Wheel SAU GAZ-68 / KSP-76

28
Soon after the end of the Battle of Kursk, the designers of the Gorky Automobile Plant proposed to develop a new self-propelled artillery unit. According to the authors of the project, this combat vehicle was supposed to supplement the existing SU-76 in the troops, as well as provide greater mobility of artillery weapons. To ensure high speed and maneuverability characteristics, it was proposed to build a new SAU not on a crawler, but on a wheeled chassis. With the initiative to create a wheeled self-propelled gun with an 76-mm gun in August 1943, the lead designer GAZ V.A. Grachev. He was supported by the design office and plant management. The proposed concept interested the military, with the result that the People's Commissariat for Medium Machine Building and the Main Armored Directorate of the Red Army allowed to start developing the project.

Wheel SAU GAZ-68 / KSP-76


Work on the new project, which received the designation "product 68-SU", started in October 43-th. A little later, the project changed its name to GAZ-68. Design work went pretty quickly. Already in December, the 1943 of the year at the Gorky Automobile Plant collected a wooden model of a promising self-propelled gun on a wheeled chassis. In the middle of December, GAZ designers sent 43-th to the GBTU project documentation. After completing some of the improvements proposed by the Main Armored Office, the project was approved. The construction permit for the GAZ-68 prototype was obtained on February 7 of the year 1944. It is noteworthy that by this time another self-propelled designation appeared in the documents - KSP-76 (“Wheeled self-propelled gun with mm 76 caliber gun”).

Without waiting for the completion of the design work, the design bureau began to transfer documentation on the new project to the car factory workshops. Due to this, despite the loading of the enterprise, in the beginning of April the production of the first KSP-76 armored hull was completed, and after about a month the finished machine left the assembly shop.

Significantly reduce the development time of a promising ACS helped the use of the finished chassis. As the basis for the KSP-76, the all-wheel drive chassis of the GAZ-63 truck, created before the war, but not yet launched into mass production, was chosen. The design of this truck with a wheel formula 4х4 started in spring 1938 of the year, and in March of 39-th two prototypes were built. Subsequently, the Gorky Automobile Plant was engaged in testing and finishing the truck, but the beginning of the war led to a slowdown or suspension of all promising projects.



About the project GAZ-63 was remembered only in 1943 year. First, in connection with the development of a promising wheeled ACS, and later in the context of creating a new all-wheel drive truck for the needs of the army and national economy. In the autumn of 43, a new prototype machine was even built, which differed from the previous prototypes in the cabin and in some details of the design. Chassis remained the same.

As conceived by V.A. Grachev and his staff, using the existing and tested machine as the basis for a new project, was to accelerate the development of KSP-76, as well as facilitate the serial construction and maintenance of self-propelled guns. In addition, the wheeled chassis had to provide high enough performance when driving on roads and, in some cases, off-road. Wheel ACS could complement existing tracked vehicles.

Since the basis for KSP-76 was chosen truck, the designers GAZ Yu.N. Sorochkin and A.N. Kirillov had to develop an original armored hull designed to protect the crew and units of the vehicle from bullets and shell fragments. The hull was a complex-shaped structure, welded from armor panels of various thickness. The front sheet initially had a thickness of 10 mm, later this parameter increased to 16 mm. The sides and bottom had a thickness of 7 and 4 mm, respectively, and the engine compartment on top was covered with a 5-mm sheet. In front of the hull, between the wheel arches, there was a flat platform for mounting the gun. Behind this platform there was an inclined frontal hull sheet, behind which there was a fighting compartment. The latter did not have a roof. The aft of the hull had a characteristic oblique shape. Due to the use of several interesting layout solutions, the SAU KSP-76 case had an acceptable level of protection, but its weight did not exceed 1140 kg.

The gun ZIS-3 caliber 76 mm was located in front of the machine on the machine, allowing to direct it in two planes. The original placement of the gun between the wheel arches, significantly rising above the platform, was proposed to reduce the height of the entire combat vehicle in order to increase survivability and stability when moving. The machine tool made it possible to direct it in a horizontal plane within a sector of width 37 °. Allowable vertical guidance angles range from -3 ° to + 15 °.

Characteristics of the ZIS-3 gun after installation on the wheeled vehicle almost did not change. Restrictions on the angles of vertical alignment led to some reduction in the maximum firing range (which, however, did not cause any complaints, because the KSP-76 was supposed to shoot only direct fire), and the rate of fire was limited to 8 shots per minute. In the fighting compartment managed to place 58 unitary shells caliber 76 mm. 41 ammunition was placed in the aft installation in a horizontal position, 17 - to the right of the gun in a vertical installation.

Inside the fighting compartment, to the right of the breech of the gun, there was a control post with a driver’s workplace. To the left of the gun was the sight and the gunner’s place. The gunner also served as commander and radio operator. For the gunner placed folding seat loader. The crew had viewing instruments to monitor the environment, and there was a panorama of the commander’s workplace. As an additional weapons For self-defense, two PPSh submachine guns with 12 magazines (852 cartridges) were offered.

The engine compartment was located at the rear of the hull. Engine GAZ-202 installed with a shift from the axis of the machine to the right by 276 mm. To the left of the engine and transmission assemblies placed an isolated fuel tank with a volume of 140 liters and the main stack of ammunition. To cool the engine in the stern sheet was provided grille.




The basis of the KSP-76 self-propelled propulsion system was a GAZ-202 carburetor gasoline engine with a power of 85 hp. The engine was associated with a five-speed manual gearbox with remote control from the driver's seat. From the gearbox, the torque was transmitted to the two driving axles by means of a transfer case and three drive shafts. The shafts and the box were in a special tunnel that ran along the body of the car. The front axle received a permanent drive, rear - switchable.

Both self-propelled axles were made rigid and fastened to the chassis frame with leaf springs with hydraulic shock absorbers. The wheels of an experimental car were equipped with single-ply bullet-resistant tires. To improve cross-country traffic, tires had developed lugs.

The prototype SAU GAZ-68 / KSP-76, built in the spring of 1944, clearly demonstrated the advantages of the layout solutions used. With a total length (with a gun) 6,35 m and width 2,05 m, the self-propelled gun had a height of just 1,55 m. Thus, the KSP-76, with similar firepower, was 70 cm below the SU-76 self-propelled gun, which should have a corresponding impact on its survivability combat conditions, but to some extent limited the combat capabilities. The combat weight of the machine was 5430 kg.

In the late spring of the 1944, the factory launched tests of the new self-propelled guns. On the highway, the combat vehicle accelerated to 77 km / h. Cruising on the highway - 580 km. Thanks to the use of the wheeled chassis, the KSP-76 had a number of advantages over the tracked SU-76 and its simplified version of the OCU-76, which was being developed at the same time. The wheeled combat vehicle was faster on the highway, quieter and lower. However, self-propelled tracked vehicles had the best characteristics when traveling over rough terrain.

The first stages of testing were accompanied by a host of problems and problems. So, there were regular breakdowns of the undetected front axle, gearbox and drive shafts. In addition, it was noted that the combat compartment of self-propelled guns is insufficient and not very convenient for the crew. By the middle of autumn, factory tests were completed in Gorky, after which the new GAZ-68 / KSP-76 self-propelled gun could be transferred to the Kubinka Scientific Test Armored Range. It is noteworthy that all the way from Gorky to Kubinka, including the icy sections of the highway, the wheeled self-propelled guns passed its course at an average speed of 60 km / h.

The test report conducted on 17 on 24 December 1944 of the year highlighted the advantages of ACS KSP-76 associated with the used armored hull design. In particular, they talked about a relatively small mass of the machine and its small dimensions. The accuracy of the fire of the ZIS-3 gun was at the level of the table. However, as it turned out during the tests, the self-propelled gun had to be fired only from a short stop, because when shooting in motion the accuracy sharply decreased.

The commission that carried out the tests recommended correcting the remaining minor design flaws, after which the GAZ-68 / KSP-76 self-propelled gun could be allowed for troop tests in the event of an appropriate decision by the Main Artillery Directorate. However, wheeled SAU was not recommended for adoption. In 1944, in parallel with the KSP-76, the self-propelled gun OCU-76 was developed, which was a simplified version of the SU-76. Having advantages in size, level of protection and maximum speed, wheeled self-propelled gun lost track tracked in combat weight and maneuverability on rough terrain. Moreover, the effective use of ACS KSP-76 off-road was considered impossible. Finally, the outlook for the car was influenced by the features of the GAZ-63 project. This truck, although it was tested before the war, was not built serially, which is why the start of production of self-propelled guns at its base could be associated with serious difficulties.

In the absence of prospects, the GAZ-68 / KSP-76 project was closed immediately after the completion of the tests. The only built copy of this self-propelled gun remained in Kubinka. Now he is an exhibit of the museum of armored vehicles.


On the materials of the sites:
http://aviarmor.net/
http://русская-сила.рф/
http://bronetehnika.narod.ru/
http://all-tanks.ru/
28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    9 June 2014 08: 12
    The cannon was "stuck" with a machine - not a bad device for the European theater of operations, but at home you won't end up with a hassle ... that's why it probably didn't work.
    1. 0
      9 June 2014 08: 23
      Quote: Bosk
      therefore probably did not pass

      Most likely because the war was on. There was an excellent SU-76
      Crossing horses do not change
      1. +5
        9 June 2014 12: 11
        A very interesting example (although not without drawbacks) of a qualitative increase in the mobility of regimental artillery, everyone somehow rushed to compare this unit with the SU-76M (as usual, confusing horseradish with a finger) -machine in terms of cost and labor intensity 4-5 times lower / less than "S.U.K.A." and is quite comparable to the cost of manufacturing a three-axle truck complete with a towed ZiS-3. Here, with this road train, you need to compare the KSP-76 (or even with a pair of bay-"Son of the Regiment" read). On the plus side: anyway, great cross-country ability , maneuverability, the presence of crew protection (not very bad, for a car in 6t). In the minuses: perhaps only the frame structure, which makes the whole structure somewhat irrational and eats up a certain amount of the reserved volume, and the absence of hull stops (which would undoubtedly appear on serial The main disadvantage of the KSP-76 was the downside of its merits - its production on the basis of auto units, and there was practically no automobile industry in the USSR in those years. GAZ was transformed into tank production, ZiS in Mias began to produce stable products only at the end of the 45th. With regard to the mechanization of the army, the emphasis was on "Lend-Lease". It was not a choice between the best and the good, it was the only solution possible at that time - tanks, then we needed more, and production By the beginning of the 45th year, the new potential has already shown its "edges" in terms of labor resources.
      2. +3
        9 June 2014 14: 05
        Quote: Denis
        Most likely because the war was on. There was an excellent SU-76

        Different from what? Su-76 it was a child of war, hastily launched into a series of self-propelled guns based on the discontinued light T-70. The car had a lot of flaws and after the end of hostilities it was pretty quickly removed from the armed forces.
        Self-propelled guns KSP-76 was armed with the same ZiS-3, for the second half of the war this weapon was no longer powerful enough.
        1. +1
          9 June 2014 20: 02
          Su-shki had one big drawback - it was used, at first it was often used as a tank, sometimes out of competence, and sometimes out of necessity ... that's where this very successful self-propelled gun earned a bunch of not the most flattering nicknames, but when later we had an "explanatory conversation" about the use of these machines, you know, everything worked out. Judge for yourself, it seems to me that this is the only car in terms of such parameters as noiselessness, lack of gas pollution, ease and speed of evacuation from a wrecked self-propelled gun and, finally, visual control of the surroundings ... some crews wisely using these advantages achieved very good results, and it is for this and loved these cars.
        2. +1
          10 June 2014 02: 03
          Quote: Bongo
          Different from what? Su-xnumx it was a child of war

          Not to fat, to be alive (s)
          The fact that the engines and gearbox were worked out, and the fact that they were. And re-engineering to other equipment would inevitably lead to a reduction in production, which during the war is by no means possible.
          And it was not only with self-propelled guns, there are many examples
          La-7 - one of the best serial front-line fighters of the end of World War II, with high flight performance. High maneuverability and strong weapons. It is believed that he had superiority in its combat qualities over the last piston fighters of Germany, England and the USA at low and medium altitudes. Increased machine survivability. Simplicity and accessibility in management
          It was better than La 5, but the production was not rebuilt
      3. +2
        9 June 2014 20: 10
        How do they not change? The KV series was changed to IS, T-34 mod. 1940 differs from T-34-85 as Moskvich-403 from GAZ-24. We do not remember aviation equipment at all. The article says it all: "Finally, the features of the GAZ-63 project influenced the prospects of the car. This truck, although it was tested before the war, was not serially built, which is why the start of production of self-propelled guns on its basis could be associated with serious difficulties." Debugging a new CONCEPT is a long process. The SU-76 could no longer fully fulfill its range of tasks in 1945, but it was a dubious pleasure to introduce a new vehicle with equivalent armament and narrower applicability.
        1. 0
          10 June 2014 02: 37
          Quote: pilot8878
          How not to change? The HF series was changed to IS, T-34 arr. 1940 of the year from T-34-85 differs as Moskvich-403 from GAZ-24

          That's necessary. Problems of HF with transmission and by that time weak 76-mm
          Even the very necessary ones, which clearly exceeded Zakhar and a lorry, the GAZ-51 and the GAZ-63 you mentioned began to be produced after the war, although they were developed before it
    2. +2
      9 June 2014 12: 23
      Ideal for Africa. It would be great to show itself in the 70's, and now too. Height 155cm. Flotation at the level of a jeep, and the power is enough to disable any BMP, not to mention the fact that the high-explosive fragmentation projectile 76mm is quite good. Any hut and even a brick building is destroyed at a time.
      1. +1
        9 June 2014 18: 11
        Quote: qwert
        Ideal for Africa. It would be great if it showed itself in the 70s, and now it’s also

        ACS AML-90, "Panar", South Africa "Eland 90 mm" produced 6000 units .....
        TTX ...
        Crew - 3 person
        Armament - 90 mm gun
        Combat weight - 5,5 t
        Maximum speed on the highway - 90 km / h
        Power reserve - 600 km
        4-cylinder gasoline engine "Panar" Model 4 HD 90 hp.
    3. +1
      9 June 2014 17: 24
      KSP-76 is a dead end. OSU-76 (OSA-76) is the best option. It used a well-developed engine from a GAZ-MM engine. OSU-76 production was easier to organize.
      In 1944, in parallel with KSP-76, the OSU-76 self-propelled gun was developed, which was a simplified version of the SU-76. Having advantages in size, level of protection and maximum speed, wheeled self-propelled guns were losing tracked in combat weight and cross-country ability.
      In addition to the gun, the OSU-76 had little in common with the SU-76. One engine instead of two, thinner armor, lighter and more maneuverable, the main thing is cheaper in production. But it was decided not to accept new weapons during the war (there were exceptions, but rarely, for example, IS-1/2). After the war, ASU-57 was created in which many OSU-76 decisions were implemented.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. 0
      9 June 2014 21: 09
      Similar thoughts revolved about the use and reason for rejection.
  2. +1
    9 June 2014 08: 36
    Self-propelled guns with a wheelhouse on wheels - a dead end.
  3. ramsi
    +2
    9 June 2014 08: 39
    since it’s self-propelled, it needs to be able to spin in place, and not write out with its steering pretzel
    1. +1
      9 June 2014 09: 40
      Quote: ramsi
      steering pretzel

      Low altitude determined the initial inconvenience in the work of the crew, after each shot it swayed for a long time (like any wheeled tank), and to the heap, small angles of horizontal and vertical aiming. After the first tests, no one had the desire to bring it to a higher level of operation. And before the end of the war they didn’t have time to implement, and after the war no one saw the use of meaning.
      The merit of this armored car in the resumption of work on the GAZ-63, which was very important.
      1. ramsi
        0
        9 June 2014 10: 14
        It’s not difficult to remove the buildup (the bulldozer blade at the back), the low height is open as well, but the small horizontal angles - well, at least a separate handbrake on both sides did something ...
        1. 0
          10 June 2014 23: 03
          the main thing that they understood: we do not need a wheeled tank and a self-propelled gun. True, Serdyukov tried to arrange delivery from Italy ...
        2. The comment was deleted.
  4. arthur_hammer
    0
    9 June 2014 09: 33
    a dead project, it’s easier to put a B-40 or B-10 (with circular shelling) on ​​an BTR-11 much more efficient
    1. +1
      10 June 2014 02: 51
      Quote: arthur_hammer
      it’s easier to put B-40 or B-10 on BTR-11

      Then the Su-25 would be very out of place.
      Only a time machine is needed
      As you know BTR-40
      It was developed at the GAZ Design Bureau in 1947 — 1949
      B-10 military did not fit either
      The criticism was also caused by the relatively low 175-mm armor penetration of the grenade used in the SG-82. That is why the SG-82 decided to replace a more effective recoilless gun of the same caliber.
      And with the B-11, you also need a time machine
      The development was carried out by the special design bureau of smooth-bore artillery (SKB GA), the head Boris Ivanovich Shavyrin, he also performed the duties of the chief designer. Adopted by the B-11 in the 1954 year. Serial production was organized at the Tula Engineering Plant.
      B-11 is intended for the destruction of military equipment, as well as for the destruction of fortifications.
  5. 0
    9 June 2014 10: 00
    Two observations on the article:
    1. The photo shows that the bottom has side bevels. The forerunner of MPI? We were the first here?
    2. Front-wheel drive with plug / unplug rear. And here it is not in the tail of technology that only in our time became popular.
    feel
    There are no stops on the ground to reduce recoil. For tracked self-propelled guns with their mass, this is understandable. But for such a light car of 5 tons. How many of these kickbacks can the transmission withstand? And when shooting on the go?
    What is the recoil force of the ZiS-3?
    1. 0
      9 June 2014 16: 23
      And when shooting on the go?

      shoot on the go, only in white light!
      1. 0
        10 June 2014 12: 38
        shoot on the go, only in white light!
        Let, purely theoretically, the bull's-eye. But what will happen at the time of the shot on the go with the transmission? Well this is such a blow to the main gear, and to the box, through it and to the engine. The machine is light, not a tank. How many such recoil can the gears withstand until they are cut off by the teeth in the opposing efforts of the engine and recoil?
        1. 0
          11 June 2014 15: 00
          Quote: abrakadabre
          But what will happen at the time of the shot on the go with the transmission?

          Friends, what are you talking about?
          Self-propelled guns are just an armored gun, shot from a position and instantly faded
          1. 0
            12 June 2014 12: 22
            Friends, what are you talking about?
            Self-propelled guns are just an armored gun, shot from a position and instantly faded
            How is this about? I’m telling you about the loads on the chassis at the time of the shot (more on the photo is a very small machine with a solid gun). And you tell me about the tactics of application.
            An ordinary gun at low weight bounces like crazy when fired. And she doesn’t ride on the field from bestowal because, among other things, she has stops in the ground.
            Although ... why am I crucifying, if the first time you did not understand ...
    2. 0
      9 June 2014 21: 13
      Of course, enlightenment descended on the chief designer and he decided to create the first MCI))) You would still recall the BA-64, that MCI is even a larger MCI. Bevels are a measure to increase bullet resistance of relatively thin sheets of armor.
      1. 0
        10 June 2014 12: 42
        You would still recall the BA-64, that MRAP is even a larger MRAP. Bevels are a measure to increase bullet resistance of relatively thin sheets of armor.
        Well, I poskoskalil.
        lol
        The bottom is flat, the sloping sides do not converge for a clean V-shaped profile. The total height of the machine will not allow them for this.

        But the absence of counter-rolls lowered to the ground is serious. What is the return on the ZiS-3? Well, what kind of brakes do you need so that the machine does not jump backwards?
  6. w2000
    +2
    9 June 2014 19: 59
    Experimental "Wolf" with a 122-mm howitzer.
    1. 0
      11 June 2014 09: 24
      Quote: w2000
      Experimental "Wolf" with a 122-mm howitzer.
      And what about the GAZ-66 chassis?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  7. w2000
    0
    9 June 2014 20: 01
    >>>
  8. +1
    9 June 2014 20: 08
    As we know, Europe has a very extensive network of roads, this is the main reason for the creation of this machine, but the war was drawing to a close, and the restructuring of production, as we know, was a long and dreary business, so it was put on the brakes.