Military Review

The project of self-propelled installation SU-122-44 "Thunder"

39
The year 1944 was the most fruitful for the Red Army in terms of equipping its units with new anti-tank self-propelled guns. Although the nomenclature of self-propelled guns manufactured in the Soviet Union was relatively small, especially in comparison with Germany, the power of the SU-100, which was armed with a 100-mm gun, was sufficient to deal with most German tanks at a distance of up to two kilometers, exceptions could be made only by the Jagdtiger tank destroyer and the experienced super-heavy Maus tank.


However, progress is not standing still, and armor confrontation and waiting for the next round of the projectile, and the self-propelled gun SU-100 had a number of obvious design flaws. Eliminate them could only complete processing of the combat vehicle. Most of the claims were caused by two parameters: the outdated self-propelled transmission and the excessive removal of the barrel for the dimensions of the body of a combat vehicle.

In general, the further improvement of the firepower of the Soviet self-propelled guns were raised after adopting ACS SU-100. The base of the T-34-85 tank, existing at that time, did not allow designers to use the newest long-barreled tools because of the heavy overload of the road wheels, low warranty mileage and the above-mentioned large cannon removal for self-propelled dimensions. For the artillery installations of the new generation, a new base was needed, which would have been deprived of the shortcomings that were already in use by the machines. Therefore, the question of creating a new anti-tank SAU was inextricably linked with the creation of new tanks, which were to replace the T-34.

Medium tank T-44 from the exposition of the memorial complex Brest Fortress


Above the development of a new medium tank in the USSR, they were already thinking in 1942 year. In KB Kharkov plant number 183, which moved to the Urals and located on the square Nizhny Tagil plant Uralvagonzavod, in 1942 year, began work on a new medium tank, received an index of T-43. It differed from the legendary "thirty-four" new spacious three-seat turret with a significantly improved booking, on which they placed the commander's turret, as well as the transition to a torsion bar suspension. Significantly increased and body armor. The forehead of the hull was defended by armor 75 mm thick, the sides - 60 mm. In the usual T-34, the thickness of the upper frontal part was 45 mm. The development of the new medium tank was personally led by the chief designer of the enterprise A. A. Morozov. But still this war machine, which exceeded the T-34 in everything, did not go to the series. If the tank began to change in the production in wartime total production of medium tanks in the USSR would have dipped significantly, and that the Soviet leadership could not afford.

The development and conduct of a deep modernization of an existing T-34 tank was chosen. The modernization of this combat vehicle led to the replacement of its turret by the turret from the T-43 tank, as a result of which an almost new T-34-85 tank appeared. But A. Morozov did not intend to abandon the idea of ​​developing a new medium tank. Therefore, at the end of 1943, the development of the tank began, which received the T-44 index. This war machine was further developed by the tower tank T-43 and T-34-85, but the body has undergone drastic changes. One of the most advanced solutions for developers was to place the B-44 engine transversely. Thanks to this, it was possible to significantly reduce the length and height of the hull, and due to the released weight, strengthen the booking of the combat vehicle. Due to the transverse engine is not only able to reduce the length of the tank on the MTO 650 mm, but also to increase the volume of its crew compartment and move the tower closer to the center of the housing.

On top of that, a new 44-speed gearbox was installed on the T-5, which turned out to be compact and light, thanks to the use of “guitars” in the transmission design (this name was invented for the gearbox with 0,7 transmission ratio, it reduced the number of revolutions and load at the checkpoint). And through the use of new fuel equipment, it was possible to increase the nominal power of the diesel engine from 500 to 520 hp.

Front projections of T-34-85 and T-44 tanks


The fundamental difference between the new tank was the refusal of the Christie suspension; the T-44 had a torsion bar suspension. Spring "candles" Christie took away too much of the reserved space, while possessing a positive feature - the crew had less difficulty in carrying out repairs. At the same time the use of torsion bar suspension has reduced the size of a medium tank, improve crew habitability conditions and reduce the cost of the process of production combat vehicle. In general, in comparison with the T-34-85, the new T-44 tank became twice as secure, retaining the same combat mass, more mobile and retaining its firepower. Seriously increased the convenience of the crew.

In parallel with the work on improving the existing and developing new medium tanks in the Soviet design bureaus, they also worked on projects of other combat vehicles. Thus, the design team of the Ural Transport Engineering Plant located in Sverdlovsk specialized in the development of medium-sized self-propelled artillery systems for various purposes. These works were led by the famous designer Lev Izrailevich Gorlitsky, who in 1932 turned out to be one of the first graduates of the Leningrad Military Mechanical Institute. He managed to get through the millstones of repression, in August 1940 was released and headed the artillery KB of the Kirov factory in Leningrad. After the beginning of the war, this design bureau was evacuated separately from the tank factory and was not placed in Chelyabinsk, but in Sverdlovsk, where Gorlitsky was engaged in designing the ACS, being the head of the Special Design Bureau.

By the autumn of 1944, in Sverdlovsk, on the basis of the chassis of the medium T-34 tank, such well-known SAUs were widely used during the Great Patriotic War as the SU-122, SU-85 and SU-100. In addition to these combat vehicles, SKB engineers worked on projects and other self-propelled guns, which, however, did not become so well known. From June to October 1944, a number of projects of self-propelled artillery installations were created at the Ural Transport Engineering Plant with the potential for subsequent modernization and improvement of performance, as well as taking into account the shortcomings that existed in previous combat vehicles. Some of them were built on the chassis of the new medium tank T-44.

SU-122-44, modeling


In October, the plant presented to the Technical Council of the People's Commissariat of the Tank Industry 1944 projects of new SAUs at once:

SU-122P, armed with an X-NUMX-mm D-122C gun, by that time the self-propelled gun was already released in the metal and was successfully able to overcome factory tests;
ESN-100, armed with a 100-mm gun D-10С, with a rear location of the crew compartment and the presence of electric transmission.
SU-100-М-1, armed with an X-NUMX-mm cannon D-100С, on the chassis of the T-10 tank, but with a rear arrangement of the fighting compartment, respectively, was equipped with weapons and weapons in the nose.
SU-100-М-2, armed with an X-NUMX-mm cannon D-100С, based on the chassis of the T-10 tank, with a rear location of the combat compartment.
SU-122-44, armed with a 122-mm cannon D-25-44С, using the base and units of the T-44 medium tank, with the combat compartment in front.

According to the decision of the technical council, the best projects presented were SU-100-M-2 and SU-122-44 self-propelled guns. Therefore, by order of the People's Commissar of Tank Industry No. 625 from October 26 1944, UZTM was asked to complete the design of the self-propelled gun data, as well as complete the drawings and produce prototypes of combat vehicles. At the same time, the SU-100-M-2 self-propelled gun was named “Uralmash”, and the SU-122-44 had the working name “Thunder”. Apparently, such a requirement on the construction of two different prototypes carried a hidden desire to be safe in the event of failure of construction of the "Soviet Ferdinand." It was this German combat vehicle that was largely responsible for designing self-propelled self-propelled vehicles with rear felling in the USSR. At the same time, on each of the self-propelled guns, the installation of two different tools — the 100-mm D-10 and the more powerful 122-mm D-25 — was worked out. Accordingly, the prototypes of combat vehicles were named "Uralmash-1" (SU-101), "Uralmash-2" (SU-102) and "Thunder-1" (SU-100-44) and "Thunder-2" (SU-122 -44).

The SU-122-44 self-propelled gun was designed on the basis of the T-44 medium tank. In the front part of the house there was a deckhouse with a fighting compartment. As the main armament was planned to use 122-mm rifled gun D-25, which was already used on the tank EC-2. The 7,62-mm DT machine gun, which was paired with the gun, was to be the additional armament of the combat vehicle. When shooting at direct fire, the TS-17 sight was used, for firing from closed positions it was planned to use the M-30 panoramic sight. The frontal booking of self-propelled guns was the same as that of the T-44 - 90 mm. The estimated weight of the combat vehicle with the 122-mm gun was up to 35 tons. With about three tons greater than the mass of the T-44 tank, given this circumstance, it was planned that the speed of the SAU would be slightly lower than that of the average tank, but would remain comparable.

The project of self-propelled installation SU-122-44 "Thunder"


However, the project of this self-propelled gun was never implemented in the metal. As early as December of 1944, as part of the continuation of work on the SU-122-44 project, it turned out that the dimensions and mass of the combat vehicle are too large. Mainly due to the five-meter barrel of the D-25C. At the same time, the SU-100-M-2 self-propelled gun with a rear combat compartment was quite compact, its length was sharply reduced, and the weight fit into the middle class machines, while the reservation was significantly strengthened. Based on these findings, it was decided to continue the work only on the project SU-100-M-2, and all work on the self-propelled SU-122-44 to roll, the corresponding order from the NKTP was received 7 March 1945.

Performance characteristics of the SU-122-44:

Overall dimensions: length - 6070 mm (with a gun - 9140 mm), width - 3100 mm, height - 2200 mm.
Reservations - body front - 90 mm, sides - 75 mm.
Combat weight - up to 35 tons.
Armament - X-NUMX-mm cannon D-122С and 25-mm DT machine gun
The power plant is a diesel engine В-44 with HP 500 power.
Maximum speed - 47,5 km / h.
Power reserve - 200 km.
Crew - 4 person.



Information sources:
http://www.aviarmor.net/tww2/tanks/ussr/su-101.htm
http://scalemodels.ru/articles/7585-samodel-1-72-su-122-44-grom.html
http://wiki.wargaming.net/ru/Tank:SU122_44/History
http://warspot.ru/2856-grom-kotoryy-tak-i-ne-progremel
Author:
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Bongo
    Bongo 25 March 2016 07: 18
    +13
    However, the project of this self-propelled gun was never implemented in metal. Already in December 1944, as part of the continuation of work on the SU-122-44 project, it became clear that the dimensions and mass of the combat vehicle were too large. Mainly due to the five-meter gun’s barrel D-25С.

    The conclusions in the publication are, in my opinion, not entirely correct. It is not a matter of dimensions and mass; the war was won without a new self-propelled guns. The military and designers were aware that the T-44 is essentially an intermediate type and the more advanced T-54 is on the way.

    On its basis, the more protected self-propelled guns SU-122-54 with an 122-mm gun were eventually created and put into service. However, by that time, the troops had a significant number of IS tanks with similar weapons and the number of SU-122-54 built was small.
    1. 2s1122
      2s1122 25 March 2016 10: 35
      -8
      But the location of the tower in the stern is still better
      1. PKK
        PKK 25 March 2016 16: 15
        0
        The fact of a large number of different projects is interesting. What was the reason for this? Maybe with Ustinov?
        1. Shadowcat
          Shadowcat 25 March 2016 16: 35
          +5
          With the fact that people thought, fantasized, offered ideas without fear of moving away from the template.
  2. MARGADON
    MARGADON 25 March 2016 07: 26
    +2
    Good article. Personally, I first learned about the T-43 project and where the T-34-85 tower came from. The information is compressed, you could paint 50 pages and it would still be interesting.
    1. lelikas
      lelikas 25 March 2016 13: 50
      0
      Quote: MARGADON
      Good article. Personally, I first learned about the T-43 project and where the T-34-85 tower came from. The information is compressed, you could paint 50 pages and it would still be interesting.

      What to paint about - it wasn’t even built, and Thunder wasn’t called either.
  3. engineer
    engineer 25 March 2016 08: 37
    +3
    It should be noted that the ISU-152 and ISU-122, the famous St. John's wort, were already mass-produced. This also affected
    on the project.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 25 March 2016 10: 27
      +7
      The "wickedness" of these SPGs is rather a legend. ISU-152 and ISU-122 are primarily assault weapons. Designed for direct fire when breaking through an engineering-prepared defense
      1. dvina71
        dvina71 25 March 2016 16: 46
        +2
        Quote: Spade
        The "wickedness" of these SPGs is rather a legend. ISU-152 and ISU-122 are primarily assault weapons.

        Not a legend. This is especially true of ISU-122. For which methods of circular anti-tank defense were even developed. ML-20 is certainly more than a howitzer. Than a gun, besides, they already didn’t have bb shells. Only HE and concrete-piercing shells. However, the hit of any of these shells incapacitated the Tiger T6 ... guaranteed.
        The Su-100s had excellent ptoruda.Made of an anti-aircraft gun. They have already been removed from service in Russia, but somewhere they are fighting now.
        1. Stas57
          Stas57 25 March 2016 22: 02
          +2
          Quote: dvina71
          ML-20 of course more than a howitzer. Than a gun, besides, they already didn’t have bb shells. Only landmines and concrete-piercing shells. However, the hit of any of these shells incapacitated the Tiger T6 ... guaranteed.

          Yeah, one little thing, to get and then ....
          1. tolancop
            tolancop 25 March 2016 23: 44
            0
            ML-20 had a caliber of 152 mm. Incl. "not a single credit defeat" is not about her.
          2. catmarder
            catmarder 27 March 2016 23: 48
            0
            Gunners brothers, sorry I forgot my name, fought with ml-20 and had on their account several destroyed tanks.
        2. Kenneth
          Kenneth 25 March 2016 22: 19
          0
          From the sea just .....
  4. EvilLion
    EvilLion 25 March 2016 08: 43
    +6
    But she is at 7 ur. oppression.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 25 March 2016 13: 44
      0
      Damned donors! smile

      * said the person riding mainly on the T34 laughing
  5. Yurmix
    Yurmix 25 March 2016 09: 13
    +4
    Quote: EvilLion
    It should be noted that the ISU-152 and ISU-122, the famous St. John's wort, were already mass-produced. This also affected
    on the project.

    Liked the ISU-152 resuscitation video, really a St. John's wort.
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 25 March 2016 09: 33
      +10
      Quote: YURMIX
      Liked the ISU-152 resuscitation video, really a St. John's wort.

      Despite the common misconception, when creating and using ISU-152, the fight against enemy armored vehicles was never a priority. For this, the 152-mm howitzer-gun ML-20С with an initial velocity of the armor-piercing projectile 600 m / s had a relatively short direct range and low practical rate of fire. The ISU-152 was much more suitable for use as a heavy assault gun, its powerful HE-540 high-explosive fragmentation shell weighing 43,56 kg, the loaded 6 kg of TNT was very effective against pillboxes and buildings turned into firing points. The real St. John's Wort was the SU-100 with much better mobility, rate of fire and the range of a direct shot.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 25 March 2016 10: 38
        +3
        Quote: Bongo
        For this, the 152-mm howitzer-gun ML-20С with an initial velocity of the armor-piercing projectile 600 m / s had a relatively short direct range and low practical rate of fire.


        Nevertheless, "on bezrybe and pike with cancer" (c) The fact that the ML-20 still consisted of some of the anti-tank units for some time is a fact. Necessary measure.

        Its main problem is not the range of the direct shot and rate of fire, but the time of the transfer from marching to combat. Well, the weight ...
        1. Bongo
          Bongo 25 March 2016 10: 49
          +6
          Quote: Spade
          Nevertheless, "on bezrybe and pike with cancer" (c) The fact that the ML-20 still consisted of some of the anti-tank units for some time is a fact. Necessary measure.

          A bit wrong. ML-20 were involved in anti-tank combat while remaining in the corps, army and artillery of the RVGK. 152-mm howitzer guns were purposefully used for firing at tanks in a number of operations, which of course was a necessary measure.
      2. MAD_SERGANT
        MAD_SERGANT 25 March 2016 14: 06
        +3
        A tiger in the forehead with a concrete-piercing shell turned around like a piece of butter ...
        1. Stas57
          Stas57 25 March 2016 22: 07
          +2
          Quote: MAD_SERGANT
          A tiger in the forehead with a concrete-piercing shell turned around like a piece of butter ...

          to get ....
          1. aba
            aba 26 March 2016 01: 01
            -3
            to get ....

            I wonder where you get your squeezes, do you print them yourself ?!

            http://topwar.ru/120-zveroboj-groza-tigrov-i-panter.html
      3. Stas57
        Stas57 25 March 2016 22: 03
        +2
        Quote: Bongo
        For this, the 152-mm howitzer-gun ML-20С with an initial velocity of the armor-piercing projectile 600 m / s had a relatively short direct range and low practical rate of fire.

        yeah the same problems as above
  6. minirulet
    minirulet 25 March 2016 09: 24
    0
    Quote: MARGADON
    Good article. Personally, I first learned about the T-43 project and where the T-34-85 tower came from. The information is compressed, you could paint 50 pages and it would still be interesting.

    So you are still ahead! Read and learn Zen)
  7. creak
    creak 25 March 2016 09: 40
    +2
    The author writes that the SU-100 had a number of serious design flaws, however, this self-propelled gun nevertheless (2495 units were produced before the end of the war) was produced after the war, was in service with the SA for a long time and took part in various local conflicts ..
    It seems that the point of view of the author was not shared by all experts who considered the SU-100 one of the most successful self-propelled guns ...
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 25 March 2016 11: 41
      +2
      Quote: ranger
      The author writes that the SU-100 had a number of serious design flaws, however, this self-propelled gun nevertheless (2495 units were produced before the end of the war) was produced after the war, was in service with the SA for a long time and took part in various local conflicts ..

      And this is a common occurrence. While the design bureaus are trying to create a prodigy, the industry continues to produce not entirely successful, but already mastered weapons. As a result, it often turns out that the wunderwaffe never goes into series or is produced in small batches - and the army has to use what it is.
    2. hard rock
      hard rock 26 March 2016 10: 57
      -2
      Quote: ranger
      who considered the SU-100 one of the most successful self-propelled guns ...

      What is so good? Unitary cartridge weighing 30 kg. Chargers should have been Ilya Muromets. And besides, damn it with the dexterous Ilya Muromets. In addition, because of the huge rounds of ammunition, their stock was extremely small.
      A variant with an 85 mm D-48 ballistic gun would be preferable. They were only taken into service after the war.
      Therefore the maximum that was of normal in the Red Army for tanks during the war, this is an 85-mm S-53. And this is after 1943, after the real industrialization of the USSR, which took place during the war (The USSR did not want to pay for it for a long time, and declared the payments as supposedly "payments for lend-lease", although the lend-lease was actually free). And before that, maximum only 76 mm F-34 and ZIS-3. All. This is the technological limit after the "wonderful Soviet pre-war industrialization." The level of the beginning of the century. Because that "industrialization" was just a fiction. The fruit of Stalinist propaganda.
      1. cdznjckfd
        cdznjckfd April 3 2016 06: 40
        0
        What about the T-28 with an 85mm gun? The pre-war development.
        1. hardroc
          hardroc April 3 2016 08: 40
          0
          Quote: cdznjckfd
          T-28 with an 85 mm gun? The pre-war development.

          1. There was no such development. A gun of this caliber was tested by a cart, but not tested by shooting. Because calculations showed that the shoulder strap may not withstand returns.
          And DT to reduce the recoil momentum on the Soviet field and tank guns did not put, because this did not allow the use of buckshot, which in the Red Army before WWII had accumulated a tuyeva hecha (during the whole war they didn’t shoot, after the war they had to be disposed of). They began to put them already during the Second World War (ZIS-3), when it became clear that the Germans would not attack in tight rows for drumming.
          2. There was no place to make such a gun. Before the Second World War, there was only one plant in the USSR, which made it possible to serially compare trunks so deeply and subtly. This is a plant bought from the Germans in the late 20s and early 30s in Podlipki, Moscow Region (No. 8). Now, if not for this plant, the USSR would have been left without anti-aircraft artillery, because there were no more people willing to sell such technologies in the USSR.
          Even Kotin on the KV-1 initially asked for a 3-K / 51-K ballistic tank gun. Not received. Then he was interested in the F-22 in a tank version, re-sharpened for the "anti-aircraft" cartridge. And he didn't get it either. Received only 30-caliber L-11 and F-32. And then the 40-caliber ZIS-5 (i.e. the usual three-inch model 1930 in the tank version). And this was the real technological maximum of the USSR before the Second World War.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  8. alovrov
    alovrov 25 March 2016 11: 00
    +5
    Su-Xnumx fought well in Arab-Israeli conflicts. For example, there was an article describing how Israelis fired from tanks of Arabs from a long distance. They fired exactly until a disc from allegedly su-100 arrived at the super-Herman, which was never found. The crew of the superman died.
  9. Leeder
    Leeder 25 March 2016 12: 26
    +3
    Quote: 2s1122
    But the location of the tower in the stern is still better

    Awful comment!
    Tower, the Soviet self-propelled guns? Maybe the BO (fighting compartment), and maybe the MTO (engine and transmission compartment) behind?
    With such knowledge, it is better not to write anything at all, and even grammar with spelling will not hurt to learn ...
  10. Torins
    Torins 25 March 2016 12: 52
    +1
    Quote: Spade
    The "wickedness" of these SPGs is rather a legend. ISU-152 and ISU-122 are primarily assault weapons. Designed for direct fire when breaking through an engineering-prepared defense

    Not a legend, near Kursk they showed themselves very well in their bestial qualities)
    1. Stas57
      Stas57 25 March 2016 22: 12
      +2
      Quote: Torins
      Not a legend, near Kursk they showed themselves very well in their bestial qualities)

      After these words, I suggest that you post the reports of the GABTU that recorded "a very good manifestation", otherwise by the beginning of the Battle of Kursk there were only 24 SU-152s in two heavy self-propelled artillery regiments.
      this is not enough for the whole arc
      1. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx 29 March 2016 16: 47
        0
        Quote: Stas57
        this is not enough for the whole arc

        All in all, of course, but where they were was easier)))
      2. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx 29 March 2016 16: 47
        0
        Quote: Stas57
        this is not enough for the whole arc

        All in all, of course, but where they were was easier)))
  11. Volga Cossack
    Volga Cossack 25 March 2016 15: 36
    0
    A beautiful machine should be, but the time has already arrived on the 54th ....
  12. igordok
    igordok 25 March 2016 16: 14
    +2
    Thanks for the articles about BTT. Lately there are a lot of them.
    One gets the impression of a veiled WOT ad. laughing
    1. poma
      poma 25 March 2016 20: 38
      +2
      People are interested ... and what’s the reason is not important.
  13. Massik
    Massik 25 March 2016 21: 57
    0
    Not a single blueprint of this protrusion for the driver in the frontal armor is present, but in all kinds of pictures it’s not clear where they come from.
  14. Kenneth
    Kenneth 25 March 2016 22: 17
    0
    Interestingly, our self-propelled guns with these guns raked a lot of land on marches
  15. Warrior2015
    Warrior2015 26 March 2016 02: 18
    +2
    Quote: Torins
    Not a legend, near Kursk they showed themselves very well in their bestial qualities)

    Uh-huh, already said above. ISU122 and ISU152 are actually infantry support weapons, that is, assault weapons, NOT FOR FIGHT AGAINST TANKS. "St. John's wort" is a more propagandistic name, and all Germans were considered beasts, and not just their technique.

    Su-Xnumx real powerful self-propelled guns. I consider it to be generally the best of the mass options available to the USSR, EXACTLY FOR ANTI-TANK DUELS. And in general, it strongly resembles a yagdpanther ... who really needs to be compared with her.
    1. Maksimov
      Maksimov April 1 2016 12: 25
      0
      I’ll tell you a secret - tanks were also not created for battles against tanks, but for some reason they had to fight against tanks quite a lot ... But the Germans had anti-aircraft guns created against planes that they used against tanks. If the technique is effective in fighting tanks, why not use it?
  16. cosmos132
    cosmos132 April 14 2016 20: 55
    0
    1939 projectile of this gun