes in 25 air battles (M.Yu. Bykov in his studies found documentary evidence of 21 personal and 1 group victories). March 15, 1945 Guard Captain F.I. Shikunov was shot down and died in an air battle in the area of ​​Friedewald (according to other sources, he was shot down by fire from the ground while blocking the air of the Neuss airfield). He was awarded the orders of Alexander Nevsky, Fighting Red Banner (twice), Red Star, and medals. In 1998, by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation for courage and military valor shown during the Great Patriotic War, he was posthumously awarded the title of Hero of the Russian Federation.
      1. svp67
        svp67 25 May 2013 20: 20 New
        +2
        Quote: Karlsonn
        P-39 "Aerocobra" (Bell P-39N-1 Airacobra).

        For some reason, speaking of aviation, first of all, and for the most frequent and last, remember only foreign fighters, but I believe that these aircraft were no less, if not more important:
        B-25


        And this aircraft was the MOST important acquisition:
        Li-2, aka X-47, DS-3

        1. Karlsonn
          Karlsonn 25 May 2013 20: 36 New
          +1
          svp67

          Quote: svp67
          For some reason, speaking of aviation, first of all, and for the most frequent and last, remember only foreign fighters, but I believe that these aircraft were no less, if not more important:
          B-25



          crying


          Quote: Karlsonn
          Soviet torpedo bombers of the field modification A-20G "Boston" of the 51st mine and torpedo Tallinn Red Banner Air Regiment in the sky over Berlin.


          but I have one (proudly paces )

          on the picture:

          Mitchell American bomber B-25J-30/32-NC (serial number 44-31162) with Soviet identification marks flying over Alaska during a Lend-Lease ferry to the USSR.
          1. svp67
            svp67 25 May 2013 20: 40 New
            0
            Quote: Karlsonn
            crying


            request
            1. Karlsonn
              Karlsonn 26 May 2013 01: 39 New
              0
              I not only posted pictures of fighters, but also torpedo bombers.
              1. svp67
                svp67 26 May 2013 09: 31 New
                0
                Quote: Karlsonn
                I not only posted pictures of fighters, but also torpedo bombers.


                The fact is that the B25 could be used and was used as a transport aircraft and a long-range bomber, that is, those vehicles in which
                our Air Force experienced DEFICIENCY ...
        2. Denis
          Denis 25 May 2013 21: 11 New
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          Li-2, aka X-47, DS-3
          It’s not a Lend-Lease, they bought and made a license for it before the war in the USSR
          1. svp67
            svp67 25 May 2013 21: 20 New
            +2
            Quote: Denis
            It’s not a Lend-Lease, they bought and made a license for it before the war in the USSR

            Yes, but also:
            - 707 C-47, DS-3 aircraft received under Lend-Lease
            1. Denis
              Denis 25 May 2013 21: 28 New
              +2
              Quote: svp67
              707 C-47, DS-3 aircraft received under Lend-Lease
              I'm talking about Lee-2
              By the way, a little Katalin and in Taganrog collected
    2. Andrew-001
      Andrew-001 25 May 2013 20: 31 New
      +4
      They supplied what they had.
      Thank them for that.
      It’s just that ours was often better.
      It is a pity that OUR is not always the best.
    3. Denis
      Denis 25 May 2013 21: 09 New
      +2
      Quote: bublic82009
      so listen to memoirs watch films different programs, so the Allies supplied us with the best equipment
      There were all kinds of things. There were no armored personnel carriers in the USSR before Scout, nor were motorized infantry. Her tasks were carried out by the cavalry
      A lot of good trucks were delivered, but Spitfaers were units. And the B-29 didn’t want to deliver to any
  10. Karlsonn
    Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 22 New
    +1
    on the picture:

    Corporal Stepan Vasilievich Ovcharenko for the Maxim machine gun. The Maxim is mounted at the rear of the Willis.

    The American army off-road vehicle Willys has been supplied to the Red Army under Lend-Lease since the summer of 1942 (modifications to Willys MB and Willys MA). In total, about 52 thousand vehicles were delivered to the USSR until the end of the war.

    My photo name:

    "Legs in your mouth, I’ve fought in Grazhdanskaya on a tachanka!"
    1. Karlsonn
      Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 26 New
      -1
      Ovcharenko Stepan Vasilievich was born on 15.08.1913/27.08.1998/XNUMX, Poltava region, Kremenchutsky district, the village of Gorishne-Plavni on XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX. resident: Ukraine Dnepropetrovsk region, Dneprodzerzhinsk.
      26.06.1941/15.07.1941/22.01.1945 was called Krinichansky RVK Dnipropetrovsk region., From 1/187/72. on Leningrad, from XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX on the XNUMXst Ukrainian Front, a senior sergeant, commander of the calculation of an machine gun XNUMX rifle regiment XNUMX rifle divisions.
      1. Karlsonn
        Karlsonn 25 May 2013 19: 28 New
        +1
        famous and namesake wink
  11. Skuratov
    Skuratov 25 May 2013 20: 14 New
    +3
    A significant role was played by the supply of medicines, cars, aluminum, radio equipment, but not tanks. One grandfather once told me (in the Second World War the tankman fought, first loading, ended the war with the commander of a tank company) that in combat use the imported tanks were not so hot, they were “taken” by a 50 mm anti-aircraft gun, the chassis was weak, but inside it was very comfortable just burned this comfort very well.
    1. Denis
      Denis 25 May 2013 21: 13 New
      +3
      Quote: Skuratov
      only this comfort burned very well.
      Sponge rubber so that the fragments do not fly apart and the head does not beat hard
  12. Denis
    Denis 25 May 2013 21: 21 New
    +2
    What everyone is unanimous in the memories is the meticulous preparation of the equipment delivered by the sea. Everything that is glued and smeared will not get a drop inside, though it was then cleaned (here also unanimity) for a long time and very abusively
    That would be with whom it was necessary to talk or read to screenwriters whose tank in the Arctic convoy shoots aircraft from the deck from the deck
    1. Argon
      Argon 25 May 2013 23: 40 New
      -1
      It happened and fired (the sailors cleaned it). Most of the Soviet “merchants” didn’t have anything except “maxims” as air defense (they hoped for an escort, but we remember about the PQ-17) and therefore they fired from tanks and from planes (bombers ). The second navigator with the captain specifically, when loading, set the necessary objects in the right places. Although the main goal was self-defense against the popped-up submarine fire (meeting the single "merchant" the Germans tried to sink it with artillery, saving torpedoes). V. Pikul has a very interesting description, to Unfortunately I do not remember the name, if you want to find it, I highly recommend it.
    2. Snoop
      Snoop 25 May 2013 23: 55 New
      +1
      These are meticulously Americans, but the British quite often delivered fighter jets in dispossessed form (took off some navigational instruments), moreover it used to be used, with worn out engines.
  13. Denis
    Denis 26 May 2013 00: 05 New
    +2
    Quote: Argon
    .U. V. Pikul is very interestingly described, unfortunately I do not remember the name, if you want, you will find it, I highly recommend it.
    Probably the "Ocean Patrol", did they make a trap ship with camouflaged guns from an old sailing schooner? Used the British in the 1-th World
    As a child, I was pickling Pikul until I became wiser and disappointed, I read. He is very free, if not to say stronger, deals with history. And this episode is only his invention
    And as for
    Happened and shot (cleaned by sailors)
    Allow me to disagree. Was it preserved in order to bring it, but what would become of the equipment on the deck open to all the waves? Kirdyk and only, would bring scrap
    1. Argon
      Argon 26 May 2013 12: 00 New
      0
      There is no "ocean patrol", my knowledge does not live on his works, I brought them as an example. I trust my father for 20 years in MMP and forced those people who went with convoys.
      1. Argon
        Argon 26 May 2013 14: 44 New
        -1
        Honestly, I don’t see the connection between the British’s receptions and the firing of weapons on board. The weapons transported on ships of the USA and England were received on arrival, the same ones loaded on our ships were considered already accepted, in any case conosament was drawn up for the captain, and he carried all responsibility for him. Did the allies secure this way, will it come or not? But the payment price has already been included. Regarding the safety of the cargo; the risk of damage from enemy fire was much higher than from almost fresh northern water seas and the North Atlantic. By the way, the bulk of the cargo is in holds and is not exposed to atmospheric influences. I have not read such reviews in the press once about V. Pikul’s work, I won’t argue about the descriptions of the “deep old traditions”, but excuse me about the Great Patriotic War, there, of course, there are studies on everyday topics, but they only color the plot of official history, no more - "The Square of the Fallen Fighters" or "Sea Tales" well, as an example.
        1. Argon
          Argon 26 May 2013 14: 55 New
          -1
          And at the expense of "wiser" do not harbor illusions, the old people say, "Live and learn, and die, all will have to be a fool" -With respect.
          1. Denis
            Denis 26 May 2013 22: 16 New
            +3
            Quote: Argon
            And at the expense of "wiser" illusions do not feed
            I don’t drink, it’s my fault here, I didn’t add “a little”, but I wanted to
            And about the shooting, I don’t know about that, but it seems that the ammunition was transported separately
        2. Denis
          Denis 26 May 2013 22: 23 New
          +1
          Quote: Argon
          official story plot color
          They give a different color. In the “Boys with Bows” about the Jung school there is such a thing. We saw the inscription Elephant-Solovetsky special purpose camp. Previously, thieves and murderers sat here, and now we will study
          There were many thieves and murderers there, should he not know?
          About sailors in the revolution is so generally disgusting
          1. Argon
            Argon 27 May 2013 00: 41 New
            0
            Don’t think that I want to offend, but I see that as a person you formed after 92 you probably don’t know some Soviet realities. If he wrote that from the mid-20s to the beginning of the 30s there was a camp in Solovki where political prisoners were held, we they would have read it in the year 95 not earlier, the authorities didn’t perceive it unequivocally into the Writers' Union if I’m not mistaken. On the other hand, as far as I know, the entire contingent of the camp was divided into three parts, political, unreliable, criminal
            1. Denis
              Denis 27 May 2013 01: 25 New
              +2
              Quote: Argon
              If he wrote ...
              And wasn’t it more honest not to write such as not to lie?
              When I was formed as a person it’s not for me to judge, but I was born a long time ago
              Many, now outlandish things such as the October star, the pioneer camp, the advice of the squad or the horn, will not surprise me. Unless they cause nostalgia
              But this is, like Pikul’s work is not about armored vehicles, hardly anyone is interested
              So we won’t ...
  14. Mister X
    Mister X 26 May 2013 17: 48 New
    +1
    M3 with our tankmen dubbed the "mass grave for seven."

    More often - in abbreviated form: "BM-7".

    I read that the crew of the M3 Lee tank (for the USSR) consisted of 7 people,
    and its modification for the British aircraft "M3 Grant" - only from 6.
    Who will tell you whom the British have abolished?
    1. svp67
      svp67 26 May 2013 17: 54 New
      0
      Quote: Mister X
      Who will tell you whom the British have abolished?

      "Party organizer ..." winked



      Model Purpose Crew
      M3 medium tank 6
      M3A1 medium tank 6
      M3A2 medium tank 6
      M3A3 medium tank 6
      M3A4 medium tank 6
      M3A5 medium tank 6
      Grant I cruising tank 6
      Grant II cruising tank 6
      Grant CDL (Lee CDL) 6 channel tank
      RAM Mk I Tank RPE 5
      RAM Mk II tank RPE 5
      ACI "ScntineI" 5 Cruising Tank
      ACII "Sentinel" Cruising Tank 5
      M7 Priest SPG 7
      "Sexton" SPG 6
      "Kangaroo" BTR 2
      ARV BREM 5
      ARV I BREM 5
      1. Mister X
        Mister X 26 May 2013 18: 02 New
        0
        How could they have fought without the party organizer?
        1. svp67
          svp67 26 May 2013 18: 04 New
          +1
          Quote: Mister X
          How could they have fought without the party organizer?

          And in their cars, instead of a party organizer, a portrait of King George VI hung
          1. Mister X
            Mister X 26 May 2013 19: 32 New
            0
            Oh god Save the king!
            And we are at the same time with him ...
            1. svp67
              svp67 26 May 2013 21: 25 New
              0
              Quote: Mister X
              Oh god Save the king!
              And we are at the same time with him ...

              Fact...
  15. xomaNN
    xomaNN 26 May 2013 17: 52 New
    -1
    For me, it’s a novelty that the English tanks are basically. USSR modifications received several thousand at the beginning of the war. Thanks to the author for the info. About fights with the participation of "Soviet" Sherman read more than once. But how the battles with the participation of Soviet-English tanks with German armor were taking place successfully, I couldn’t read
  16. Kovrovsky
    Kovrovsky 27 May 2013 17: 22 New
    -1
    It’s a pity that we weren’t supplied with Sherman Firefly! Allies had few of them!
  17. Best novel
    Best novel 28 May 2013 09: 33 New
    0
    I’m sorry, the concrete embarrassment turned out. And for the tankman it’s generally unforgivable. I'll go shoot myself.
  18. starper
    starper 25 February 2016 04: 06 New
    0
    Article + Objectively, concisely, intelligibly, and simply honestly. We have many people forget folk wisdom, the road spoon for dinner! Of course, our industry produced a huge amount of equipment, but it was later, and lendlize helped out just in time.