"His among strangers." Part 1

63
"His among strangers." Part 1


Apparently, the first examples of Soviet armored vehicles that the Americans were able to familiarize themselves with in detail were Tanks T-34 and KV. Within the framework of allied relations, military vehicles for inspection and testing were sent to the United States in the autumn of 1942. Tanks arrived at the Aberdeen Proving Ground (Maryland) on November 26, 1942. From November 29, 1942, their tests began, which lasted until September (T-34 tank) and November 1943 (KV-1 tank).

In general, Soviet tanks made a favorable impression on American specialists. However, along with such advantages as simplicity of construction, “a good and light diesel engine”, good armor for that time, reliable armament and wide tracks, there were also numerous shortcomings.


Tank T-34 parked in Aberdeen


While the T-34 tank hull shape was almost perfect in terms of sling resistance, according to the Americans, its combat compartment was tight and the B-2 engine air filter design was extremely unsuccessful. Due to poor air cleaning after overcoming 343 km, the tank engine was out of order and could not be repaired. A lot of dust had jammed into the engine and the pistons and cylinders were destroyed.



The main disadvantage of the hull was water permeability as its lower part when overcoming water obstacles, and the upper part when it rained. In a heavy rain, a lot of water leaked into the tank through the cracks, which could lead to the failure of electrical equipment and ammunition.

The transmissions on both tanks were considered unsuccessful. During the tests on the KV tank, the teeth on all gears were completely crumbled. On both engines, bad electric starters are thin and of unreliable design.


Tank KV parked in Aberdeen


The armament of the Soviet tanks was considered satisfactory. According to its armor penetration characteristics, the X-NUMX-mm F-76 gun is equivalent to the American 34-mm M75 L / 3 tank gun. The gun was effective against the German light and medium tanks (except for the latest modifications of the PzKpfw IV) and, on the whole, was quite consistent with the requirements of the time.

The suspension on the T-34 tank was considered bad; by that time, the Americans had abandoned the Christie suspension as obsolete. At the same time, the KB (torsion) tank suspension is recognized as successful and promising.
It was noted that both tanks were made very roughly, the machining of parts of equipment and parts with rare exceptions is very bad, which affected the reliability. At the same time, the KV tank was made more qualitatively than the T-34.

At the end of 1943, the allies asked to provide them with a 57-mm anti-tank gun ZIS-2 for testing.



It turned out that the Soviet gun outperformed British and American 57-mm anti-tank guns in terms of its main characteristics.
The English 6-pound gun Mk.II was 100 kg heavier than the Soviet at a much lower initial speed and lighter projectile. The American 57-mm gun M1 was a modification of the English 6-pound cannon and was even heavier due to the longer barrel. The initial velocity of the projectile of the American guns increased slightly, but it still remained significantly lower than that of the Soviet ones. When compared with its counterparts, the Soviet gun has a very high utilization rate of metal, which speaks of its structural perfection. In addition, unlike foreign guns, the ZIS-2 is a duplex - the 76-mm divisional gun ZIS-3 was produced on its gun carriage. The release of two guns using one carriage greatly simplified and cheapened production.

The first Soviet jet fighter that fell into the hands of the Americans was the Yak-23. After the break in relations with the USSR, he was handed over to the US by the Yugoslav leadership in exchange for American military assistance. In Yugoslavia, this fighter was hijacked from Romania by a defector pilot.


Yak-23 on tests in the USA


Americans rated jet Yak low. After the tests that took place at the end of the 1953 of the year, it was recognized that the aircraft - as obviously outdated - does not represent much interest. Onboard equipment was primitive by American standards. At a speed of more than 600 km / h, the plane lost track stability, and therefore the speed limit M = 0,8 was established. The advantages of the aircraft include take-off qualities, good acceleration characteristics, high climb rate.
By that time, the Yak-23 was no longer the latest achievement of the Soviet aviation industry, and the Americans knew that.

Next time, close to "get acquainted" with the Soviet weapons former allies had a chance during the armed conflict on the Korean Peninsula. The Soviet T-34-85 medium tanks, which the North Koreans used massively enough at the initial stage of the war, shocked the American and South Korean infantry.



However, thanks to total dominance aviation The "UN forces" at the initial stage of the war and not always the correct use of tanks by North Koreans, the Americans soon managed to level the situation at the front. The very weak training of North Korean tank crews also played a role.

Several captured serviceable T-34-85 were tested by American experts. During the tests, it turned out that this is not the same tank as in 1942. Reliability and build quality of the machine has significantly increased. A number of innovations that improve the combat and operational characteristics. And most importantly, the tank received a new, more spacious and better protected turret with a powerful 85-mm gun.



Comparing the T-34-85 with the tank M4A1E4 Sherman, the Americans came to the conclusion that the guns of both tanks can equally well penetrate the frontal armor of the opponent. The T-34-85 was superior to its enemy in the mass of high-explosive fragmentation projectiles, which made it possible to more effectively support its infantry and fight field fortifications.

Having approximately equal to the T-34-85 reservation, the Sherman outperformed it in the accuracy and rate of fire of the gun. But the main advantage of the American crews over the Korean and Chinese tank crews was a higher level of training.



In addition to tanks, the Americans got quite a few other Soviet-made weapons as trophies. US troops sufficiently highly of the Soviet submachine guns PCA-41 and PPP-43, sniper rifles, machine gun DP-27, easel SG-43, large-DSK, 120-mm mortars, 76-mm gun ZIS-3 and 122-mm howitzers M-30.



Of interest are the cases of using captured trucks GAZ-51. The Americans, who seized him in Korea, made “gantraks” and even auto-tires on its base.


GAZ-51H, captured by the Americans and turned by them into a car


Another unpleasant surprise for the Americans was the Soviet jet fighter MiG-15. It was he who became the "stumbling block" in the path of American aviation to dominate the air in the sky of Korea.


Fighter MiG-15 during the Korean War was the main opponent of the American F-86 Saber


The American pilots themselves considered the jet MiG, with proper pilot training, to be very formidable opponents and called it the "Red Emperor". MiG-15 and F-86 had approximately the same flight characteristics. The Soviet fighter had an advantage in vertical maneuverability and power of weapons, yielding “Sabro” in avionics and horizontal maneuverability.

During the Korean War, the United States repeatedly attempted to capture the serviceable MiG-15 for familiarization by announcing a 1953 award in thousands of dollars in April 100 to the pilot who would provide this aircraft to the US Air Force. Only after the end of hostilities, in September 1953, the North Korean pilot No Gymsok hijacked the MiG-15 to South Korea.



The plane was delivered to the United States and tested by the famous American test pilot Chuck Yeager. Currently, this aircraft is located in the National Museum of the US Air Force, located on the Wright-Patterson airbase near the city of Dayton, Ohio.


Former North Korean MiG-15 at USAF Museum


Initially, the 60-s of the Soviet Union began to carry out large-scale deliveries of the most modern for that time military equipment and weapons to Arab countries that are in a state of permanent war with Israel.
The Arabs, in turn, regularly supplied samples of this technique to a "potential adversary."

As a result of the Israeli intelligence operation, the captain of the Iraqi Air Force, Monir Radf, hijacked the 16 August 1966, the newest front-line fighter MiG-21 F-13 to Israel. After Israeli pilots flew around 100 hours during test flights, the plane was flown to the USA.



Test flights on the MiG-21 in the United States began in February 1968, in an atmosphere of extreme secrecy at Groom Lake Air Base.

Soon the Americans received a pair of MiG-17F fighters from Israel, which 12 August 1968 of the year landed at Israeli Bezet airfield due to a “navigation error”.



The tests of the MiG-17F at that time were even more relevant for Americans than the more modern MiG-21. By the time they coincided with the escalation of hostilities in Vietnam, where the MiG-17F at that time were the main enemy in the air.

During the “Six Day War” 1967 of the Year Only on the Sinai Peninsula, the Egyptians abandoned the whole tank with minor damage 291 T-54, 82 - T-55, 251 - T-34, 72 heavy tank ИС-3М, -NNXX-TNXXN-29 - T-76, 51 of the heavy tank EC-100M, -NNXXMNMXXMNXXXMNXXXXNUMX, XNUMX -NNXX T-XNUMX, XNUMX - T-XNUMX, XNUMX - XNUMX SU-XNUMX self-propelled artillery, a significant amount of other armored vehicles and artillery.


Transportation of captured vehicles on railway platforms. In the foreground are clearly visible ZIL-157




Much of this equipment was repaired and adapted in accordance with Israeli standards and subsequently used in the IDF.



During the Israeli offensive on Egyptian airfields, MiG-21 fighters and Su-7B fighter-bombers were captured.

During the “Doomsday War” in 1973, the Israeli trophies were about 550 T-54 / 55 / 62 to be restored. Subsequently, these tanks were upgraded and re-equipped with British 105-mm guns L7 and for a long time were in service with Israel. For repair and maintenance, spare parts were removed from captured machines, partly produced in Israel, partly purchased in Finland.


"Tyrant-5" - upgraded T-55


Based on the chassis and hull of the T-54 / 55 tank with the turret removed in 1987, the Akhzarit armored personnel carrier was created.


BTR "Ahzarit"


The security of the machine compared with the base sample has increased significantly. The body armor protection is additionally enhanced with perforated steel sheets with carbon fibers, and a set of dynamic protection is also installed.

In addition to armored vehicles, the radar and anti-aircraft missiles of the Soviet production became the trophies of the Israelis, which was much more sensitive.


Captured radar P-12, in the background TZM ZRK C-125 with missiles


Naturally, the United States, as the main ally of the State of Israel, was given the opportunity to become familiar with all the interesting examples of Soviet equipment and weapons.

In the middle of 1972, the 57-e combat wing of fighter aviation, also known as the Aggressors, was formed in the United States at Nellis airbase. Soon the composition of this unit was replenished with MiGs obtained from Indonesia, in which a new government came to power, which curtailed friendly relations with the USSR.

All Indonesian MiGs were in an unsuitable state of flight, and American engineers had to go into “cannibalism,” collecting one from several vehicles suitable for flying. In 1972-1973, one MiG-17PF, two MiG-17F and two MiG-21F-13 were able to bring to flight status.



Operation of the MiG-17F in the USAF continued until 1982, the ex-Indonesian MiG-21F-13 flew until 1987. They were replaced with F-7B fighter jets, which, in turn, were a clone of the Soviet MiG-21, purchased in China through a front company.



After Anwar Sadat came to power and concluded the Camp David Agreement in Egypt, there was a change of political orientation. The place of the main ally was occupied by the United States. In exchange for arms supplies, the Americans were given the opportunity to study all the military equipment supplied from the USSR.

Moreover, sixteen MiG-21МФ, two MiG-21У, two Su-20, six MiG-23MS, six MiG-23БН and two Mi-8 helicopters were sent to the USA.



Of particular interest to the Americans were the MiG-23. During the test flights and training battles, several 23's were lost.
That, however, is not surprising, this machine was considered very “strict” and “capricious” in the Soviet Air Force. MiG-23 demanded a respectful approach, errors and superficial attitude in the process of preparing for flights did not forgive.

6 September 1976 of the year as a result of the betrayal of the senior lieutenant of the Soviet Air Force Viktor Belenko at Hakodate Airport (Hokkaido Island) landed a MiG-25П interceptor fighter.



Subsequently, the Japanese authorities made an official notice that Belenko had asked for political asylum. 9 September he was exported to the United States.

The initial inspection of the aircraft was carried out at Hakodate, but it was clear that it would not be possible to investigate the MiG-25 in detail at a civilian airport. It was decided to transport the aircraft to the Hakari military airbase, located in 80 km from Tokyo. For this, the American heavy transporter C-5A was used. Wings, keels, tail, and engines were removed from the plane.



On the night of September 24, under the escort of 14 "Phantoms" and "Starfighters" of the self-defense forces of Japan, "Galaxy" flew from a civilian airfield to a military one with a precious cargo.

The aircraft was disassembled, subjected to detailed study by Japanese and American experts and returned to the USSR on November 15 of the year 1976.
Two months of research aircraft showed how badly in the West they were wrong in assessing its capabilities, technical characteristics and design features. Almost all the experts agreed that the MiG-25 is the most advanced interceptor fighter in the world. Distinctive features of which are simplicity of design, its strength, reliability, ease of maintenance and availability of piloting the aircraft to pilots of medium qualification.

Despite the fact that the share of titanium parts in the design of the aircraft was not large (in the West it was believed that the aircraft was built entirely of titanium alloys), its characteristics were quite high. The radar MiG-25P, made on obsolete, according to the American "experts" vacuum tubes, had excellent characteristics.

The electronic equipment of the aircraft, although it was considered rather primitive, but at the same time, it was noted that it was performed at a good functional level, at least not inferior to the best Western systems developed at the same time as the MiG-25 equipment.

The Soviet Union suffered very significant moral and financial losses as a result of hijacking a plane to Japan. Over the next two years, we had to upgrade electronic equipment on all MiG-25 aircraft. However, these changes were already planned earlier, Belenko’s betrayal only accelerated them. On all Air Force aircraft, changes were made to the "system of state recognition." Hijacking MiG-25 was not the first and not the last case when MiGs flew at the will of pilots piloting them to a potential enemy. But the Soviet pilot hijacked the aircraft for the first time.

In this story The MiG-25 in the USA is not over. This aircraft, capable of flying a supersonic for a long time, was still very interested in American intelligence services. Moreover, in the 90-ies, Iraqi reconnaissance aircraft MiG-25РБ repeatedly flew over Jordan and Saudi Arabia with impunity. American fighters F-15 and F-16 were unable to interfere with these flights.

During the invasion of Iraq in July 2003, at the Iraqi al-Takkadum airbase, the Americans discovered several sand-filled MiG-25RB and MiG-25RBSH.



At least one MiG-25 was taken to the US Wright-Patterson airbase. After studying the aircraft was transferred to the US Air Force Museum in Dayton.

Based on:
http://www.testpilot.ru
http://www.atacusa.com/
http://www.warbirdinformationexchange.org
63 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    11 July 2014 09: 47
    It is joyful that often a detailed study presented surprises. Nateka, gentlemen, take a bite!
    1. +18
      11 July 2014 10: 31
      Quote: 505506
      It is joyful that often a detailed study presented surprises. Nateka, gentlemen, take a bite!

      It's always like that. Dry tsifiri and wrinkled foreheads are one thing analysts trying to determine the characteristics of the machine from blurry photos, another thing is a living machine. For us, the American F-5 delivered from Vietnam came as a surprise, for example, it wasn’t considered for the enemy because it turned out that it was the opposite to be beaten when meeting with the MiG-21 ...
      By the way, Americans attach great importance to joint exercises with various types of aircraft. Both European and our production. With the MiG-29 from Eastern Europe, with the Su-30 from India and Indonesia. So then they know the r / l picture and the strengths / weaknesses of almost all the major Russian aircraft. We can’t boast like that ...
  2. +8
    11 July 2014 09: 53
    Cool article. Large coverage of technology and a lot of interesting things. Concrete plus.
  3. +20
    11 July 2014 09: 59
    An unnecessary reminder that it is necessary to sell military equipment abroad with special care and that you always need to have a ready-made and worked-out scheme for modernization in stock ... to "confuse the cards" to "sworn friends".
    1. +3
      11 July 2014 11: 43
      Quote: svp67
      An extra reminder that it is necessary to sell military equipment abroad with extreme accuracy

      Rather, selling equipment is not newer than the penultimate generation and in a simplified version.
      1. +3
        11 July 2014 18: 37
        Quote: anip
        sell equipment no newer than the penultimate generation and in a simplified version.

        But who will buy the old stuff? Is there really complete fools?
    2. 0
      15 July 2014 18: 18
      ... and mark a bookmark in the sold equipment in case "there is something about what if what." So that I’m screaming at all.
  4. +8
    11 July 2014 10: 09
    So that's it. Mattress makers' ideas about the level of development of the Soviet and Russian defense industry have always lagged behind reality. I read an article about samples of US testing of Soviet tank equipment during the war in the Military Historical Journal back in the 90s. I want to ask again - Do we need military technical cooperation with the United States? Let them sleep in ignorance. And we will gradually continue to improve the models of weapons and military equipment for the benefit of our Armed Forces and the Fatherland!
    1. +3
      11 July 2014 18: 40
      Quote: staryivoin
      Let them sleep in ignorance.

      I remember in Soviet times, when everything was terribly secret, we learned about the performance characteristics of our novelties from foreign military magazines! smile
      1. Alf
        +1
        12 July 2014 20: 21
        Quote: Bayonet
        I remember in Soviet times, when everything was terribly secret, we learned about the performance characteristics of our novelties from foreign military magazines!

        Especially about these.
      2. Alf
        0
        12 July 2014 20: 24
        And these super secret samples.
  5. 0
    11 July 2014 10: 52
    Too many traitors ....
    1. +5
      11 July 2014 11: 07
      Quote: Astartes
      Too many traitors ....
      No more than always.
      1. +6
        11 July 2014 12: 39
        Why, then, does the Amer have almost every model of Soviet weapons and military equipment to study, and we have almost nothing, not a single F-15/16/18, no helicopters, no tanks? Apparently, they are still better at home than we have learned to instill love and loyalty to our homeland. It's a shame.
        1. Alexey Prikazchikov
          +2
          11 July 2014 15: 19
          they live better than us 4 times, and there are no traitors. we were betrayed to get out of Soviet and Russian paradise.
          1. Kassandra
            0
            8 January 2015 14: 42
            for grandmothers or Nazi infirmities (as was the case in Hungary), usually one of two.
            less often - fagots from the dressing room ...

            the fact that the North Korean pilot did not know anything about the reward is also a fairy tale ... leaflets were scattered all the time, and for ideological reasons, the people on the contrary rebelled and destroyed in the South (Jeju Island), where he was then shot at concentration camps.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Rusi dolaze
          0
          11 July 2014 17: 51
          And they should write about this in Pravda, or Putin personally will call you and report back, so, they say, is there, we are studying, etc.?))
          We have never seen anything like this in the bazaar :))
          1. Alf
            +2
            12 July 2014 20: 27
            After the war 8-8-8 captured weapons where did it go?
        4. +1
          12 July 2014 00: 31
          Quote: GreenHell
          Why, then, does the Amer have almost every model of Soviet weapons and military equipment to study, and we have almost nothing, not a single F-15/16/18, no helicopters, no tanks? Apparently, they are still better at home than we have learned to instill love and loyalty to our homeland. It's a shame.


          Snowden, a rascal, he could fly on a Raptor!
  6. 0
    11 July 2014 11: 12
    And how much equipment they got lately ...
    1. +9
      11 July 2014 11: 57
      Recently, for about 20 years, they have gotten not only equipment but also scientific and technological designs, despite the theft that we had and have, there is no doubt that the enemy gets the most interesting and promising first-hand and from the highest posts ..
    2. +5
      11 July 2014 16: 21
      The West received especially a lot of equipment and technologies after the collapse of the USSR and the Socialist system in Europe. Fortunately, far from everything, but even before the collapse of the Soviet Union, in the 1980s, a very significant lag in domestic electronics, computer technology, and aircraft engine building was revealed. Soviet technological equipment in many branches of production was not up to par. This is partly why the then leadership of the USSR practically "merged" the country to the West, not wanting to improve the current situation, and declared Soviet socialism unviable. The calculation was made on friendship with the United States, but they simply decided to finish us off, which partly succeeded. I must say that, whenever possible, Western military equipment has always been studied here. The last case is when they got something in 2008, during the hostilities in South Ossetia.
  7. +4
    11 July 2014 11: 18
    Good article, thanks to the author for the great work, I learned a lot! In the photo, where the United States tanks and our T-34 were shot together, you can see how compact our tank is, more chances to survive in battle
    1. +5
      11 July 2014 18: 49
      Quote: Gray 43
      about how compact our tank is, more likely to survive in battle

      How to say. Getting out of a cramped tank when it was knocked out and on fire is not so simple. Veterans recalled how on 34-ke in the battle hatches were not locked.
      1. Alf
        -1
        12 July 2014 20: 32
        Quote: Bayonet
        Quote: Gray 43
        about how compact our tank is, more likely to survive in battle

        How to say. Getting out of a cramped tank when it was knocked out and on fire is not so simple. Veterans recalled how on 34-ke in the battle hatches were not locked.

        Hatches did not close for another reason, more important. If the hatch is locked and a cumulative shell gets into the tank, the crew dies from a pressure surge, and if the hatches are closed but not locked, the tank loudly slams the hatches during the explosion, through which the overpressure is relieved.
        By the way, the locked hatches and small dimensions of the tank are not interconnected, and it’s more difficult to get into a smaller tank.
        1. +2
          13 July 2014 01: 59
          Quote: Alf
          If the hatch is locked and a cumulative shell gets into the tank, the crew dies from a pressure surge,

          Here you are mistaken, the explosion of a cumulative projectile occurs from the outer side of the armor, and the cumulative jet itself is formed after the explosion of the charge and the "collapse" of the metal lining. A cumulative jet of armor piercing through does not give a significant pressure jump.
          1. +4
            13 July 2014 06: 56
            Hatches did not close due to poor visibility, especially on the first T-34s and because of gas contamination.
          2. Alf
            0
            14 July 2014 21: 53
            Quote: Bongo
            Quote: Alf
            If the hatch is locked and a cumulative shell gets into the tank, the crew dies from a pressure surge,
            Here you are mistaken, the explosion of a cumulative projectile occurs from the outer side of the armor, and the cumulative jet itself is formed after the explosion of the charge and the "collapse" of the metal lining. A cumulative jet of armor piercing through does not give a significant pressure jump.

            Find the series Domestic Grenade Launchers from Wings of Russia. There it is very well shown how after hitting from RPGs on BTR-60, 70 hatches fly out. I also dare to note that in RPG warheads are only cumulative.
            1. +3
              15 July 2014 05: 42
              Quote: Alf
              after getting from RPGs on BTR-60, 70 hatches fly out.

              And what RPGs were created to combat armored personnel carriers? An extremely incorrect comparison, the BTR-80 (70) airborne armor is most likely to break through at a short distance from the PC (personally observed). And now what follows from this that the 7.62-mm machine gun is an anti-tank weapon?
              With the same success, the armor of light armored vehicles breaks through when high-explosive shells hit and hatches fly far too. Against this technique, the difference in the destruction of HE and CS shells is minimal.
              During the Second World War, and even now, the main reason for the death of tankers in the defeat of KS tanks is burns and shrapnel wounds, not shell shock.
  8. +2
    11 July 2014 11: 20
    Our technique is no worse, and sometimes even better than the American one ..
  9. +2
    11 July 2014 12: 02
    Our equipment has always been reliable and of high quality. The requirements for it were high, and the system of "kickbacks" did not yet exist.
    1. +7
      11 July 2014 19: 01
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Our equipment has always been reliable and of high quality.

      Somehow in a conversation with an old driver, Studebaker discussed. He compared it to the ZiS-151, which appeared much later. The axles on the Studio were thinner, but did not break, which can not be said about ZiS. The gearbox is smaller and more reliable. ZiS often overheated. In general, Studer considered better and more reliable. The aircraft technicians servicing Douglas and his copy of Li-2 also considered Douglas better in terms of workmanship (nothing leaked, components and assemblies worked longer). And so with a lot. I didn’t come up with it - people told me who worked with this technique.
      1. +1
        12 July 2014 00: 18
        There is no need to compare the products of those years. Having survived a revolution, a civil war, TWO world wars, Soviet technology was only slightly inferior to the machines of an "unsinkable aircraft carrier", which has not seen ANY serious war on its territory or social upheavals. "Scoop" presented a real MIRACLE, creating entire industries from scratch. For some 45 years, the USSR, in the most severe conditions, went from a backward, destroyed agrarian country to a scientific and technological giant that launched the first man into space.
    2. tripletrunk
      0
      19 July 2014 19: 11
      It was simply simpler, based on "a fool" and a sledgehammer and with a three-carat safety factor + a factor of ignorance))
    3. tripletrunk
      0
      19 July 2014 19: 13
      With three times the margin of safety + coefficient of ignorance ...
  10. +1
    11 July 2014 12: 13
    we, too, "in nature" need to study the technique of a potential enemy
  11. -2
    11 July 2014 12: 14
    from the Don.
    At our institute in 77. was: Phantom -4Е: so on bends our 21 did it!
    1. +5
      11 July 2014 13: 29
      Quote: borisjdin1957
      At our institute in 77. was: Phantom -4Е: so on bends our 21 did it!

      There was no F-4E in the USSR, on confusion with F-5E. These are completely different cars.
  12. 0
    11 July 2014 13: 18
    That is why the hell with you versions for your own, bite the export one, anyway ditch, or throw it away.
  13. 0
    11 July 2014 13: 25
    Amazed by the number of vehicles that hit a potential enemy. I understand that the arms trade is important and comes second after drugs and human trafficking, but there must be some way to minimize this (probable) damage?
    1. +2
      11 July 2014 13: 31
      Not enough anger at traitors and cowards. All ranks and stripes. The same damage is calculated not even in billions, but in trillions. If at all, it can be appreciated.
  14. +4
    11 July 2014 13: 37
    Good article, thanks.
  15. +5
    11 July 2014 14: 26
    Interesting article! To the author +! The unpleasant thing is that we never had real friends. Apparently, betting on high ideals loses to the green serpent. in this case, the dollar.
  16. +4
    11 July 2014 14: 29
    An excellent article, thanks to the author. Interesting, but were there any reverse cases when the potential enemy’s equipment was stolen in the Soviet Union?
    1. +5
      11 July 2014 14: 40
      Quote: zyablik.olga
      I wonder if there were reverse cases when equipment was stolen in the Soviet Union.

      I do not know cases of hijacking aircraft in the USSR. But after the end of the war in Vietnam, captured as trophies were delivered to the USSR: the F-5E fighter, the A-37 attack aircraft, and the UH-1 helicopter. All these machines after testing were highly appreciated.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. +5
        11 July 2014 15: 05
        Mdya ... whether the potential enemy had better cadres checked, or the USSR could not offer anything tempting to the hijackers.
        1. +4
          11 July 2014 15: 12
          During the Vietnam War, there were cases when South Vietnamese pilots stole their military vehicles in North Vietnam and even bombed the presidential palace in Saigon before. But there was a completely different situation, there was a war ...
      3. Alf
        0
        12 July 2014 20: 38
        In the 80th year, A-10 Cheburashka was tested near Samara, and after the Korean War, the F-18 Saber was at the 86th aircraft plant. My neighbor was just studying his ejection seat.
        1. +2
          13 July 2014 01: 46
          Quote: Alf
          In the 80 year near Samara they tested the A-10 Cheburashka

          In 80, the A-10 Thunderbolt-2 attack aircraft had just begun to be produced in the United States, how would it have ended up in the USSR?
          1. Kassandra
            -1
            8 January 2015 14: 25
            everything is for sale and everything is bought ... and sometimes it’s just hijacked,
            even the harrier got to the USSR when they were still small-scale.
  17. +2
    11 July 2014 18: 19
    Yes, the overseas allies found flaws in the thirty-four, but about their own, when in a Sherman M4 or M4A1 tank (there is an aircraft engine, and it is located, as in an airplane, of course), you need to replace one (!!!) from below, a spark plug, you need to remove the entire engine with a crane, somehow they did not really spread ...
    1. +4
      11 July 2014 19: 06
      Quote: crasever
      (there is an aircraft engine, and it’s located, as in an airplane, of course), you need to replace one (!!!), located truth, from below, the spark plug, you need to remove the entire engine with a crane

      As a power plant on medium tanks M4 "Sherman" used several types of engines. At the INITIAL production periods of the M4 and M4A1 tanks, the Continental R975 C1 aviation star-shaped carburetor engine was used with 350 horsepower. In the modification of the M4A2, a GM 6046 twin-cylinder diesel engine was used with a total power of 375 horsepower. The M4A3 tanks were equipped with a Ford GAA V8 gasoline engine, which developed a capacity of 500 horsepower. The experimental M4A4 series of tanks was equipped with a 30-cylinder Chrysler Multibank A57 power plant, which consisted of five L6 carburetor automobile engines. Tanks modification M4A6, released at the very end of the war, were equipped with a Caterpillar RD1820 diesel engine. On average, all types of power plants allowed the M4 Sherman tank to develop a maximum highway speed of about 50 kilometers per hour.
    2. +3
      11 July 2014 19: 32
      Somehow I can’t believe about the candle, they could not freeze such stupidity, there should be access.
  18. -3
    11 July 2014 19: 07
    It's funny to read about "American specialists" in tanks ... who "discovered many flaws" in the T-34 tank ... and the main one is CLOSE (!) ... Comments are superfluous ... I'm not talking about THEIR tanks from that time wars that COULD NOT DESTROY "Tiger" ONE AGAINST SIXTEEN (!) ... in that battle, "Tiger" emerged victorious ... and this at a time when the German command FORBIDDEN German tankers DIRECT military confrontations WITH SOVIET TANKS ...
    1. wanderer_032
      +12
      11 July 2014 20: 30
      Quote: I think so
      It's funny to read about "American specialists" in tanks ... who "discovered many flaws" in the T-34 tank ... and the main one is CONSTRUCTION (!)


      Why are you surprised?
      The tightness of the BO 34 matches arr. 1942 was an acute problem and was recognized by everyone, from the tankers themselves to the designers.
      Because this tower (a pie, it was so called for its characteristic shape) was originally developed for the installation of a 45-mm gun, and not a 76-mm one.
      In addition, after the installation of a 76-mm gun in this tower, the ventilation of the BO deteriorated sharply and the tankers were simply cut off from the powder gases during an intense battle.
      This problem was solved only in 43, when a new tower was introduced into the production, popularly called the "nut", but it was still cramped.
      They also installed a new air cleaner in the 43rd, of the "Multicyclone" type, which cleared the air better and had to be serviced less.
      But all these Amer’s snorts about the quality of our tanks in 1942, I personally consider just a show off.
      I will explain why. It's simple, the evacuation of factories served as the reason for their such mediocre quality.
      There was also a lack of components from rubber and other materials that became scarce.
      People in the evacuated factories, put machine tools and other equipment in the open, and started to work.
      Most of the workers in those factories were women and adolescent children working for food stamps and a very meager pay of 14-16 hours a day.

      And in America, factories worked fully provided with everything necessary.
      Both materials and staff.
      Most of the workers there were healthy men who worked for full wages and a fixed shift.
      There is a difference? I think that is absolute.
      1. Alf
        0
        12 July 2014 20: 49
        Quote: wanderer_032
        Because this tower (a pie, it was so called for its characteristic shape) was originally developed for the installation of a 45-mm gun, and not a 76-mm one.

        The T-34 tank was initially developed for a 76 mm gun. Initially, Koshkin and Morozov in the T-34 project laid the inclined arrangement of armor plates, a powerful diesel engine and a powerful 76-mm gun.
        There is fragmentary information that a 34-mm gun was actually installed on the T-1 N45, but this was due to the fact that the plant did not currently have a 76-mm gun available.
    2. Alf
      0
      12 July 2014 20: 44
      In 1942, the T-34 of 1940 was sent to the states, and this is a slightly different song.
      To claim that the T-34 is a bad tank, you need to have better tanks, and in 1942 the Americans could hardly boast of the best. In addition, the Americans clung to the finish of our tanks, but it was worth noting that our tanks were made on the assembly line by boys, women and the elderly, unlike skilled American workers in ideal terms.
      1. +3
        13 July 2014 11: 09
        The main criticism was caused by the terrible gearbox design:
        an engineering error that negated all the advantages of a powerful motor.
        Almost T-34/76 could go into battle only in 2nd gear.
        And the roar of the engine of one T-34 was therefore like that of a German tank company.
        The deficiency was partially eliminated in 43 g, and finally
        only in 44 g. in T-34- / 85.
        1. 0
          14 July 2014 18: 31
          This is not an engineering mistake. There were simply not enough machines at the factory where the gearbox was designed. A better box could not be played. True, her modification with a multiplexer immediately appeared, which could correct the situation, but she did not go into the series, because all the same, it did not allow to realize the full power of the engine. Box with HF could well save the situation, but it was a different diocese. As a result, in 1942, the KV-1C overtook the T-34 in the field.
  19. 0
    11 July 2014 21: 36
    That would be the American trophy technology, our similar amount got smile
  20. KIRON
    +2
    12 July 2014 01: 50
    Since then, Americans have become fans of our fighter jets. How many are now in private hands?
    1. +3
      12 July 2014 07: 31
      Americans generally love technology and keep it in perfect condition, there are wonderful museums and private collections. This cannot be taken away. You can inquire http://wmuseum.ru/ssha/
      1. +2
        12 July 2014 13: 07
        There are many tanks in private collections "on the go". And some collectors -
        multimillionaires, turned on this business, own a territory of tens
        square kilometers, where "grazing" equipment off-road. They have
        their factories (with workers) where they grind spare parts, boil, paint ...
  21. +2
    12 July 2014 03: 35
    Adopting the T-34 tank, Stalin said something like the following: "There are a lot of shortcomings, but there is no time. We need to prepare for war." The control of the T-34 tank is very heavy. the effort on the clutch pedal is about 70-90 kilograms, the clutch levers, 40-50 kilograms. it is almost impossible to change gears on the go. Changing gears by throwing the gears is a very difficult task. Subsequently, on a four-step with shifting. do not confuse with syncs, it has become much easier
  22. +1
    12 July 2014 03: 54
    and who remembers the tank batteries. 135s in a wooden box. horror !!! there is no capacity, but it weighs 100 kilograms, probably a joke, and after all they did this squalor until the very end. and there are already 4 of them.
    1. 0
      12 July 2014 07: 26
      Quote: Free Wind
      and who remembers the tank batteries. 135th

      As far as I remember - 40 kilograms. This one stood under the seat in the Urals, it was very fun to drag it into the cockpit.
  23. -4
    12 July 2014 08: 48
    Deja vu effect.

    I read the article and I had a slight déjà vu effect.
    1. article about the test of the Americans T-34 \ HF at its training ground was already Topwar
    2. An article about the testing of our Mig21-23 aircraft (by the same Americans) was also there.
    and very detailed
    There were also articles about the seizure of our missile defense stations by the Israelites or about defectors to Israel / Japan.

    Why was this short garden fenced?
    1. +3
      12 July 2014 13: 44
      Quote: Takashi
      Why was this short garden fenced?

      If you didn’t like the "vegetable garden", it means that the time spent on reading the article was "killed" in vain, at least the "vegetable garden is short".
      Quote: Takashi
      1. the article about the T-34 \ KV test by the Americans at its training ground was already Topwar 2. An article about testing our MiG21-23 aircraft (by the same Americans) was also there. Moreover, very detailed articles about the capture of our missile defense stations by the Israelis or about defectors to Israel / Japan were also.

      It is a pity that from all that you read, you remember only this. As the author of the publication, I had the intention to make a review chronological article about our technology that has fallen overseas. The second part has been "hanging" unpublished on the site for a couple of days, probably it is worth waiting for it and taking your time with conclusions. hi
      There is a funny moment in our communication, both are Komsomol members, but we communicate on the pages of "VO".
  24. Alf
    0
    12 July 2014 20: 55
    Having received the MiG-25, the Americans said a loud "Fi!" When they saw the electronics on the radio tubes. Then, however, they shyly hid the fact that after the explosion of a vigorous loaf, due to the effect of an electromagnetic pulse, their microprocessor electronics are covered by a female organ, and the radio tubes are working. The same situation was when they received our missile boats from the GDR.
    1. +4
      13 July 2014 18: 49
      [quote = Alf] Having received the MiG-25, the Americans said a loud "Fi!"
      And I read another. The Americans thought that the tube equipment was used specifically, so that it would not fail from powerful pulses in nuclear explosions, but in fact, with semiconductor technology, we were lagging behind.
  25. Chestnut
    0
    13 July 2014 17: 38
    Interestingly, the majority of combat aircraft hijackers had the ending of a surname indicating a great and independent one.
  26. +1
    14 July 2014 18: 25
    Quote: Bosk
    Hatches did not close due to poor visibility, especially on the first T-34s and because of gas contamination.

    On the T-34 of the release of 1942-43, 2 electric fans were routinely provided, in practice they were not enough, put 1 or not at all. In order not to burn in the tower, hatches were opened.