Military Review

"Hunters" vs. "Panthers"

42
The Battle of Kursk, the 70 anniversary of which is celebrated this year, entered into history as one of the bloodiest tank battles of the Second World War. The authors of this publication do not intend to re-enumerate the known facts about this brutal battle in the summer of 1943. Many studies and memoirs have been written about her, including by Soviet marshals. We would like to draw your attention to some little-known circumstances of those events.


Disputes about whether to attack or defend on this main sector of the front, have been going on since April 1943, both in the German and in the Soviet command. Wehrmacht generals offered Hitler two options: “realistic” - the continuation of active defense on the Kursk-Orlovsky ledge and “optimistic” - striking the ledge from two directions. The second option - the plan of the offensive operation, which the Germans received the code name "Citadel" - Hitler was supported, but postponed for two months under the pretext of the need to replenish the troops with the latest technology to create a guaranteed advantage in forces.

There were two points of view of the Soviet command. Marshal Zhukov in his book describes it this way: “Army General N.F. Vatutin. Without denying defensive measures, he offered the Supreme to deliver to the enemy a preemptive strike on his Belgorod-Kharkov grouping. In this he was fully supported by the member of the military council N.S. Khrushchev. Chief of the General Staff A.M. Vasilevsky, A.I. Antonov and other employees of the General Staff did not share such a proposal by the military council of the Voronezh Front. I fully agreed with the opinion of the General Staff, as reported by I.V. Stalin. However, the Supreme himself still hesitated whether to meet the enemy with the defense of our troops or deliver a preemptive strike. I.V. Stalin feared that our defense could not withstand the blow of the German troops, as it happened more than once in 1941 and 1942. At the same time, he was not sure that our troops were able to defeat the enemy with their offensive actions.

After repeated discussions around the middle of May 1943, I.V. Stalin finally firmly decided to meet the German offensive with fire of all kinds of deeply echeloned defense, with powerful blows aviation and counterattacks of operational and strategic reserves. Then, having exhausted and bleeding the enemy, finish it off with a powerful counterattack on the Belgorod-Kharkov and Oryol directions, and then carry out deep offensive operations in all major areas. "

* * *

The Germans gathered for the Kursk battle, according to their data, 2.000 tanks (according to Soviet sources, 2.772). In addition to their main tanks T-III (armor - 30 – 20 mm, gun - 37 mm) and T-IV (armor - 80 – 30 mm, gun - 57 mm), they were going to use the latest armored vehicles in the Battle of Kursk VI "Tiger" with 100 mm armor and guns not previously used 88 mm caliber, TV "Panther" with 85 mm armor and 75-mm gun, Ferdinand self-propelled gun with an unprecedented 200-mm frontal armor and 88-mm gun with an extended trunk , as well as captured Soviet T-34 and KV. The Germans "prudently" used Soviet-made tanks captured in the first months of the war. Recall, they twice took Kharkov, and KhPZ (Kharkov Locomotive Plant) - the birthplace of the T-34 tank. After the occupation, the Germans organized the repair of tanks there, including captured ones.

Our help. In the Wehrmacht, the captured T-34 received the designation PzKpfw.747 (r). They were armed with units of the 1, 8 and 11 tank divisions and the SS division "Reich" (her 8 T-34 tanks participated in the Battle of Prokhorovka).

The Germans were preparing to destroy Soviet tanks precisely and with the help of aircraft cannons and for this purpose they installed anti-aircraft 129-mm and even 190-mm guns on the Henschel-87, Focke-Wulf-37 and Junkers-50 airplanes. For Me-109 fighters, a method of vertical diving on tanks and self-propelled guns was developed, which culminates in precision bombing.

Soviet troops had 3.600 tanks (according to Zhukov, the Germans believed that they opposed them before the Soviet cars 5.000). At that time, the Soviet army had several vehicles: the medium tank T-34-76 (frontal armor - 45, airborne - 40 mm, cannon - 76 mm), which was the most massive tank that participated in the Battle of Kursk (70 percent of all tanks ); T-70 light tank (armor - 35-15 mm, gun - 45 mm, 20-25 percent) and a small amount (5 percent) of heavy tanks KV-1C and KV-1 (armor - 75-40 mm, gun - 76-XNUMX mm, gun - XNUMX-XNUMX mm (armor - XNUMX-XNUMX mm, gun - XNUMX-XNUMX mm (gunnumber - XNUMX-XNUMX mm, gun - XNUMX-XNUMX mm (armor - XNUMX-XNUMX mm, gun - XNUMX-XNUMX mm) mm).

On the Soviet side, self-propelled artillery guns also took part: 2 regiment (24 vehicles) Su-152 “Hypericum” (armor - 75-60 mm, gun - 152 mm), 7 regiments (84 machines) SU-122 (armor - 45- 40 mm, cannon - 122 mm) and several dozen heavy British Churchill tanks received under Lend-Lease (armor - 76-102 mm, gun - 57 mm).

After comparing the combat capabilities of these tank armadas, the advantage of the Germans becomes obvious - their heavy armored vehicles were able to penetrate the frontal armor of any Soviet tank with a aimed fire at a distance of up to 2 km. While only a part of the Soviet tanks could do it, and having approached them at a distance of 200-400 m. And the 45-mm gun (which made up half of the entire Soviet anti-tank artillery) could not penetrate it at all.

* * *

On the first day of the Battle of Kursk, 5 July 1943 of the year, a nearly two-hour meeting of the T-bills and military equipment designers took place in Stalin's office. Air Force Marshal Novikov (with Air Force Chief Engineer Lieutenant-General Repin, Head of the Air Force Armament Scientific Test Ground, Major-General Gurevich, and Commander of the NIVA Test Pilot Major Zvonaryov), Head of the State Air Force, Colonel-General Yakov, were invited to attend. the commander of the Artillery Committee, Lieutenant-General Khokhlov). The chairman of the technical council of the People’s Commissariat of Armament Satel also participated. Thus, there were only people responsible for the creation and testing of artillery and missile weapons of the Ground Forces and Aviation.

It should be noted that even in the unique edition “At the Reception at Stalin. Notebooks - logs of persons taken by I.V. Stalin "two participants of the meeting - Khokhlov and Zvonarev - were mistakenly identified, and two more participants - Rashkov and Charnko - were not identified at all.
A group of designers was invited to the meeting. weapons. Let's call them.

Glukharev - the chief and chief designer of the OKB-16, who developed aircraft guns. (The one who saved and brought to production the world's first automatic 37-mm air cannon 11-P-OKB-16, created by Taubin and his co-author Baburin, arrested by 16 on May 1941 of the year "for developing the enemy gun.")
Spitny is the chief and chief designer of the OKB-15, who developed aircraft cannons, participated in the development of the automatic cannon TNSh-20 (Nudelman's tank - Spit) for the T-60 and T-70 tank.

Grabin - the chief and chief designer of the Central Artillery KB, developing anti-tank and tank guns, the creator of 57-mm ZIS-2 and 76-mm ZIS-Z.

Charnko - the chief and chief designer of OKBL-46 (later KB-10 - SRI-88), developing special landing recoilless air cannons "Cheka" (Charnko - Komaritsky). The successor of the case of the designer-inventor Kurchevsky - the creator of the world's first recoilless guns.
Kostikov, the chief and chief designer of the State Institute of Jet Technology (formerly the Jet Research Institute), which developed Katyushas and rocket projectiles for her and for airplanes (their creators, the director and chief engineer of the RNII, Kleymenov and Langemak, were arrested in 1937 year).

Nudelman - Lead Designer of OKB-16, representing it at the 11-P-OKB-16 Aircraft Manufacturing Plant No. 74, participant in the development of the TNSh-20 gun for the T-60 and T-70 tank (later head and chief designer of the OKB-16) .

Rashkov - the lead designer OKB-16, the creator of the anti-tank gun RES (Rashkova - Ermolaeva - Slutskogo) and gun RSHR (Rashkov - Shentsova - Rozanova).

This suggests that at the meeting the question was about only one thing: how and how to destroy the newest German tanks T-VI "Tiger" and T-V "Panther", SAU "Ferdinand". Most likely, the leader wanted to get from the designers themselves accurate data on the weapons available in their troops, capable of hitting German heavy tanks, hearing recommendations on the most effective methods of applying development against powerful armor (on using tungsten cores in anti-tank shells, etc.).

It is noteworthy that exactly on this day, July 5, the resolution of the State Defense Committee No. 3692 “On the release of V.M. Molotov was adopted. from controlling the production of tanks and entrusting these duties to Beria L.P. (he was entrusted with this section by the decree of the State Defense Committee No. 1250 of 6 in February 1942 of the year, and the title of Hero of Socialist Labor was awarded 30 of September 1943 of the year "for special services to the Soviet state in the development of the tank industry during the Great Patriotic War ").

"Hunters" vs. "Panthers"What was said at the meeting in the Kremlin is unknown. We can only guess. Perhaps it was Grabin who suggested to the commanders to conduct aimed fire 45-mm, as well as the newest 57-mm anti-tank guns on the tracked tracks of German heavy tanks, and then finish off stopped vehicles with explosives and incendiary bottles. He could also recommend placing 76-mm anti-tank guns not uniformly along the front of the onslaught of German tanks, but in groups at intervals that ensured their penetration not by frontal, but by side armor.

Due to a significant increase in the thickness of armor of tank hatches of German heavy armored vehicles, Kostikov could remind that they were able to penetrate concrete and armor-piercing bombs with a rocket booster created in the RNII in 1940 year to neutralize the pillars of the “Mannerheim line” that the "Katyusha" has already been put on the Lend-lease "Studebaker" and the T-60 tank chassis. He also had information that the Red Army had 320 mm caliber missiles at its disposal.

Glukharev had the opportunity to report that the 37-mm 11-P-OKB-16 air cannon, mounted on the Yak-9Т fighter (engine version) and the Il-2 attack aircraft (wing version), began military trials, participating in the military actions on the Kursk Bulge. At that time, it was the largest automatic air gun in the world (the Germans would use 37-mm and 50-mm cannons in the Battle of Kursk, but these would not be anti-aircraft guns, but anti-aircraft guns adapted for airplanes).

Rashkov could tell about his new anti-tank rifle, the RES of an unprecedented 20-mm caliber and its armor-piercing 20-mm projectile with a tungsten core (only on the Central Front, 432 PTR was involved in the battles - most likely of this particular caliber).

Charnko developed the 37-mm recoilless landing assault gun Chek. Stalin did not forget about the development of the Airborne Forces in 1943 either. It was not for nothing that 4 June 1943 of the year adopted the resolution of the State Defense Committee No. 3505ss "On the additional formation of 13 Guards airborne brigades". In his CB Charnko continued the work of his predecessor - Kurchevsky, repressed in the 1937 year. Maybe then Stalin said about the tragic fate of Kurchevsky: "They threw out the child with the water."

And another interesting fact. Shortly before the Battle of Kursk, 19 June, the decree of the State Defense Committee No. 3612 “On amnesty with the removal of conviction from specialists E.O. Berkalov, E.P. Ikonnikova, S.I. Lodkina, A.F. Smirnova, G.N. , Tsirulnikova M.Yu. ” They were all artillery designers.

* * *

In conclusion, I would like to note that in the history of the rivalry between Soviet and German tank builders, the Wehrmacht had a great deal of assistance from pre-war contacts with the USSR in the military-technical sphere. It is known that the company "Porsche" performed the main work on a heavy tank together with Soviet specialists in 1920-x - the beginning of 1930-s in the USSR. After Hitler came to power, she managed to take the manufactured samples to Germany under the guise of the "heavy tractors" chassis. In the USSR, the KV-1 and KV-2 were created on such a chassis on six rinks. And the Porsche used these chassis to create the Ferdinand assault gun.

Before the war, the Germans, it is not excluded, received “in exchange” several copies of Soviet tanks. We carefully looked at what was said about tanks in the prewar Soviet-German agreements. It turned out that the “Special Orders and Purchases Program in Germany” drawn up in October 1939 of the year in section XII “Auto Benefit” states: “p. 1. The latest models of medium and heavy tanks with full equipment and weapons - 2. This means that the Germans were supposed to put the USSR two medium and two heavy new tanks (a letter from the People's Commissar of Defense Voroshilov to the Central Committee to Stalin and to the SNK to Molotov, ref. No. 3438ss from 20 of October 1939). Whether the USSR sent its tanks to Germany, so to speak, in parity, is not known for certain, but we found on the Internet a few German photos of the KV-2 tank. In this case, as we assume, the photographs could have been taken before the war.

One thing is clear: German designers closely followed Soviet tank building. And it was not by chance that the commander of the 2 Guards Tank Army Lieutenant General Rotmistrov reported G.K. Zhukov: “The T-5“ Panther ”tank ... in fact, is a complete copy of our T-34 tank, but in quality it is much higher than the T-34 tank, and in particular in terms of weapon quality.” But this is a separate topic ...

In the photo: SAU-152 “Hypericum” from the battery of Major Sankovsky (13-I Army of the Central Front), his crew destroyed in the first battle during the Kursk battle 10 enemy tanks.
Author:
Originator:
http://redstar.ru/
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. GOLUBENKO
    GOLUBENKO 28 June 2013 07: 27 New
    +8
    It is no accident that the commander of the 2nd Guards Tank Army, Lieutenant General Rotmistrov, reported to G.K. Zhukov

    Lieutenant General Rotmistrov commanded the 5th Guards Tank Army.
    The commander of the 2nd Guards TA was General Rodin.
    T-IV (armor - 80-30 mm, gun - 57 mm),

    In fact, it was a 75mm long-barreled gun and anti-bullet screens in addition to armor.
    In addition to the means of fighting tanks listed in the article, attack aircraft had PTAB and IL-2 they were successfully used to mow the tank columns on the march.
    1. Andy
      Andy 28 June 2013 07: 44 New
      +9
      We assign 57mm to a typo. just the numbers are reversed. but to the article the question is, what was it? An incoherent set. article minus.
    2. smart ass
      smart ass 28 June 2013 14: 01 New
      +1
      I agree with you, why write an article if everything is bad with the story
    3. uhu189
      uhu189 28 June 2013 14: 18 New
      +3
      Well then, what about the PzIII tanks with the main 37mm gun? By the end of the 42 year, there were no more of them in the Wehrmacht, just as there were almost no trenches with short 50mm guns at the beginning of the 1943g - only short 75mm and long 50mm. Although why find fault with - so it is clear ...
    4. dustycat
      dustycat 28 June 2013 20: 56 New
      +1
      During the Kursk battle of IL2, PTABs were also successfully used during the battle. According to the recollections of pilots attack aircraft.
      And our T70 got pretty bad of them.
      True and downed IL-2 was a lot.
  2. Hort
    Hort 28 June 2013 07: 48 New
    15
    something like that, the topic of St. John's wort against panthers was not disclosed ... Or will there be a sequel?
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 28 June 2013 08: 27 New
      +6
      Quote: hort
      something like that, the topic of St. John's wort against panthers was not disclosed ... Or will there be a sequel?

      This question also arose, hoping to read about the experience of using one against the other. Then I wondered how I could name this article in accordance with the content, but never came up with it. There is no basic thought, a set of facts, many of which are debatable. request
    2. baltika-18
      baltika-18 28 June 2013 08: 59 New
      +6
      Quote: hort
      something like that, the topic of St. John's wort against panthers is not disclosed ... Or the continuation will still be

      Plus for you, minus the article. Somehow I was interested in the topic "St. John's Wort", I thought I would draw something new. I was disappointed.
      1. smirnov
        smirnov 29 June 2013 22: 57 New
        +1
        St. John's wort only in the title, the article has only one line ... minus.
  3. sscha
    sscha 28 June 2013 08: 00 New
    28
    On the Kursk Bulge, my uncle received a heavy concussion - a mechanic driver T-34/76. After the hospital, he was sent as a mechanic-instructor to Uch. regiment. And my friend’s father-in-law near Prokhorovka was charging in KV-1. Under the bottle of "Russian", he said such that now it’s freezing ...
    ... "From the blows of German blanks on the forehead, we briefly lost consciousness and blood came from our ears and nose ...
    ... When the battle was over and we fell out of the tank to the ground, we could not recognize our Queshka. He stood all in scale, without ZIPs, headlights, etc. ... After counting 18 hits in the frontal armor, two of them - in the mask of the gun. "...
    God grant. so that we are worthy of our grandfathers ... hi
    1. dustycat
      dustycat 28 June 2013 21: 10 New
      +3
      My uncle Misha also told the same about KV and also for a drink.
      He especially scolded the T70 and how they were used near Prokhorovka to drive Panthers into the swamp under the aimed fire. How they were bombed before them.
      He is also a MV.
      There he burned a second time. One of the crew got out of the tank.
      I saw how a shot from a disc from the Panther T-70 demolishes a tower.
      He told how with the mount (in a hurry, getting out of the tank, he grabbed it instead of an automatic machine) in hand-to-hand at the stream with the Germans came together.
      As if burnt all night, crawled to his side and heard the Germans all night blow up our wrecked tanks.
      In general, his story about the battle of Prokhorovka was very different from the official Soviet version.
      There were powerful men in Russia.
  4. Cat
    Cat 28 June 2013 08: 04 New
    17
    it seems that the authors of the article - about the war in general and about tanks in particular, know exclusively "based on" the Discovery channel (which they watched during commercial breaks on MTV)
    For example:
    ... In addition to their main tanks T-III (armor - 30-20 mm, gun - 37 mm) and T-IV (armor - 80-30 mm, gun - 57 mm) ...

    In fact, T-III tanks with a 37-mm cannon were produced until 1940 inclusive, the subsequent ones came with a 50-mm gun. And even if one considers that a certain number of old “triples” did well before the summer of 1943, it would be frivolous to call them basic. Well, the T-IV with a 57-mm cannon did not exist in nature at all, on all fours there were 75-mm guns of different models.
    Farther:
    ... they were going to use the latest armored vehicles in the Battle of Kursk - T-VI Tiger tanks with 100 mm armor and 88 mm previously unused cannons ...

    The first Tigers on the Eastern Front appeared in August 1942, almost a year before the Battle of Kursk - therefore, language is also not considered to be their “newest”. Yes words and about previously unused 88 mm caliber - how to understand where not applied? On tanks - it’s been a year since they’ve been fighting, but in general the “aht-aht” caliber has been carrying its pedigree since the time of the 1st World War.

    But these are not some tricky nuances out there, like the nomenclature and characteristics of the tank ammunition shells - it’s main data known by heart to any boy more or less interested in tanks.

    In short, the lads de-cheked something, wrote something, and posted it "on the anniversary" - they say, people stupidly dull.
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 28 June 2013 08: 52 New
      +2
      Apparently, "not previously used on tanks."

      And along the Tigers - EMNIP quite a lot of them, they just appeared on the Kursk Bulge.
    2. uzer 13
      uzer 13 28 June 2013 18: 58 New
      +2
      I immediately remembered the German 88 mm anti-aircraft gun, which was very successful in design and good workmanship. And if it was already mass-produced, then why not use ready-made developments in a tank gun?
      1. ansons
        ansons 5 July 2013 12: 22 New
        0
        Well, on the Tigers I, II, they set up an 8.8 cm Flak anti-aircraft gun (naturally acquired).
    3. Alekseev
      Alekseev 28 June 2013 23: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: Cat

      In short, the lads de-cheked something, wrote something, and posted it "on the anniversary" - they say, people stupidly dull.

      Absolutely accurate definition! good
    4. Denis
      Denis 29 June 2013 02: 25 New
      +2
      Quote: Cat
      to consider them "newest" also does not turn the language.
      during the battles to break the siege of Leningrad on January 17, 1943, Soviet troops captured one practically intact Tiger. The crew left him without destroying even the brand new technical passport, instruments, weapons
      There was a time not just to get acquainted, but in detail to study
      This is whole, but the black ones came across before
  5. RPG_
    RPG_ 28 June 2013 09: 05 New
    -4
    From 42 to 43 there were military tests of the tiger and they were at the front in single copies. Well, the first T4s were with 50 mm cannons and it seems like it was after the Kursk battle that additional armor plates and a 75 mm cannon with a barrel length of 56 calibers were hung on it (versus 71 for the panther)
    1. Cat
      Cat 28 June 2013 09: 25 New
      11
      Quote: RPG_
      From 42 to 43 there were military tests of the tiger and they were at the front in single copies. Well, the first T4s were with 50 mm cannons and it seems like it was after the Kursk battle that additional armor plates and a 75 mm cannon with a barrel length of 56 calibers were hung on it (versus 71 for the panther)

      military trials - the summer-fall of the 42nd, then went to complete the regular units, and as such - participation in hostilities. Before the Kursk Bulge, the Tigers managed to check in at Stalingrad, Kharkov, kicked off in Africa ... So by the summer of the 43rd, it was a serial tank, well known to the Soviet command - in the autumn of the 42nd it had received a couple of captured Tigers from the Lenfront (including including one almost whole)
      As for the T-4, I repeat: fours originally designed for a 75 mm gun. On the first models there was, if I am not mistaken, KvK 37/24, and already with the modernization they put the guns more authentic and more powerful.
  6. svp67
    svp67 28 June 2013 09: 18 New
    11
    Gentlemen-authors Alexander Osokin, Alexander Kornyakov, if you are going to write an article on such a topic, then it would not hurt to work out historical documents more carefully. "Lyapov" in your article a lot. You do not write a school essay, this material is read by people, most of whom are well versed in the subject matter. I wish you success in the future, but I will put a “-” for this article, since you did not disclose the necessary questions, and even made many mistakes ...
  7. deputy ___ watered
    deputy ___ watered 28 June 2013 09: 41 New
    +7
    I completely agree with svp67! The authors of the TTX technique are okay from dubious sources, but to compare Ferdinand and KV-1. "In conclusion, I would like to note that in the history of the rivalry between Soviet and German tank builders, the Wehrmacht was greatly assisted by pre-war contacts with the USSR in the military-technical sphere. It is known that the Porsche company "The main work on the heavy tank was carried out jointly with Soviet specialists in the 1920-s - the beginning of the 1930-s on the territory of the USSR. After Hitler came to power, she was able to take the manufactured samples to Germany under the guise of a" heavy ". In the USSR, the KV-1 and KV-2 were created on such a chassis on six rollers. And the Porsche used these chassis to create the Ferdinand assault gun." Could at least see the differences in the chassis!
  8. Stas57
    Stas57 28 June 2013 10: 01 New
    +7
    but we found on the internet several German photographs depicting the KV-2 tank. In this case, as we assume, the pictures could have been taken in the pre-war time.

    patstalom, sensible source for article

    And it is no coincidence that the commander of the 2 Guards Tank Army, Lieutenant General Rotmistrov, reported to G.K. Zhukov:
    2-I tank army
    20 November 1944 converted to the 2-th Guards Tank Army
    army commanders:
    Lieutenant General Romanenko Prokofiy Loginovich [from 15.01.1943 to 12.02.1943];
    Lieutenant General t / v Rodin Alexey Grigoryevich [from 12.02.1943 to 09.09.1943];
    Lieutenant General of military unit Bogdanov Semyon Ilyich [from 09.09.1943 to 23.07.1944], wounded;
    Major General Alexey Ivanovich Radzievsky [from 23.07.1944 to 20.11.1944] vrid;
  9. ed65b
    ed65b 28 June 2013 10: 10 New
    +4
    The operation was crowned with the capture of Kharkov, which made it possible to fill a three-hundred-kilometer breach, broken during the Battle of Stalingrad and subsequent battles. For this, three divisions of the SS Panzer Corps were deployed in neighboring sections for an offensive to the northeast and north.
    The SS Totenkopf division on the right flank was supposed to go to Donets, the SS Das Reich division was advancing in the center, and the Leibstandart SS division was advancing on Belgorod on the left flank.
    In strict accordance with the plan, on March 16, two battalions, supported by tanks of the 5th company of the Leibstandart tank regiment and dive bombers, launched an attack on well-fortified positions. A quick jerk in deep snow allowed the task to be completed by 18.30 p.m.
    For Leibstandard, the order for March 17th remained unchanged. “Totenkopf” and “Das Reich” were aimed at Belgorod.
    Piper’s battle group attacked at 12.30 and came across an anti-tank line, which Piper’s battalion, supported by the 7th company of the Leibstandart tank regiment under the command of Obersturmführer von Ribbentrop, managed to break through only after dark.
    At 4.15 a.m. on March 18, Piper's reinforced battle group conducted reconnaissance in battle. Exactly at 7 am, the Soviet defensive line was attacked by dive bombers. Ten minutes later, Piper’s battalion reported that he had managed to break through the defensive line and develop an offensive at heights near Otradny. At 10.00, Piper’s battalion went to the Red. On his own initiative, Sturmbannführer Piper ordered the offensive to continue. At 11 a.m., Piper reported: “The advanced units reached the highway 8 km south-west of Belgorod. The Russians are retreating to the west. Two tanks are wrecked. The commander of the 3rd battalion of the 2nd regiment. "
    At 12.10, Piper’s battle group repelled a tank counterattack on Belgorod from the northwest, knocking out several tanks. An order was received overnight to occupy the western part of Belgorod, including the northern approaches to the city.
    The Das Reich division, together with the Deutschland regiment, attacked Belgorod from the south.
    By the evening of March 18, the tank corps took up a defense on the line from the heights west of Murom via Nechaevka, Bochkovka, Brodok and Tavrovo to defensive positions around Belgorod and cut the railway that went to Kharkov from the west.
    During the night, the enemy constantly attacked positions in the northern part of Belgorod. Early in the morning of March 19, at the turn of the line, Piper’s battle group was replaced by the 2nd Battalion of the 2nd Regiment.
    At 13.15, Piper’s battle group, reinforced by tanks of the 7th company of the Leibstandart tank regiment and two “tigers,” advanced on the offensive. At 15.35, she received a message about a battle with Soviet tanks in the Streletsky area. Seven Soviet tanks were shot down there. There were no casualties among the German tankers, but one of the armored personnel carriers received a direct hit. The bridge in Streletsky was destroyed by the enemy, and the battalion returned to the eastern part of the village. By order of Piper, Obersturmfuhrer von Ribbentrop again went to the crashed armored personnel carrier to find out if there were any surviving infantrymen. He could only collect soldier's books and some things. There were no survivors. On March 19, the Totenkopf and Das Reich divisions reached the Donets and occupied all the villages in the offensive area.

    In the background the church of the village where my mother-in-law lives. Unfortunately, after the war it was demolished, now there is a club.
  10. GOLUBENKO
    GOLUBENKO 28 June 2013 10: 11 New
    +4
    but we found on the Internet several German photographs depicting the KV-2 tank. In this case, as we assume, the pictures could have been taken in the pre-war time.

    School-age WoT players wrote an article about chtoli. In general, AFTORS, where is the information about SU-152 "St. John's Wort" information? From which women's magazine article copied?
    Here is a similar photo of the captured KV-2, the question is nothing. And the Red Army used captured German tanks.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  11. Kars
    Kars 28 June 2013 10: 24 New
    +4
    ____________________
    1. Kars
      Kars 28 June 2013 10: 26 New
      +5
      _________________
      1. Kostya pedestrian
        Kostya pedestrian 28 June 2013 20: 57 New
        +1
        Something like the "ancient" movie Star Gate with Kurt Russell.
        It is interesting, but what kind of hero of the caterpillar did he "lead"?
  12. Stas57
    Stas57 28 June 2013 10: 28 New
    0
    http://www.redstar.ru/index.php/2011-07-25-15-55-35/item/9764-zveroboi-protiv-pa
    nter
    article address where everyone can say their formidable fairy to the authors
    1. dustycat
      dustycat 28 June 2013 21: 32 New
      0
      Something there 600 with a hook of views and not a single comment.
      Apparently the comments do not pass pre-moderation.
  13. ed65b
    ed65b 28 June 2013 11: 21 New
    +2
    Yes, we did more here than the author drinks
  14. Taoist
    Taoist 28 June 2013 11: 45 New
    +8
    /At that time it was an automatic air gun of the largest caliber in the world (the Germans would use 37-mm and 50-mm guns in the Battle of Kursk, but these would not be air guns, but anti-aircraft guns adapted for airplanes).

    and for this, Henschel-129, Fokke-Wulf-190 and Junkers-87 aircraft were equipped with anti-aircraft 37-mm and even 50-mm guns. For Me-109 fighters, a vertical dive technique for tanks and self-propelled guns was developed, culminating in targeted bombing.
    /

    pearl on pearl ... Well, how would the 37mm guns on the VIT-2 (long before the 43 year) and on the Aerocobra seem to be no guns? Again: “In October 1943, the tests of the experimental Hs-129B-2 (head ╧ 0280), equipped with the VK3.7 anti-tank gun in a suspended under-fuselage container (ammunition of 12 shells) - the so-called“ rustzatz ”3 () were completed. .e. Henschel with 37mm appeared after Kursk. "And besides, according to reports, about 10-12 such attack aircraft were built, but not one of them came to the front." (c) Where the author saw on the "fokker" 37mm is generally unclear. And even more so, there were no 50mm on airplanes near Kursk. Explicitly data from computer toys. About the "sheer dive" on the "Messers" generally "inserts." wassat The article "fat minus" - not only is it "about nothing" but also complete nonsense with factology.
  15. tverskoi77
    tverskoi77 28 June 2013 11: 54 New
    +1
    The author has the wrong title of the article and from this essence not everyone has caught.
    1. Cat
      Cat 28 June 2013 12: 10 New
      +3
      Quote: tverskoi77
      The author has the wrong title of the article and from this essence not everyone has caught.

      it’s not the name - but that there’s nothing to catch ...
      An arbitrary set of numbers, surnames and facts - excavated by the authors in no one knows where and has nothing to do with real events. Willing to sprinkle an article on the anniversary of the Kursk Bulge is not a question, please. But only - without numbers and surnames in which not a foot in the tooth. And without masterpieces such as "we found a photo on the Internet, and assume." If you find a signature for the photo, or at least read the banal Wikipedia - there are not enough brains.
      This is not the memory of the fallen in that, without exaggeration, the Great Battle. This frank mockery turns out, to know more - from stupidity, or intentional.
  16. Bongo
    Bongo 28 June 2013 12: 14 New
    +8
    Amused opus about the "gun RES unprecedented 20-mm caliber." Under what ammunition is interesting, from SHVAK? So he muzzle energy and armor penetration less than the regular 14,5-mm.
    1. Cat
      Cat 28 June 2013 13: 02 New
      +8
      Quote: Bongo

      "muzzle energy", "armor penetration" ... You should be more careful with terminology ... And then suddenly the authors of the article will come to the site, and your comment will be read - from such a zaumi in their brain the last crinkle of it will look, there’s nothing will steer the stomachs - the authors will die out, in general.

      Although ... maybe it's for the better =)))
      1. dustycat
        dustycat 28 June 2013 21: 24 New
        +2
        Actually it was like that, but it didn’t go further than the training ground.
        1. Cat
          Cat 28 June 2013 22: 27 New
          +4
          Quote: dustycat
          Actually it was like that, but it didn’t go further than the training ground.

          in all the huge Internet there is data on the release of about 70 PTR type PES. He was specifically looking for - it became interesting, before I had never heard of such an armor piercing. But I’m so curious, but the authors of the article don’t fall for such vulgarities: they “think”, “guess”, etc. In general, it is not clear where these or other data are taken, there is no mention of such figures in any sources. The same armor fights - "only on the Central Front in the battles were involved 432 PTR" - What kind of an idiot should I be to make such statements? PTRs were issued by hundreds of thousands, and the Battle of Kursk was not June 22, the 41st, they were seriously preparing for the battle, the enemy’s forces were more or less known, and nothing more than that, but with the help of anti-tank forces the troops were stuffed to the maximum. Even an ordinary rifle regiment had a staff of 70 or 75 PTR, a division, respectively - 210 (minimum). This is what happens - there were only two SDs on the entire Central Front (well, let three, even 4 - taking into account the incomplete staff)? Nonsense.

          Exactly the same picture for many other numbers (if not for all at all). The authors are clearly not doing that, they would have to compose fiction. Or, as a last resort, articles about some LesGeybl * Tstv. But not about the war.
  17. smart ass
    smart ass 28 June 2013 13: 57 New
    +1
    "T-IV (armor - 80-30 mm, gun - 57 mm)" shoto I don’t remember such a gun on t4 ...
  18. ed65b
    ed65b 28 June 2013 14: 34 New
    0
    there is a country road called “powder” along it until now, after a rain of different types of gunpowder appears, it is interesting that they dug alongside along nothing, but there is one on it. In general, the war constantly reminds of itself. Until now, tank trenches in the forests have been preserved. Yes, as clear as if the tank was recently. here on a hill going to a funnel came across a diameter of 10 meters even such as a ball pulled out of the ground. looked closely and she akurat in the trench line. Now there are children playing lightning.
  19. uhu189
    uhu189 28 June 2013 14: 38 New
    +5
    Sorry, but after reading positive emotions did not arise, I put the minus in the article, and I will explain why - well, it’s just that there were some blunders and ignorance of the mat. parts - there would be another topic - it would be possible to forgive, but gentlemen - you write about the Great Patriotic War, be afraid of God !!! Why are you broadcasting something like that? People will read your article, who do not know the story very well, and then they will start to judge the war by such and such opuses. Before you write anything - to begin with, you would have to think, but here it is not even close ...
  20. va3610
    va3610 28 June 2013 15: 35 New
    -4
    Article avno author udak
    1. Trapperxnumx
      Trapperxnumx 28 June 2013 16: 04 New
      +2
      Quote: va3610
      Article avno author udak

      For rudeness =)
  21. rexby63
    rexby63 28 June 2013 17: 42 New
    +3
    Osokin, is that one from MK? Then it’s not even discussed. With pimps about the fate of the motherland do not argue
  22. Kostya pedestrian
    Kostya pedestrian 28 June 2013 20: 50 New
    +1
    The article looks like the movie "white tiger", where the T-34, in view of the genius of the driver, should have flown like crazy on the sight, and the ISU-152 tossed with its howitzer on the "prize_rock", and everything was vice versa, if not dumber.

    Thanks to the author for the information and some remarks that you would otherwise find having studied at least a ton of autobiographies of prominent Soviet military leaders and strategists.
  23. Black
    Black 28 June 2013 21: 55 New
    +2
    Yes ..... the authors got under the skating rink .... well, nothing! - they give for one broken or two not broken! Dont be upset.
  24. Avenger711
    Avenger711 29 June 2013 00: 44 New
    +1
    What was said at the meeting in the Kremlin is unknown. We can only guess. Perhaps it was Grabin who suggested to the commanders to conduct aimed fire 45-mm, as well as the newest 57-mm anti-tank guns on the tracked tracks of German heavy tanks, and then finish off stopped vehicles with explosives and incendiary bottles. He could also recommend placing 76-mm anti-tank guns not uniformly along the front of the onslaught of German tanks, but in groups at intervals that ensured their penetration not by frontal, but by side armor.


    Well, nonsense. ZIS-2 is not a new gun at that time, it just could not bring the barrel. Pak-nests of 6-7 guns are clearly front-line tactics, the designer has nothing to do with it. Kill the tanks with bottles, it's generally lol. Even the “Ferdinands” of 21 destroyed / captured finished off just 3 bottles, 1 more bottles and stopped. The rest of the cars, except for 150 “tigers” and a couple of hundred “panthers”, which were in 2 battalions of 96 cars each and which were stuck in mines, made their way perfectly into the forehead, but the “panther” alone was punched by a 45 mm subcaliber into the tower.
  25. Hug
    Hug 29 June 2013 02: 41 New
    +1
    But what, previously the print material is not viewed by the editors of the site?

    Such a respected publication as Military Review should not be compromised by such nonsense.
  26. Alex
    Alex 8 September 2013 20: 23 New
    +3
    I don’t even know what to advise the authors. It seems that I read the essays of my graduates: nonsense and stupidity, even without the desire to check and double-check anything. "-" unconditionally, I don’t even want to encourage the authors: this is not a mistake or a “damn lump”, it is a complete disrespect for both ourselves and people.