The project of the two-turreted tank BT: profit and non-profit

In the interwar period, Soviet tank builders were actively engaged in the subject of multi-tower armored vehicles. Similar Tanks, as conceived by their creators, they should have increased firepower and differ in the ability to simultaneously attack multiple targets, including using different weapons. A number of projects of multi-turret tanks reached mass production and operation in the army. Other samples were less fortunate, because of which they remained only in the form of drawings or did not pass the test stage. In addition, some developments in this area have become a real mystery and can still be a topic of controversy.

In the thirties, several light wheeled / tracked tanks of the BT family (“High Speed ​​Tank”) were developed. Within this family, several major projects were created, which were brought to mass production and operation of equipment by the troops, as well as several experimental machines and a number of auxiliary equipment. In the latter case, various construction units, various armaments, special equipment, etc. were used. In addition, according to some sources, a two-tower modification of the BT tank was created. For several years there were active debates about the existence of this machine, which, it seems, allowed to establish the truth. Consider this question in more detail.

First mentions

According to reports, the technical specifications for the BT family of tanks meant the construction of light armored vehicles with high mobility characteristics. Also, a number of modifications should have the ability to move both on tracks and on wheels. All weapons were supposed to be installed in one tower. Exactly so, with the exception of some nuances, looked like serial tanks with BT-2 on BT-7, as well as several experimental machines. According to some sources, a small tank series with two towers was also developed and even built.

Two-tower tank BT at the NIBT training ground. Photo magazine "Polygon"

The earliest known mention of a double-wheeled BT is found in one of the issues of Tankmaster magazine for 1992 a year. The magazine provided a diagram of this machine, called the BT-4, and also had a brief story. The magazine stated that the tank’s drawings were made based on foreign sources. The list of these sources, however, was not mentioned. Also remained a secret and the main characteristics of the machine with a non-standard layout. The accompanying text to the drawings looked as follows:

“I recommend to modellers who adore rarities, this tank BT-4. If memory serves, at the end of 1932, this project existed, moreover, 20 tanks of the installation series were built. What is the matter and ended because of the obvious depravity of the two-tower concept. However, the car looks great! Like all experienced tanks, it was painted in reddish-brown color with red lead. ”

The attached drawing depicted a light tank of the BT series, equipped with an unusual fighting compartment. On the standard BT chassis of the first modifications, two towers were located at once, similar to those of the early modification used on the T-26 tank. In one of them was located a machine gun, in the other - a small-caliber gun. The layout, running gear, power plant and other features of such a BT-4 tank, apparently, corresponded to the main features of previous projects. Unfortunately, no details were given on this subject.

The following mention of double-wheeled BT is found in the book of I.P. Shmelev "BT Tanks" 1993 of the year. As in the case of the "Tankomaster", the armored car appeared under the designation BT-4. Due to the lack of full-fledged data or for other reasons, the double-headed WT is allocated only half of the paragraph. We quote this text:

“Some sources mention intermediate models BT-3 and BT-4. What it is? The designation BT-3 can be understood as the BT-2 tank with a slightly modified tower structure and continuous rollers (they previously had strong needles). Well, the BT-4 is a small series of tanks with two machine-gun turrets as in the first series of light tanks T-26. Surprisingly, these archaic cars finished up the summer of 1941 and took part in the battles. ”

Drawings from the magazine "Tankomaster"

Any images, charts or other materials on the double-tower BT-4 were not given. Probably, the author was able to find only references to these armored vehicles, but no other evidence of their existence. It is noteworthy that by the time of the publication of the book “Tanks BT” the magazine “Tankomaster” with the corresponding drawing had already been released. Nevertheless, lovers of armored vehicles with experience know how difficult it was to get this edition in the early nineties.

Subsequently, information about dvuhbashennom BT or BT-4 from time to time appeared in various domestic and foreign publications. Due to the lack of information about this tank, almost all of them were reprints from earlier sources. New publications about the two-tower modification of the “Speed ​​tank” became a cause for disputes, the participants of which gave various arguments and tried to determine whether such a machine existed and what it was.

In connection with a certain popularity of the topic, over time, allegations began to appear in serious editions of the tank theme that disproved the existence of the double-towed BT. Historians of the domestic tank building could not find any evidence of the existence of the modification of the BT-4 with two turrets. At the same time, however, the BT-4 project itself existed, albeit in a different form. However, the lack of evidence for the existence of a two-turreted tank did not lead to a complete halt of disputes.

"Two-headed salamander of the Red Army"

Until a certain time, information about the two-tower BT was fragmentary, and was not supported by documents. At the beginning of the two thousandth, the situation radically changed. In the spring of 2002, the issue of the magazine “Polygon” was published, in which there was a large and detailed article about the BT tank with two turrets entitled “The two-headed salamander of the Red Army”. Its author, T.R. Yepachev, allegedly, studied a lot of documents and restored the history of an interesting project. In addition, the author managed to get some unique photos of a promising combat vehicle, which were attached to the article.

Two-tower Bt-BT on the 7 parade in November 1931, Red Square. Photo magazine "Polygon"

The author of the article in “Landfill” claimed that he had repeatedly come across references to a two-turret tank, BT, and also knows about the refutations of its existence. However, he had previously seen a photo of such an armored vehicle. As it turned out, one of the relatives of Yepachev in the early thirties worked in the SKB-6 of the Kharkov Tank Plant and related to the creation of new equipment for the army. With certain difficulties, the author of the article managed to get the diaries of his relative, where there was some information about the development of the BT tank with two towers.

According to the diaries of designer V.V. A. Durnygin, the head of SKB-6 and the project of the double-wheeled BT was A.A. Morozenkov. In addition, it was alleged that the armored vehicle project with two independent towers was not related to the BT-4 tank, since its development began even before the appearance of the serial BT-2. In this case, the emergence of a new project contributed to pure chance, almost unrelated to the development of the armed forces.

In the autumn of 1931 of the year, the first production tanks of the BT family were built at the XTZ. The first five buildings were built, which, however, could not be completed with towers. Accessory workers were to blame for this: the Izhora plant, which was responsible for the production of these units, did not have time to deliver them on time. A.A. Morozenko. On the existing corps, it was necessary to install the already received towers for T-26 tanks, two for each vehicle. In this configuration, new wheel-tracked tanks could be sent to the parade and to the exercises, where they could see the military, civilian spectators and foreign experts.

The proposed draft revision initially included the installation of new towers without significant changes in the design. Nevertheless, it was necessary to provide some modifications of the hull and chassis. So, because of the new towers, an updated hull roof was needed, and some of the elements of the candle hanger had to be moved, since their original location did not allow the tank to be equipped with two towers at once.

By order of M.N. The Tukhachevsky HTZ received five hulls of BT tanks and the same number of power plants that should be used in the construction of new double-armored vehicles. When checking the supplied components, it turned out that one of the supplied machines is faulty and needs to be improved. Engine-Engine Builder V.D. Gorlopanov carried out the adjustment of all systems, and also transferred the tank from gasoline to kerosene, having received a small increase in power. Some other ways of modernization were also proposed, which were not approved due to the complexity and high cost of living. In particular, the project of additional wings, which allowed towing a light tank by bombers, was out of work. This proposal was not approved due to the use of expensive and scarce duralumin.

Double-turbo tank on maneuvers of the HVO, 1935. Photo of the magazine "Polygon"

According to the magazine "Polygon", the assembly of the first two-tower BT was completed at the very beginning of October 1931. Soon, engineer Pugin brought the car to the test. A test drive around the plant took place without problems, but ended in an embarrassment. Under the armored car tracks, a pig from the neighboring Red Whaler collective farm unexpectedly rushed. The driver turned the steering wheel and flew into the tree, the pig tragically died. Later, the plant had to pay compensation to the collective farmers.

With the exception of the pig incident, the tests were successful, after which the assembly of the following four tanks began. To designate a new project, the People's Commissariat of Tank Building proposed the abbreviation BT-VT - “High-Speed ​​Tank, Internal Prison” (the internal prison was called SKB-6). The assembly of four double-turbo tanks was completed by October 10 of the same year. One of the finished cars was fired from a rifle and a machine gun, two more went under their own power to Moscow, where one of them took part in a parade on Red Square. She passed in the same column with the BT-2 tanks of the first series.

Later, two tanks passed the NIBT for ground testing. The project BT-VT interested M.N. Tukhachevsky, who at that time was actively promoting multi-tower tanks. In April, comparative tests of BT-1932, Christie and BT-BT tanks passed at the test site at 2. In terms of speed performance, the double-turbo machine showed itself better than its competitors. Perhaps affected the skill of the driver or the use of alternative fuels in the form of kerosene.

Exact information about the fate of the BT-BT tanks from TR. Epacheva absent. According to the 1 June 1941 report he had on XTZ, there was one sample of such equipment, which, after the start of the war, was probably restored and sent to the front. Perhaps it was this car that was thrown by the Red Army soldiers near Kharkov, became the enemy's trophy and was subsequently shot by a certain photographer. A snapshot of this car was first published on the pages of the Meili-Emeil in April 2003. Data on four other machines are missing.

The article “The two-headed salamander of the Red Army” was accompanied by several photographs of not very good quality, which, however, made it possible to view the BT-BT tank. It differed from serial BT of early modifications by the presence of two relatively small turrets with cannon and machine-gun armament. In the right turret there was a 37-mm cannon, in the left - a DT machine gun of the 7,62 caliber mm. The hull and chassis, apparently, were borrowed from earlier technology without significant changes, although they were refined due to the need to install two towers.

Exposure Session

The article of the magazine "Polygon" to this day is the largest and most detailed study of the topic of two-tower tanks BT, however, has some characteristic features. The attentive reader will notice some oddities in the names of the project participants, as well as notice the discrepancy between the named and actual designations of the organizations. For example, the Kharkov factory that built armored vehicles was never called a tank one, and there were no SKB-6 in its structure.

Tank BT-VT, which became the enemy's trophy. Photo magazine "Polygon"

It should be noted, this was not a mistake of the author. T.R. Epachev could not be mistaken, because he never existed and appeared only thanks to the release date of the magazine. The second issue of Polygon magazine for 2002 was released in April and to a certain extent was timed to the Day of the Fool. For this reason, in its appeal to the readers, the group of authors urged: “do not fall, please, under the soft charm of some articles, no matter how interesting they may seem to you. However, for people who have no sense of humor at all, we have provided for them "subtle hints of thick circumstances."

In other words, the article about the two-tower modification of BT was a hoax and an April Fool's rally. Mention of such a technique did occur in earlier literature, but did not have any evidence. In particular, there were no images of allegedly built tanks. The authors of the magazine "Polygon" corrected this flaw and independently made several pictures with two-turreted tanks by photomontage.

Not only in the 2002 year, but even now there is no reliable information about the existence of a “speed tank” with two turrets with cannon and machine gun weapons from T-26. Apparently, the project BT-4 (with two towers) or BT-BT never existed and was not even considered as a possible development variant of the technology. The creation of such an option hardly made sense, and was also associated with a number of most difficult technical problems. The latter would require a radical alteration of the existing car with very dubious prospects.

In the first references, the double-towed BT was referred to as BT-4, but this index applied to another project. This BT-4 tank was a modernized version of the BT-2, created under the guidance of A.O. Firsov. Its main difference from the base machine was the riveted-welded design of the armor case, which facilitated the operation and some maintenance operations of the machine.

When considering the technical features of a hypothetical project, first of all it should be noted that the hypothetical double-turret version of the BT tank would have only one advantage over the serial one with one turret — the possibility of firing two targets simultaneously using different weapons. All other differences between the two machines could demonstrate the advantage of one-turret. For example, the two towers could interfere with each other and limit the sector of guidance, worsened the ergonomics of the crew compartment and affected the size and weight of technology.

The scheme of suspension tanks BT. You can clearly see the location of the springs, making it impossible to install two towers. Figure from the book of I.P. Shmeleva "BT tanks"

Described T.R. The option of installing two towers of the T-26 tank on the BT chassis looks very absurd and pointless. He demands that one more person be added to the crew (in comparison with the BT-2 with a crew of two) who will control one of the towers. At the same time, weapons from a cannon and a machine gun are spread over two separate towers without any noticeable advantages over the basic layout. Despite this, the installation of two borrowed towers noticeably weights the tank.

Moreover, the installation of a new roof of the hull, two towers and an updated combat compartment in the case of the BT tank may not be possible for technical reasons. The article of the magazine "Polygon" referred to the refinement of the suspension, but they would be too complicated and would require a significant alteration of the body. Tanks of the BT family differed in a relatively narrow hull, the sides of which had elements of the so-called. candle pendant in the form of vertically placed springs and means of their adjustment. The springs of the second pair of road wheels were located in the area of ​​the tower and the fighting compartment. Thus, the use of two towers would require to transfer these springs, changing the design of the suspension and housing. Without such changes, the full use of the towers was not possible due to the crowded and inconvenience of the fighting compartment.

It is possible that in the early stages of the formation of the appearance of promising armored vehicles, domestic engineers considered the possibility of designing a two-tower modification of the BT. However, if such ideas existed, they did not manage to go beyond the preliminary discussions. Any reliable information about the creation, not to mention the construction, testing or military operation, dvuhbashennyh BT is absent. This suggests that such a project never existed.

Everything suggests that the double-tower modification of the “High-Speed ​​Tank” was not even developed, but in various domestic and foreign publications there are references to such technology. Probably the basis of this problem is some kind of misunderstanding or even a conscious hoax. In the case of the article of the magazine "Polygon" everything is clear - the editors noted April April with an interesting and unexpected joke. The reasons and prerequisites for the emergence of previous publications on this topic remain unknown.

In the history of the creation of weapons and military equipment left a huge number of unusual and interesting projects, many of which are known only to a narrow circle of specialists. Such developments always arouse great interest among the general public and attract attention. However, sometimes under the guise of an unusual and unknown project, the public may be offered not entirely truthful information based on rumors, speculation, or conscious hoaxes. One example of this was the double-mounted version of the BT tank, which appeared due to rumors or unverified information.

Based on:
Shmelev I.P. BT tanks. - M .: Hobbikniga, 1993.
Epachev T.R. Two-headed salamander of the Red Army. Polygon, 2002, №2.

Article-mystification of the magazine "Polygon" (without the April Fool's epilogue):
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    18 February 2016 07: 07
    Well, the drawings show that this is not possible. The towers hang over the hull, and there is no possibility to expand the hull - the internal candle pendant will not allow this to be done properly. Although photoshop is good. The only thing I would place towers with a ledge so that they do not go beyond the width of the hull
    1. 0
      20 February 2016 18: 16
      This is what, it turns out, the grandfather of "Mickey Mouse" - "about two heads." The granddaughter was prettier - two round "hatch-ears", but the "head" is one, as it should be. laughing
  2. +3
    18 February 2016 07: 44
    Thank you to the author for the exposure session ..
  3. +3
    18 February 2016 07: 47
    Yes, I read about Shmelev about such a tank, I also thought about the illogicality of such a decision: the T-26 was converted with a BT tower, so there was no point in reverse somersault with weakening the firepower of a more promising tank.
    And yes, the hull design does not allow to place two towers on the initial surface without a complete redesign of the project.
  4. +3
    18 February 2016 08: 30
    funny. What? Normal April humor of technocrats) By the way, "Pop Mechanics" also likes to joke in this way in its April issues (at least articles about the "Volga" with an atomic engine and fighting moose)))
  5. 0
    18 February 2016 09: 52
    "Austin-Putilovets" Ilyich, only on caterpillar tracks.
    1. +1
      18 February 2016 10: 16
      Quote: Sergey-8848
      "Austin-Putilovets" Ilyich, only on caterpillar tracks.

  6. +1
    18 February 2016 10: 20
    After adjusting the volumes and the proper quality of the 20K guns, in contrast to the not-so-good state of affairs with the PS-1, and the caliber of 45 mm versus 37 mm is more powerful, the production, and even less the development of new two-turret tanks, lost all meaning. An example is the curtailment of the production of two tower T-26.
    Although, at a time when there was a search for where to move, consideration of such decisions is possible.
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. +5
    18 February 2016 12: 51
    Thanks to the author, I did not know about this tank-joke) Such a machine would fit well into the world of tanks - a crazy car for a crazy game)
    1. +5
      18 February 2016 14: 12
      Quote: Polkovodetz
      Such a machine would fit well in the world of tanks - a crazy car for a crazy game)

      All claws for! smile
      And to distribute it at the next action - to the great joy of the owners "sand houses hotchkiss. "Every time the potatoes give out free machine gunners - it's just some kind of holiday.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  9. +2
    18 February 2016 13: 48
    Is this the "great-grandson" of the two-tower BT? smile
    1. +1
      19 February 2016 15: 41
      power plant I hope for fast neutrons? or in the old fashioned way - on slow?
  10. +4
    18 February 2016 13: 56
    "A session of black magic with its complete exposure" (c)

    Cyril, as always pleased with its unusual and detailed material. And as always, I will be waiting for your new publications.
  11. +1
    18 February 2016 14: 15
    Of all the attempts (real) to make a tank based on Christie’s chassis, the BT-CB2 was most interesting to me for a number of reasons
    1. inclined reservation (two booking options)
    2. Lack of protruding parts
    3. The engine cooling system, unlike the BT-7, worked in two modes: combat and marching.
    The machine passed tests (NIBT, mileage of more than 2000 km), during which it was found that the chassis of the BT-7 tank, provided that the BT-SV-2 was actually booked and the mass of the latter was increased to 24-25 tons, was too weak. -CV2 could compete with the T-34.
    1. -1
      19 February 2016 00: 18
      Quote: tacet
      If not for this fact, the BT-CB2 could seriously compete with the T-34.

      It is rare that a normal tank could not compete with the T-34. One of its suspension and layout were worth it. But the reality is 22.06.41/5/3. consisted of the fact that out of 2 tank plants in the USSR, only 34 worked at full capacity. And 1941 of them produced just the T-2. Moreover, by the fall of 34. only 34 remained working at full capacity. And these were the very factories that produced the T-1941. Therefore, the choice of the main tank of the war was predetermined by this circumstance, and not by the fact that the T-XNUMX was something especially good. It was then that the propagandists found in him a mass of genius, which made him suddenly become legendary. And in XNUMX everything was determined by other factors.
      1. 0
        19 February 2016 15: 43
        The t-34 was brilliant in terms of price / performance. it was a true tank of war. I don’t invest only money in the concept of price, it means spent production and the simplicity of creation and maintenance, etc.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. -3
          19 February 2016 23: 28
          Quote: DrVintorez
          t-34 was brilliant in terms of price / efficiency

          Really? How did he manage at a high price and low reliability and efficiency?
          Quote: DrVintorez
          it was a true tank of war

          "True tank" WW2 from the spring of 1942. was called Pz.Kpfw.IV. Since the fall of 1942. this tank was the KV-1s. Since the spring of 1943. this tank was again the Pz.Kpfw.IV. And somewhere from the end of 1943. and by the end of the war it was replaced by the Pz.Kpfw.V. From 22.06.41. in the spring of 1942 there may be options. But without the T-34.
          Quote: DrVintorez
          I don’t invest only money in the concept of price, it means spent production and the simplicity of creation and maintenance, etc.

          The agitation prop legends you put there. If you look, T-34 did not occupy a leading position in any of the positions. Its value for the Red Army was that at that time it really existed and the factories that produced it were not evacuated. And it was better than nothing or the T-40s (then the T-60, then the T-70). This predetermined his future fate.
          1. aba
            20 February 2016 08: 29
            "True tank" WW2 from the spring of 1942. was called Pz.Kpfw.IV.

            How about that?
            By the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, out of 3582 German combat-ready tanks, 439 were Pz.IV. It should be emphasized that according to the then classification of tanks in the Wehrmacht by the caliber of guns, these machines belonged to the heavy class. For our part, the modern heavy tank was KV - there were 504 units in their forces. In addition to numerical, the Soviet heavy tank had absolute superiority in combat qualities. The average T-34 also had an advantage over the German car. They pierced the armor of the Pz.IV and the 45-mm cannon of the light tanks T-26 and BT.
            A short-barreled German tank gun could effectively fight only with the latter. All this was not slow to affect military losses: during 1941, 348 Pz.IV. were destroyed on the Eastern Front.

            The Germans themselves adhered to a low opinion of the fighting qualities of Pz.IV. Here is what Major General von Mellentin writes in his memoirs (in 1941, with the rank of major, he served at Rommel’s headquarters): “The Pz.IV tank gained the reputation of the formidable enemy from the British mainly because it was armed with a 75 mm cannon . However, this gun had a low initial projectile speed and poor penetration ability, and although we used Pz.IV in tank battles, they brought much greater benefit as a means of infantry fire support. " More significant role in all theaters of war Pz.IV began to play only after the acquisition of the "long arm" - 75-mm gun KwK 40.

            ednij_tank_pz_kpfw_iv / 29-1-0-123
            1. 0
              20 February 2016 09: 53
              Quote: aba
              How about that?

              No way. Only in response to it can an entire article be written.
              Quote: aba
              In addition to numerical, the Soviet heavy tank had absolute superiority in combat qualities.

              He had a "small" flaw. He drove badly. Often not far and long. A more or less rideable KV was called the KV-1s, and it went into production in the summer of 1942.
              The T-34 was different basic trouble, it was a highly specialized infantry escort tank. And for other purposes, he did not fit well. But I had to use it, because With the beginning of the Second World War, the parties switched from special equipment to actually MBT. The Germans became such a tank tank SP Pz.Kpfw.IV, in the Red Army - tank SP T-34. Only Pz.Kpfw.IV suited this role well (only the gun was changed in the spring of 1942), and the T-34 did not fit well, because for this it would be necessary to redo the half-tank. The KV-1s mod was much better. 1942, but there was nowhere to do it. Therefore, they took a number.
              Quote: aba
              The average T-34 also had an advantage over the German car.

              Curious what? In the gun? Then the T-34 should not be called a tank but a tank destroyer. As a tank destroyer, the T-34 had advantages, and as a tank, it didn’t. In addition, the Germans had cumulative cartridges that pierced even HF in the forehead. In the spring of 1942. on Pz.Kpfw.IV put a powerful cannon.
        4. The comment was deleted.
  12. +1
    18 February 2016 17: 49
    How do you like this?
    June 26, 1941 issued a decree according to which the plant number 183 named. The Comintern in Kharkov should develop a screening for the BT-5 and BT-7 tanks. July 15, 1941 the screens were ready. Additional armor was made in Mariupol at factory No. 48. The test report was signed on September 17, 1941. Participated in the November parade of 1941.

    The total thickness of the frontal armor of the hull was brought to 50 mm. Onboard - up to 30 mm. Frontal armor of the tower - 50 mm. Boards - 45 mm. At the same time, he had to sacrifice the hatch of the driver. The mass of the tank increased to 20 - 21 tons. The vehicle speed decreased to 40 - 45 km / h. Frontal shielding of the hull and turret provided protection for the tank crew from 37-45 mm caliber anti-tank shells, 75-76,2 mm field guns and 7,92-20 mm anti-tank guns. Airborne - from the fire of anti-tank rifles.
    1. 0
      19 February 2016 01: 51
      Quote: Cap.Morgan
      How do you like this?

      Poorly. BT generally fit poorly into the war. The actions for which they were built did not lead the Red Army. And for other purposes, the design was not very.
      So did the shielding tell if it helped. Most likely the engines overheated and the suspension springs burst. And also friction clutch and gearbox failed.
      Therefore, BT (6157 units only of the 1st and 2nd categories as of 01.06.41) ended their life quite ingloriously. Even the ancient T-26 was more appropriate for that war than they were. And the T-50, it was supposed to replace the BT, was prudent enough not to be produced at all. At this time, the "tanks of development of success" in the Red Army ended. And not at all because the BTs were somehow very bad, although they also had shortcomings. It's just that they basically did not live up to the second half of 1943, when the Red Army went west rather cheerfully. Then they would still be really useful. But there are almost none of them in a combat-ready state, tk. those 1091 pieces that were listed in the Red Army on 01.01.46. were mainly tanks of the 3rd and 4th categories in the eastern districts. Something like scrap metal. Especially the 4th category (they required factory repair, but there was no longer a manufacturing plant).
      And in Germany, tanks of this type (Pz.Kpfw.III) were produced for quite some time, until 1943. Later they were no longer needed by Germany and were discontinued.
  13. +1
    18 February 2016 17: 53
    In 1934-1935, the Design Bureau of the Kharkov Locomotive Plant developed an artillery version of the BT-7 serial tank. A 76,2 mm KT-28 cannon was installed in the new elliptical turret of increased size. In addition, part of the cars received new radio stations. A total of 155 BT-7 artillery tanks were released, which took part in the battles on the Karelian Isthmus, in Manchuria and in the first period of World War II.
    1. +1
      18 February 2016 18: 41
      Quote: Cap.Morgan
      A total of 155 BT-7 artillery tanks were released, which took part in the battles on the Karelian Isthmus, in Manchuria and in the first period of World War II.

      The lead batch of BT-7 Artillery was assembled by the end of August 1937. In January 38th, their number already exceeded one and a half hundred. Not so much, but even in this situation, the 76-mm KT-28 guns were not enough to equip all the machines. The reason is quite common at that time: the gun was removed from the conveyor, but they could not be found with what to replace it with. The production of the first Soviet support tank stopped at this, and only 132 vehicles entered the troops. Another was used as a test bench for new tank weapons, and the rest joined the ranks of conventional BT-7s.
      1. 0
        19 February 2016 00: 34
        The photo is not a small-scale BT-7A. This is an experimental tank with an F-32 cannon (the same one stood on the early KV-1). And there were still experimental BTs with L-11 (the mask was different, they were on the early KV-1 and T-34) and L-10 (the barrel is shorter than the L-11 and F-32, but longer than the CT).
        All these models have remained experimental, since the guns on the "divisional" cartridge simply did not fit into the BT-7A turret. Rather, they climbed in, but there was almost no room left for the crew. An increase in the turret ring was required. This was done in the T-34 (and the T-50, too).
        BT-7A looked like this:
      2. 0
        19 February 2016 01: 12
        Quote: Bayonet
        The production of the first Soviet support tank stopped at this, and only 132 vehicles entered the troops.

        The BT-7A was not the "first Soviet support tank". At that time, the T-1931 infantry support tank was mass-produced in the USSR for quite a long time (since 26).
        As for the BT-7A, it was a strange structure. To support the infantry, it was not suitable, the platform was not the same (from a high-speed tank development success). For the same reason, he was not suitable for breakthrough tanks. And for the tank of success development, the gun was not very suitable. Therefore, they did a little. Just in case. That was.
        The first serial infantry support tank armed with a 76-mm gun was the T-34. But after the outbreak of the war, it was not used for its intended purpose all the way. Therefore, after the retirement of the T-26, the infantry was supported by the T-60/70. So far in 1942/43 did not appear SU-76. She remained self-propelled infantry escort until the very end of the war.
      3. 0
        19 February 2016 15: 45
        Now the question arises, but how did the body and chassis withstand the operation of such a gun? after all, initially the calculation was on a weaker gun.
  14. -1
    20 February 2016 10: 18
    Quote: Zeppelin ml.
    Quote: Polkovodetz
    Thanks to the author, I did not know about this tank-joke) Such a machine would fit well into the world of tanks - a crazy car for a crazy game)


    normal arcade game ... (it does not pretend to be a simulator)
  15. pal
    20 May 2018 00: 01
    On the photo Kotische in the comment to
    -pervyy-sovetskiy-seriynyy-tank.html in the background?