Military Review

Project assault tank T-34-122

13
In the Soviet army in the early years of World War II, there were a lot of problems, the main of which was the lack of necessary weapons for the effective conduct of hostilities. This may include the absence of self-propelled assault guns. Only KV-2, most of which were lost in battles, and the trophy StuG III can be attributed to them. To fill this vacuum, a self-propelled artillery installation and an “assault tank” based on the T-34 were simultaneously developed. The main weapon was to serve tank howitzer U-11, developed on the basis of the M-30.


In December 1942, the technical department of the People’s Commissariat of Heavy Industry, at the request of the BTU, developed tactical and technical requirements for an artillery reinforcement tank for tank brigades. In this tank, according to the assignment, the hull and chassis of the T-34 tank were to remain. For the new machine it was required to make a new turret, and the 122-millimeter assault rifle with the howitzers ballistics of the 1938 model of the year were to be used as weapons.

The work on the creation of the machine was entrusted to three design teams at once - the design bureau of UZTM (project leader Gorlitsky L.I.), the design bureau of the plant No. XXUMX (head Petrov FF) and the Central Artillery Design Bureau (head Grabin VG)

Under the cipher U-37, the Ural Heavy Machinery Plant developed cast and stamped towers, which in form and size were close to the T-34 tower, but under the shoulder strap of the KV tank. The X-NUMX-mm howitzer of the U-122 or the 11-mm cannon of the U-85, developed by UZTM as early as 10-1941 by the designers Sidorenko V.Ye. and Usenko A.V. However, already at the meeting of the mockup commission, it turned out that the proposed towers were too small to accommodate the breech of the 1942 or 85 millimeter cannon and three men of calculation. In this regard, the project UZTM was rejected.

Project assault tank T-34-122



The project of the Central Artillery Design Bureau proposed the installation of 122-or 152-millimeter artillery system C-41. This tower was offered not only for installation on the T-34, but also on the KV-1C. However, the design of TsAKB in the T-34 tower with a shoulder strap with a diameter of 1420 millimeters could not be installed due to the large recoil reaction and excessive dimensions. In this regard, the project for the T-34 was rejected, but recommended for installation in the KV tank.

The most attractive was the proposal of the design office of the plant №9. The design bureau of the plant offered a cast tower with vertical walls of increased height. Part of the ammunition was located in the tower niche. The tank was proposed to arm the X-NUMX-millimeter D-122 assault gun, which was the fruit of technological simplification and refinement of the X-NUMX-millimeter U-6 gun and the unification of parts and assemblies with the D-122-millimeter D-11 gun. In the continuous numbering of the products of the plant No. 85, the indicated tower received the factory index D-5 and could easily rearm with the X-NUMX-millimeter cannon D-9. However, the size of this tower was not enough for comfortable accommodation of three crew members.

The designs of the design offices of the Uralmashzavod and Plant No. XXUMX were discussed for some time at the plenum of the Artillery Committee. So, for example, in order to avoid narrowness in movement, it was proposed that the loader in combination would also be a radio operator and leave his chair only when the tank stopped while shooting was in progress. However, in this case, the machine would be without protection from the attack of the enemy infantry. All attempts to find a way out of this situation were in vain. In the autumn of 9, due to the advent of self-propelled SU-1943 and SU-152, work on the assault tank T-122-34 was discontinued. Experienced assault tank T-122-34 in some documents passed under the designation T-122Sh (assault) or T-34G (howitzer).

Design tactical and technical data:
Combat weight - 30000 kg.
Crew - 4-5 people.
Length - 6000 mm.
Height - 3200 mm.
Ground clearance - 400 mm.
Armament:
- 121,9-mm howitzer U-11;
- two DT machine guns of caliber 7,62 mm.
Booking:
The forehead and the sides of the body - 45 mm.
Body Feed - 30 mm.
Bottom and roof of the case - 20 mm.
Tower - 60 mm.
Engine - diesel, 12-cylinder, B-2-34, hp power 500
Tank capacity - 620 l.
Transmission - manual, gearbox 5 speeds (4 forward and 1 back).
Chassis - 5 rubberized twin main rollers, rear drive and front guide wheel.
Speed ​​- 30 km / h.
Obstacle obstacles:
The width of the moat - 2,50 m.
Wall height - 1,00 m.
Wade depth - 1,50 m.
Communication facilities - radio station 71ТК-3.

Based on materials:
Alternathistory.org.ua
Lib.rus.ec
www.aviarmor.net
www.tehnikapobedy.ru
Author:
13 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Shadowcat
    Shadowcat 14 January 2014 09: 28
    +10
    A new branch of the Soviet self-propelled guns HERA disclosed))
    1. vvp2412
      vvp2412 14 January 2014 16: 30
      +2
      It would be nice to get such a tank in the hangar! That would be a thing better than the 1 with the 122mm Jig! :)
      1. StolzSS
        StolzSS 14 January 2014 21: 33
        +1
        Yes bullshit. Design simplifications will reduce accuracy, as will a short gun barrel. Low fire rate, you can certainly smoke dugouts ...
  2. Moore
    Moore 14 January 2014 09: 44
    +1
    Either in BTU they tried to unify the products as much as possible (I inserted a new epaulet in a regular building, a new tower and drove off), or to increase combat efficiency (it is not necessary to turn the whole building during firing).
    When it didn’t work out, they returned to the classic ACS scheme.
  3. Denis
    Denis 14 January 2014 09: 44
    +7
    "Assault tank" based on the T-34
    Tall for a tank, rather self-propelled guns. Like KV-2
    Although they did their job, it’s a pity not so much: Unfortunately, all the technical problems associated with the chassis and transmission of KV tanks fully affected KV-2. This, as well as poor preparation of the tankers, affected the enormous losses of KV-2 tanks in the first months of the Second World War. Also, the tank units were practically not equipped with ammunition. Often, caterpillars became the only weapons of the tankers. Nevertheless, for the Germans KV tanks were a terrible shock.
    the story of the KV-2 tank began on December 19 on the 1939 of the year when the USSR Defense Committee Decree No.443ss was signed, according to which the KV-1 tank was adopted by the Red Army. At this time, a prototype KV-1 tank passed military tests and took part in the Soviet-Finnish war. During the battles, the Soviet command came to the conclusion that, in addition to the tank armed with the 76,2-mm cannon, it was also necessary to have a heavy tank capable of fighting the pillboxes, gouges and other fortifications.
    The first tests in the factory shooting gallery dispelled all doubts: the structural strength was sufficient, and two experimental KV-2 tanks were sent to the front of the Winter War.
    1. lelik2599
      lelik2599 16 November 2017 15: 54
      0
      What? But nothing that self-propelled guns are just below the tanks?
  4. svp67
    svp67 14 January 2014 14: 09
    +4
    Project assault tank T-34-122
    Yes, in the form they wanted to be made, it is clearly unpromising, since even for a linear machine with a 76,2 mm gun, the turret used at that time was small, but here 122 mm ... And besides, the assault tank implies that he would have to go in the front ranks and come very close, and the T34 armor protection in 1942 was no longer enough for this ... so it had to be increased - as a result of the alterations, a completely new machine would have to be produced, so the appearance of such an SPG on base T34 with 122 howitzer more naturally and correctly ...
    1. Aleks tv
      Aleks tv 14 January 2014 16: 02
      +3
      Quote: svp67
      for a linear machine with an 76,2mm gun, the turret used at that time was small, but here 122 mm ... And besides, the assault tank implies that he will have to go in the forefront and come very close, and the armor protection of the T34 in 1942 is already was not enough for that ...

      There is nothing to add.
      hi

      Su-100 was the most successful development based on the T-34.
  5. svp67
    svp67 14 January 2014 14: 13
    +3
    and the best "assault tank", aka "hunter" based on the T34, of course - from the serial, Su100

    and from experimental Su100M
    1. Sour
      Sour 14 January 2014 16: 00
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      and the best "assault tank", aka "hunter" based on the T34, of course - from the serial, Su100

      Assault tank is a defense breakthrough tank. Apparently so.
      SU-100 in general is never a tank, but self-propelled guns, and was created primarily for anti-tank purposes.
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 14 January 2014 16: 26
        +3
        Quote: Sour
        Assault tank is a defense breakthrough tank. Apparently so.
        SU-100 in general is never a tank, but self-propelled guns, and was created primarily for anti-tank purposes.

        That's why Sergey took the expression "assault tank" in quotation marks, applying it to the Su-100, I agree with his opinion.
        And so it is clear that this is an SPG.
        But the Su-100 was used in 1945 as: "and the Swiss, and the reaper and the player on the pipe."
        And she coped well with all her duties both as a self-propelled weapon and as a destroyer of heavy tanks and as a kind of "assault tank" based on a middle-class vehicle.
        1. svp67
          svp67 15 January 2014 21: 16
          0
          Quote: Aleks tv
          Sergey therefore

          Alex hi Even I could not find so many weighty arguments in my defense ... hi
        2. svp67
          svp67 16 January 2014 07: 56
          0
          Quote: Aleks tv
          Sergey therefore

          Alex hi Even I could not find so many weighty arguments in my defense ... hi
  6. Sour
    Sour 14 January 2014 15: 57
    +2
    If an assault tank is a breakthrough tank of an engineering fortified defense, then this project is not good. He was probably rejected at an early stage.
    The armor is clearly weak. It is impossible to strengthen it in the future, taking into account the chassis of the medium tank and the 122 mm gun.
    1. svp67
      svp67 15 January 2014 13: 01
      +1
      Quote: Sour
      The armor is obviously rather weak. It is impossible to strengthen it in the future, taking into account the chassis of the medium tank ...

      It is good that the SU100M designer did not know about this ...