White spots of the battle at Prokhorovka station

134
In the Soviet official historiography of this battle, not only is the loud title of the greatest tank battle that took place during World War II, it is also called one of the largest in the entire military stories battles using tank troops. However, the history of this battle is still full of "blank spots". There is still no exact data on the chronological framework, the number of armored vehicles that took part in it. And how the battle itself took place is described by different researchers in very contradictory terms, no one can objectively assess the losses.

White spots of the battle at Prokhorovka station


For the general reader, information about the “tank duel” appeared only ten years after the battle, in 1953, when the Battle of Kursk became available, a book written by I. Markin. It was the Prokhorov battle that was called one of the most important components of this battle, since after Prokhorovka the Germans were forced to retreat to their original positions. There is a question about why the Soviet command was hiding information about the battle near Prokhorovka? The answer, most likely, lies in the desire to keep secret the huge losses, both human and in armored vehicles, especially since the fatal mistakes of military leadership led to their occurrence.

Until 1943, the German forces were confidently moving forward in almost all directions. The decision to conduct a major strategic operation in the Kursk salient was made by the German command in the summer of 1943. The plans were strikes from Belgorod and Orel, after which the strike groups were to merge near Kursk in order to completely surround the troops that make up the Voronezh and Central Fronts. This military operation was called the "Citadel". Later, an adjustment was made to the plans, which suggested that the SS 2 tank corps would advance in the direction of Prokhorovka, in an area with terrain conditions that were ideal for a global battle with the armored reserve of the Soviet troops.

In the military command of the USSR there was information about the plan "Citadel". To counter the German offensive, a system of deeply echeloned defense was created, the purpose of which was to wear down the Germans and then defeat them with attacking counterattacks.

The official historiography has a clear date for the start of the Battle of Prokhorovka - 12 July 1943 of the year, the day when the Soviet army launched a counter-offensive. However, there are sources that indicate that the battles on the Prokhorovsky direction were fought on the third day after the start of the German advance on the Kursk Bulge, so it would be more correct to consider the date of the start of the battle near Prokhorovka station 10 July, the day when German troops began to break through the rear of the army’s defense line aim to take Prokhorovka.

July 12 can be considered the culmination of a “tank duel,” however, ending with unclear results, it lasted until July July 14. The end of the battle of Prokhorovka is 16 July 1943, even the night 17 July, when the Germans began to retreat.

The beginning of the battle near Prokhorovka was unexpected for our troops. Further developments have several versions. According to one of which it turns out that for the Germans it was an unexpected battle. Two tank armies performed their tasks on the offensive and did not expect to meet serious resistance. The movement of tank groups took place under the "angle", but the Germans were the first to discover Soviet tanks, and because of this they managed to carry out a rebuilding and preparation for battle. They carried out a rapid attack, which violated coordination among the Soviet tank crews.

Other historians put forward the version that the counter attack by Prokhorovka by the Red Army was worked out by the German command. SS divisions specially "set up" under the blow of the Soviet tank army. The result was a head-on collision of Soviet armored vehicles with large German tank formations, which put Soviet soldiers in extremely unfavorable strategic conditions.

The second version seems to be more likely, since after the Soviet armored vehicles entered the direct defeat of their guns, she was met by a dense enemy fire, which was so powerful that it literally stunned the Soviet tank crews. Under this hurricane fire, not only did you have to fight, but psychologically moved from maneuver into the depth of defense in a positional war. Only the high density of the battle further deprived the Germans of this advantage.

The main participants of the “tank duel” that took place on Prokhorovka’s July 12 on July 1943 are called the 5 Panzer Army, commanded by Lieutenant General Pavel Rotmistrov, and the SS 2 Panzer Corps commanded by SS Paul Hausser. According to data provided by the German generals, about 700 Soviet vehicles took part in the battle. Other data called the number in Soviet tanks 850. On the German side, historians refer to a figure in 311 tanks, although in official Soviet historiography there is a figure in 350 of only destroyed German armored vehicles. However, now historians provide information about the apparent overestimation of this figure, they believe that only about 300 tanks could participate from the German side. In any case, about a thousand tanks came together in the battle of Prokhorovka. It was here that the Germans first used teletnets.

In Soviet times, the version that our tanks were attacked by the German Panthers was spread. But now it turned out that the “Panther” was not at all in the Prokhorovka battle. Instead, the Germans "incited" on the Soviet soldiers "Tigers" and .... "T-34", captured cars, which in battle was 8 from the German side.

However, the worst was that one third of the Soviet tank army consisted of T-70 tanks, which were intended for reconnaissance and communications. They were much less protected than the T-34, which were clearly inferior in the battles in open areas to German medium tanks, which were equipped with a new long-barreled gun, and there were also more powerful Tigers. In open battle, any projectile of heavy and medium German tanks easily destroyed the Soviet "seventies". This fact our historians preferred not to mention.



Our troops under Prokhorovka suffered awfully huge losses. Now historians sounded the ratio of 5: 1, even 6: 1 in favor of the Germans. For each German soldier killed, there were six killed on the Soviet side. The following figures have been made public by modern historians: from 10 to 16 in July, about 36 thousand people were lost from the Soviet side, 6.5 thousand of whom were killed, 13.5 thousand were on the list of the missing. This figure is 24% of all losses of the Voronezh Front during the Battle of Kursk. The Germans lost about 7 thousands of soldiers during the same period, of whom 2795 was killed, and 2046 - missing. However, it is not yet possible to establish the exact number of casualties among the soldiers. Search groups still find dozens of nameless warriors who fell under Prokhorovka.

Two Soviet fronts lost 143 950 people on the south face of the Kursk bulge. The largest number was missing - about 35 thousand people. Most of them were captured. According to the German side, 13 July captured about 24 thousands of Soviet soldiers and officers.

Large losses were in armored vehicles, 70% of the tanks that were in service with the army of Rotmistrov were destroyed. And that was 53% of all the equipment of the army that participated in the counterstroke. The Germans didn’t count up all 80 machines ... And the German data about the "duel" generally contain data only about 59 lost tanks, 54 of which were evacuated, and they were able to take out a few Soviet machines. After the battle of Prokhorovka in the corps was already 11 "thirty-three".

Such enormous sacrifices were the result of numerous mistakes and miscalculations by the command of the Voronezh Front, which was headed by N. F. Vatutin. The counter-strike planned for July 12, to put it mildly, was unsuccessful. Later, after analyzing all the events, he will be called the “pattern of an unsuccessful operation”: incorrectly chosen time, lack of real data about the enemy, poor knowledge of the situation.

There was also an incorrect assessment of the development of the situation over the next few days. There was such a bad interaction between our units leading the offensive that sometimes there were battles between the Soviet units, even bombing of our positions took place. aviation.

Already after the Battle of Kursk ended Deputy High Commander Georgy Zhukov, attempts were made to initiate the process of analyzing the events of 12 on July 1943 of the year near Prokhorovka, the main purpose of which were the main culprits of huge losses - Vatutin and Rotmistrov. Last was going to give later under the tribunal. They were saved only by the successful completion of battles on this sector of the front, and later they were even awarded orders for the Battle of Kursk. Captain after the war he received the title of Chief Marshal of Armored Forces.

Who won the battle near the station Prokhorovka and the Battle of Kursk in general? For a long time, Soviet historians have put forward an undoubted assertion that, of course, the Red Army won. The German strike group failed to break through the defense and our troops managed to defeat it, the enemy retreated.

However, in our time there are claims that this "victorious" view is nothing more than a myth. The departure of the Germans did not cause the defeat of their strike force, but the inability to hold the area into which their troops had penetrated, with a total length of up to 160 km. Due to the huge losses, our troops could not immediately push through enemy units and launch an offensive in order to complete the defeat of the retreating German units.

Yet the feat accomplished by Soviet soldiers in the most difficult conditions is immense. Ordinary soldiers with their lives paid all the miscalculations of their commanders.

Here is what Gregory Penezhko, Hero of the Soviet Union, who survived in that hellish cauldron recalled:
“... It was such a roar that the membrane pressed, blood flowed from the ears. The solid roar of engines, the clanging of metal, the roar, the explosions of shells, the wild gnash of ruptured iron ... The turrets collapsed from point-blank fires, armor burst, tanks exploded ... Hatches opened and tank crews tried to get out ... we lost the sense of time They did not feel thirst, or heat, or even strikes in the cramped cabin of the tank. One thought, one striving - while alive, beat the enemy. Our tankers, having got out of their wrecked cars, searched for enemy crews on the field, who were also left without equipment, and beat them with pistols, grabbed hand to hand ... "

In the documents there are memories of German soldiers about that “duel”. According to Untershturmführer Gürs, commander of the grenadier motorized rifle regiment, the attack was launched by the Russians in the morning, they were everywhere, and the hand-to-hand combat began. "It was hell."

Only in the 1995 year, during the celebration of the 50 anniversary of the victory, the Church of the Holy Apostles Paul and Peter was opened in Prokhorovka - it is on 12 July that these saints are celebrated - the day of the terrible battle at Prokhorovka station. Thanks to the descendants of the earth waited, stained with blood.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

134 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Kostyan
    -4
    11 January 2012 09: 40
    Yes, there is ALL is not clear at all .... a mystery shrouded in darkness ..... you need to figure it out .....
    1. J_silver
      +16
      11 January 2012 10: 32
      I think so. that no one will be able to figure it out, unfortunately - before it was necessary ...
      It always made me angry and angry that no one really tries to learn from their mistakes, to draw the right conclusions, that stepping on a rake is our national sport ...
      The country was writhing in the rear, people did everything in their power and even a little more, but some sheep came up with the idea of ​​forming brigades of three types of tanks, as a result of which the T-70s came first to die senselessly, then the T-34s approached and really They fought, mainly without any advantage, and only then did heavy tanks crawl, which is called hats and corpses ...
    2. +9
      12 January 2012 11: 16
      where the red army acted unsuccessfully, as a rule, everything is always shrouded in a thick curtain of fog ... successful operations, on the contrary, are always thoroughly investigated and covered ... where to go from propaganda?
      1. vovan1949
        +5
        13 January 2012 23: 58
        So always in any country. This is normal. And it is clear that the author of the article, under the pretext of historical justice, lays the next layer of diarrhea on everything Soviet and Russian. He's high.
    3. mengeleff
      +9
      14 January 2012 20: 06
      Yes, there is ALL is not clear at all .... a mystery shrouded in darkness ..... you need to figure it out .....

      Why is it not clear to you? The one who won the war won. The Russians cannot have two opinions!
      as well as the fact that you are the enemy of a muddy troll scribe!
      angry
      1. Auschwitz
        +1
        14 January 2012 20: 15
        Why is it not clear to you? The one who won the war won. The Russians cannot have two opinions!
        as well as the fact that you are the enemy of a muddy troll scribe! angry

        +100500 vrazhin fools around
    4. serge348
      +7
      25 February 2012 22: 09
      There is no mystery. I advise you to read the books of Valery Zamulin "Prokhorovka",
      "Kursk break", "The classified battle of Kursk". The author has done a gigantic job
      with archival documents. In these books without blah blah and unnecessary pathos in detail
      analyzed the course of the battle on the southern front of the Kursk Bulge. And the secrets, for some, are themselves
      born in the head from reluctance and inability to work with large arrays
      information.
  2. +9
    11 January 2012 10: 01
    It is also necessary to reflect the fact that after Prokhorovka, Rotmistrov was threatened with a military tribunal for the huge losses of Soviet equipment (Stalin himself was furious). But he was acquitted or "disguised". Also, the losses among German tanks are still unclear. According to archival data, the Wehrmacht at Prokhorovka lost only 2 Tigers and a dozen other vehicles. One thing is clear that the losses of German tanks were less for several reasons:
    - the Germans, indeed, earlier noticed Soviet tanks and met them from more advantageous positions on the "oncoming"
    - Germans had superiority in firepower and heavy tanks
    - illiterate attack of Soviet tanks - they went at full speed, trying to hit German tanks, which correctly used the hills and cover and fired from the spot (by the way, this hopeless cavalry attack is described in many memoirs of German tankers)
    1. Splin
      +12
      11 January 2012 20: 29
      The cavalry attack is not so reckless in this case. If the Tiger cannon could hit our medium tank from 1,5 km, and heavy from a distance of 1000 meters, then the guns of our tanks from a range of 200-300 meters could effectively snap. Only the Su-152 were worthy opponents of the Tigers. So the faster the tank gets, the sooner it will fire. And since the crews trained for three to four hours in the training, they could not only shoot. Because there were a lot of tank rams.
      1. pokermen
        +4
        11 January 2012 21: 30
        That's just su 152 was only 20-25pcs
      2. Insurgent
        -2
        11 January 2012 21: 32
        I doubt that with a 1,5 km tiger could get into the t-34
        1. Splin
          +14
          11 January 2012 21: 42
          The hit is the second thing. He could hit them at such a range and this is already bad. Zeiss optics is an important plus for this. And considering that the Tiger’s gun is a shortened anti-aircraft gun, its rate of fire is greater than ours. And St. John's Wort with its separate-shell loading could not keep up with him. In addition, add that the Elite tank units served on the Tigers. This is to justify our losses.
          1. Insurgent
            -2
            12 January 2012 21: 55
            Well, here I disagree with you in 43, getting from 1,5 km is for luck, you still need to take into account the accuracy and the silhouette is 34 small, you certainly get into a tank with 1,5 km without a gun
            1. Splin
              +3
              13 January 2012 11: 44
              My father had a teacher (I later got to know this old man), so he shot from a tank gun offhand, and they said that he fell from a T34-85 on the move into an empty tank truck from afar. My grandfather also went from our Western border to Kursk, but he no longer took part in the battle. Lost a leg in May. So he also hit the bull's-eye on the move. This is an experience. And the PTURA as well as the television remote control simply relax.
            2. klew
              +1
              15 February 2012 08: 33
              no, 1500 meters for a KwK 36 L / 56 tiger gun - normal
              And Panzerabwehrkanone-43/41 (the same on base 88) also beat Nashhorn for 2 meters (legends go about six t-000s shot down from 34 m, but I attribute this to rumors and empty unreasonable praise of the Germans, so famous for it )
          2. vovan1949
            -4
            14 January 2012 00: 22
            Explain, the tikr shot like an anti-aircraft gun, bursts?
            1. Splin
              +7
              14 January 2012 05: 09
              Large-caliber anti-aircraft guns never fired shots. They simply haven’t got another shutter, more rapid guidance mechanisms, the position of the barrel in the carriage is easier. The barrel itself is less heavy. There are several more lotions, due to which a greater rate of fire is achieved. In addition, the high initial velocity of the projectile allows her to fight targets at an altitude of 6 km. And the cannon of the Tiger was a little cut off. The Royal Tiger Cannon was full. long.
        2. serge348
          +1
          25 February 2012 22: 17
          We fell from 2 km. By the way, ours also fired well - I read in my memoirs that
          some craftsmen from T34-85 interrupted the telegraph pole from the first shot
          at a distance of 800 meters.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. 0
            10 January 2016 17: 45
            Quote: serge348
            We fell from 2 km. By the way, ours also fired well - I read in my memoirs that
            some craftsmen from T34-85 interrupted the telegraph pole from the first shot
            at a distance of 800 meters.

            T-34-85 was not in that battle, because began to arrive only in the summer of 1944.
    2. +23
      11 January 2012 22: 47
      I did not want to get into this chatter, but I had to. So I live near Prokhorovka and while those who participated in the dismantling of this tank blockage are still alive. Three years pulled this pile after the massacre and German tank technology was two-thirds of all mangled armored vehicles. And there are plenty of husks and gossip with losses in that 41-45 war, but according to the census of the 1939 of the year and 1957 of the war victims and those who died after the war from wounds (these are the men who were from 41-45 years from 16 years to 49) and died a little more than 8 million from the USSR and 8,5 million from Germany died. The remaining dead and killed children, the elderly and women. It is interesting then who the Germans fought with? So do not try to rewrite history. It is not grateful to dance on the bones of the dead. There was a war and there are no wars without losses.
      1. vovan1949
        +5
        14 January 2012 00: 30
        + The last 20 - 25 years, there are many who want to belittle, justify * our history. And drag on it.
  3. Sergio
    +9
    11 January 2012 10: 16
    "According to Untersturmführer Gürs, commander of the grenadier motorized rifle regiment ...."

    I wonder with what joy Untersturmfuhrer (Lieutenant) Gürs commanded the regiment?

    The Germans then left the battlefield; they evacuated and restored all their wrecked equipment. And they simply blew up our more or less maintainable tanks.
    1. J_silver
      +16
      11 January 2012 10: 26
      By the way, it is still not known exactly who left the battlefield - ours say that the Germans are behind us, the Germans ...
      One thing is clear, that everything did not develop at all like in the movie Liberation ...
      On the whole, this article did not satisfy me at all - the author is rather weak, I feel that copy-paste from different sources, but I don’t have my own opinion ...
      1. +21
        11 January 2012 11: 55
        in the end - not only this battlefield remained behind the Soviet troops))
      2. vovan1949
        0
        14 January 2012 00: 34
        Besides the movie "Liberation" there are many other sources of information.
  4. Makhalych
    +4
    11 January 2012 10: 21
    Such articles in the 90s were good. Now it’s not rolling. Although, some do it without problems :-)))

    Sergio, where does such data come from?
    "The battlefield then remained with the Germans, they evacuated and restored all their damaged equipment. And they simply blew up our more or less maintainable tanks." :-)))
    1. Sergio
      +11
      11 January 2012 10: 38
      You know, I read and listen to books, including memoirs of participants from both sides, I watch films and know how to filter out information a little.

      To the question of the battle near Prokhorovka: ours went almost face-on on the seven-kilometer section of the front. The Germans, as the author says, managed to deploy their anti-tank weapons, and in addition, our anti-tank moat appeared on the path of our attacking orders. The fight was fierce, the losses too. But by evening, the corps of the 5th Guards Tank Army had lost almost all combat vehicles (according to various sources, from 334 to 339 tanks and self-propelled guns) and were forced to stop the attacks of pain.

      And then the chances receded due to the prevailing unfavorable situation (constant threat to the environment).
      1. Makhalych
        +8
        11 January 2012 10: 53
        Yes, I also read and watch, but ... there wasn’t anything anywhere that they hadn’t lost anything, and we were all.
        So, you don’t have to bend the stick.
        There we had large losses, it’s true, but I didn’t get weak in harsch.
        In general, by and large, a draw came out there.
        1. J_silver
          +1
          11 January 2012 10: 56
          In any case, it didn’t turn out exactly what we would like - but it is still a war, the enemy rarely plays the game ...
      2. J_silver
        +4
        11 January 2012 10: 55
        And who could surround them there if everything was so beautiful?
        1. Makhalych
          +7
          11 January 2012 11: 00
          Probably ... Americans ... :-))))
          No one else. :-)))))
      3. 0
        14 January 2012 16: 37
        I ALSO READ A LOT WHAT YOU WRITE HAVE READ AT LEAST IN TWO SOURCES. BUT IN GENERAL (this is my personal opinion) IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO BREAK THE HISTORY
        SEARCH THE FACTS BASED ON SCARFUL INFORMATION, AND ON THEIR BASIS TO BUILD CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THESE OR OTHER EVENTS OF THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR. It is fair enough, WITHOUT EVERYTHING, to turn to the archives, OF COURSE IF IT DOES NOT JOB THAT ALL THIS WAS UNDER THE USSR, AND NOT UNDER THE CURRENT FREE CENTER.
  5. +9
    11 January 2012 10: 32
    As for the German T-34 (r), something is not believed. So that the losses under Prokhorovka were greater than the Germans definitely --- but
    Quote: Prometey
    According to archival data - the Wehrmacht near Prokhorovka lost only the 2 Tiger and about a dozen other machines.

    this is also not true - otherwise they stopped, and rolled back?

    But the Fritz repair and evacuation service was excellent. That’s why the summaries of our victories over the Germans are usually not so high - as some say - they knocked out more tanks than the Germans had
    --- They knocked out 30 tanks, and by the next morning 20 of them were already in operation, and three days later 4-6 were restored - and so big numbers gathered

    In total, according to the OKH report in July 1943, the Army Group Center used 22-T-34 (r), and in GRA South - 28.

    1. +9
      11 January 2012 16: 16
      Kars - in vain you do not believe about the Germans using the captured T-34s, the Nazis had this theme in use at the beginning of the war and in some towers. they mounted their cannons ... there are documentary photos and docks. Well, if you think it over with brains, then what can prevent your and ours from using trophy equipment for its intended purpose ??? Rummage and make sure that both our units and the Hans side used military units based on tank trophy equipment.
      But Rotmistrov - for whom the life of a soldier is dust. The enemy near Prokhorovka used the 2 SS corps (and these are the elite troops as principles in ancient Rome, and not the butchers from the concentration camp ... by the way, who knows, Hartman was near Prokhorovka?). I’m not PR fascists, but the way they treated their own warriors, starting from training and ending with ammunition, it would certainly not hurt to study some cool horned stripes.
      1. Filin
        +2
        12 January 2012 04: 17
        http://battlefront.ru/view_articles.php?id=244

        Check out the website and photos of captured equipment in the Wehrmacht army.
      2. +1
        12 January 2012 09: 53
        Quote: viktor_ui
        Kars - in vain do not believe about the Germans using the captured T-34,

        Can we read?
        Quote: Kars
        In total, according to the OKH report, in July 1943, the Army Group Center used 22-T-34 (r), in GRA South - 28

        it seems like he didn’t express doubts about the Germans using trophies --- but only on scales
        1. +3
          12 January 2012 10: 48
          The scale of the use of "alien" technology by the Germans was impressive. They took everything, as they say, down to potatoes. Belgian, Dutch, French, Czech ... Well, ours, too, for all the sadness.

          I once read one report on this topic, about the use of trophies. The Germans were very willing to use the T-34 with a 76 mm cannon, especially since everything could be poured into our diesel engine. Again, I read the memoirs of our self-propelled gunner on the SU-85, how they refueled their self-propelled gun with a mixture of autol, kerosene and oil. And skated for all the sadness. "Tigre" such a mixture would not even threaten diarrhea.

          So about the guns. They put their barrels on the T-34-85, because the caliber is not at all that ... And with a strong desire, you can shoot an 76,2-mm German projectile with a 75 caliber cannon. They put some belts, and bullets.

          Germans are very rational in their essence. Therefore, the captured technique was used (where so much to take), and the wrecked tanks were restored. And the bases for repair they had more abruptly.
          1. +1
            12 January 2012 13: 53
            Great tank robbery. Hitler's captured armor
            YOM: 2008
            Posted by Anthony Tucker-Jones
            Publisher: Yauza, Eksmo
            Series: Tanks in battle

            And do not need special stories. Justified and objective.
            and my collection of photos of captured tanks in the Wehrmacht counts over 1400 pcs
        2. +4
          12 January 2012 13: 59
          Great tank robbery. Hitler's captured armor
          YOM: 2008
          Posted by Anthony Tucker-Jones
          Publisher: Yauza, Eksmo
          Series: Tanks in battle

          And do not need special stories. Justified and objective.
          and my collection of photos of captured tanks in the Wehrmacht numbers over 1400 pcs.
          about the T-34-85, they were captured by units, not the time for the Germans in the 1944-45 was used in its original form, for several days it will not be beaten.
    2. +8
      12 January 2012 10: 45
      by the way, our tanks also had trophy tanks, I saw tigers with stars on one of the sites, so ours were used by our tanks and Germans, the trophy was used everywhere, during the war and lack of weapons everything worked in battle.
      Eternal memory to the soldiers!
  6. +6
    11 January 2012 10: 59
    About the losses. It’s just that there is a different accounting - irrevocable and refundable, different numbers can still come from here.
    Then the Germans did not roll away. Manstein after the battle of Prokhorovka had the opportunity to continue the offensive, but he decided TAPE troops to their original positions, based on the evolving operational-tactical situation, because on the northern front of the Kursk Bulge, an offensive of the spacecraft was unfolding. And note, after Manstein’s departure, the SC launched an offensive on the southern face of the arc only after 2 weeks, because there were no forces and means.
    1. J_silver
      +2
      11 January 2012 11: 04
      If I had the opportunity, then I would have led!
      Also say that everything ended because of the landing in Sicily - more important tasks had to be solved than to finish off the Red Army ...
  7. +1
    11 January 2012 11: 26
    J_silver,
    Do you understand what you wrote? Or just to blurt out?
    1. J_silver
      +4
      11 January 2012 11: 28
      I understood, and that you wrote, and that myself ...
      Of course, Manstein did not have the strength to continue the operation, and precisely because everything was not so beautiful with the losses as beaten fascists try in their memoirs ...
  8. Tyumen
    -1
    11 January 2012 11: 37
    Here, in the middle of the article, an advertisement for knives sticks out, so I advise EVERYONE not to take anything more than 2000 rubles. The rest is a double or triple price for a squint locksmith and second-rate materials. Plus, thin blades, and incredibly short shanks (48-60mm). I looked through everything - for me it's not knives, but blanks. To whom it is necessary - I will advise worthy things. In the photo - my job.
    1. Makhalych
      0
      11 January 2012 11: 51
      A good knife, worth a lot of money !!! Yes, and you need to choose it not by photo, but live. In the pens to rotate, to twist, to twirl ... Not so easy, choose your knife.
      1. Tyumen
        0
        11 January 2012 12: 04
        The knife needs to be done by yourself. Over the internet do not you will see, I just can recommend online stores that have been tested for themselves, but I understand something.
        1. Makhalych
          +1
          11 January 2012 12: 14
          To do it yourself, you need to be able to do it ONCE, and TWO - to have from what and on what to do. "On the knee" yes with hands "under the uy sharpened" the same UY will come out, not a knife. :-))
          Good craftsmen, like good knives, are few. It’s a lot of iron, but not enough KNIVES ...
          1. 755962
            +3
            11 January 2012 15: 41
            What does the knife have to do with it? The article is about Prokhorovka, or didn’t I catch up with Che !?
            1. Tyumen
              +4
              11 January 2012 17: 48
              Quote: 755962
              An article about prokhorovka


              Again, crush the water in the mortar? A tip might come in handy.
              1. 755962
                0
                11 January 2012 18: 41
                Uso understood a colleague, the advice submitted on time is worth the time and money. I didn’t want to bother you, but let me ask you, where does this skill come from? I'm talking about processing. Isn't it simple, does it even have a name?
                1. Tyumen
                  0
                  11 January 2012 19: 01
                  Are you talking about a blade or a tree? I’ve been doing knives for 25 years, so I have experience.
                  1. 755962
                    0
                    11 January 2012 19: 24
                    About the blade. Original sharpening, The imposition of metal of different textures. Do you get it yourself? It’s a pity that it’s time to service, you are my respect. I’ll be glad to read if that thread is thrown off by the processing.
                    1. Tyumen
                      0
                      11 January 2012 19: 34
                      This laminate is a three-layer. The center layer is an etched solid knife steel, the plates are stainless steel. My only locksmith, forging and MOT from the master.
                      1. 755962
                        0
                        12 January 2012 10: 31
                        There are still golden hands and a love of craft. Is it for the soul or?
                      2. Tyumen
                        +2
                        12 January 2012 14: 54
                        For the soul, or as a gift.
                      3. 755962
                        0
                        12 January 2012 18: 32
                        only +1000
                      4. vovan1949
                        -1
                        14 January 2012 00: 53
                        Even according to the words "hard knife steel" it is clear that a person does not know anything about metals and heat treatment at all.
                      5. Tyumen
                        0
                        24 January 2012 14: 03
                        You, wise guy, apparently from the site that I scolded. I could write - X12MF, 60-62 Rockwell, but people don’t need it, it was easier to write.
                      6. vovan1949
                        0
                        24 January 2012 22: 10
                        Easier nowhere to indicate the grade of steel and hardness.
                  2. -1
                    11 January 2012 19: 33
                    If such a knife and every tanker under a prokhorovka, oh and hard Manstein would have wink Well, you give a pancake!
              2. +2
                12 January 2012 12: 34
                Advice, unlike the article, is efficient.
        2. Shuriken
          0
          11 January 2012 23: 46
          Recommend kindly
          1. Tyumen
            0
            12 January 2012 15: 09
            As if not to break the rules ... Just when I looked at the local advertisement, it was so hooked. Here the blades are good (www.inetkuznec.ru)
            Wood and furniture (www.sarmik.ru)
            Everyone can do what is necessary, under their own hand and to their taste. I just showed an example of a product.
            1. Shuriken
              0
              12 January 2012 17: 19
              Thank you for the useful links.
              1. vovan1949
                -1
                14 January 2012 00: 56
                Sorry, where is the good advice here?
            2. 755962
              +2
              12 January 2012 18: 40
              The links are useful, I don’t think that you have broken something. A versatile communication only brings you closer. That's when they bite to the forum, then yes. In addition, what’s wrong is that people have not only brains, but also hands.
  9. +12
    11 January 2012 12: 02
    Everyone knows that after the Kursoky arc the Wehrmacht no longer carried out large-scale offensive operations. There were no forces and means. This suggests that it was on the Kursk Bulge that the Stavka was able to completely take the initiative in its own hands, turn the tide, bleed and weaken the enemy. So to say that the Red Army did not win the battle is at least strange.
  10. +14
    11 January 2012 12: 11
    The technical unpreparedness of the Soviet troops can be explained by a number of reasons. Before the war, the main tank production was deployed in Kharkov, Stalingrad and Leningrad. The course of the war deprived the USSR of the pre-war infrastructure of the tank industry and forced the urgent transfer of Ukrainian enterprises beyond the Urals. Leningrad was blockaded and Stalingrad destroyed. In fact, on the basis of the evacuated Kharkov plant, a new Soviet armor smithy arose. However, the transfer of tank production thousands of kilometers away at the height of the fighting practically paralyzed the production of tanks. There were fatal interruptions in the supply of troops, which were urgently plugged by the forced production of high-tech light T-60 and T-70 in Moscow, Lend-Lease and flawed T-34s. The flaw was dictated by the urgent need to quickly obtain at least some tanks - even the "Sormovo monsters". The quality could not compensate for the small quantity and they abandoned it. And what quality could be during the evacuation! With Ukraine, the USSR lost, in addition to the Kharkov tank plant, also strategic deposits and enterprises responsible for armored steel. Soviet tanks could not be of high quality in the conditions in which Soviet tank building found itself at the beginning of the war. The famine of tanks and the hard-established production of tanks at "non-tank" enterprises forced them to abandon in favor of quantity the qualitative modernizations of the T-34, which were planned even before the war. Therefore, in both tank corps that fought near Prokhorovka there were 233 T-34s and as many as 148 T-70s. Although until 1943 the USSR was fighting tank hunger, Kursk needed to be approached with new weapons - there were obvious prerequisites and opportunities for that. Soviet intelligence worked much better than Russian designers.

    The unpreparedness for the decisive battle forced Soviet sappers to lay mines literally under the tracks of advancing tanks at the cost of their lives. The general weakness of anti-tank artillery allowed the Germans to break through to a depth of more than 20 km. The destruction of the Tiger required heroism, and the slaughter of Pz IV, unlike 1941, was accompanied by mortal risk.
    And then it's time to remember the skill of ordinary tankers. In 1995-1997, the US Army Research Center studied the archival documents of the Battle of Kursk, both German and Soviet, and as a result of this, in 1998 published a book entitled: "KURSK OPERATION SIMULATION AND VALIDATION EXERCISE - PHASE II (KOSAVE II)" - to date, this is the most complete and detailed analysis of this battle. So, having more than 36% of the light T-70s, the Soviet side managed to bring the total percentage of damage to the Pz VI in 3 TD Totenkopf to 190,9%. This means that the Tigers were repeatedly knocked out and, after repairs, went into battle again. By the end of 11.07. In 1943, 2 SS TC had 320 units of tanks and self-propelled guns, and not 211. The small percentage of irretrievably lost equipment suggests that the German repair units worked beyond praise. In the conditions of the most difficult battles, they gave an amazing percentage of the commissioning of damaged vehicles (we can confidently say that if it were not for them, the corps would cease to exist on the 5th day).
    T-34

    Now why did the Germans use the T-34 a little. For example, on July 4, 1943, there was 18 T-34s in the SS TD Das Reich, and after persistent battles there were 2 left. The T-34 is worth a special mention. At the beginning of the war, Germany captured such a huge number of tanks that they would have been enough for more than one tank army. Some captured T-34 turned out to be several thousand. Guderian recalled that German tankers simply asked to copy this tank and quickly adopt it. But the strange thing is that the Germans have thousands of T-34s in the hands of the Germans, and the war veterans are making claims to Russian tank building. Here Müller would have to slap a couple of generals and arrange for the Gestapo to go to the front with live firing on negligent rear lines. You look and would cease the eternal complaints about the lack of tanks. It is enough to put the trophy tank hordes under the gun and order. But you can’t. Hordes will not go. The Germans launched a factory in Riga to remake the T-34 in their own way, but nothing good came of it. Improvements did not affect the main thing - the V-2 diesel engine, which was eating diesel fuel. In the Third Reich there was such a shortage of oil products that at a decisive time they could not find diesel fuel for the desired trophy tanks - everything took Kriegsmarine (Navy) from Luftwaffe (Air Force). Paradoxical as it sounds, perhaps the B-2 diesel engine saved the USSR from defeat in 2MB. If the Germans had something to pour in T-34 tanks, then the Soviet command would have nothing to stop the German offensive in 1941-42. That is why the Germans, who could not calmly pass the nuts on the road, massively used riveted, but Czech gasoline tanks with the antediluvian Reno 17 and sighed sadly looking at the admiring T-34s. However, not that diesel fuel, even normal gasoline for its tanks in Germany was not found. Panzerwaffe skidded the entire war in synthetic fuel. This miracle of German alchemy was extracted from coal and at an astronomical price yielded more than a mediocre result - the cost of the Reichsmark, and the return on Pfennig. Maybach was struggling with the power of its engines, and ersatz gasoline steadily reduced horsepower. The Soviet gasoline T-60 and T-70 did not recognize this ersatz for gas and refused to drive. That is why and only therefore, on July 5, 1943, only 18 T-34s went into battle in the TD SS SS. More than thirty-four were Germany simply could not afford. Soviet designers had nothing to do with tectonic processes in the German bowels - they were responsible for Soviet tanks.
    http://vn-parabellum.narod.ru/article/kursk_art_critics.htm
    1. J_silver
      -3
      11 January 2012 12: 22
      About the fact that the Germans were delighted with the T-34, so this is also a myth, including about diesels ...
      Poor gun and scope, cramped, extremely poor visibility - all this is by German standards ...
      It is customary to press that a gas engine is easier to light up, so it’s much easier to extinguish, and the crew is more intact, if that, but diesel in this regard is completely uninteresting - get diesel on a person, then this person will burn much more ...
      1. Denzel13
        +3
        11 January 2012 15: 26
        Please note the above answer. The T-34 was relatively small. The ZIS-4 cannon was already super super at that time, and at the beginning of the war the 76,2 mm guns also had something with something (the Nazis didn’t have a tight fit) Optics - I agree, and try to get into the tanks in the interior t-34 and for example pz2 or pz3 (which was the main thing at the beginning of the war) and about diesel fuel got excited - try to set fire to diesel fuel and gasoline - an interesting comparison
        1. J_silver
          +3
          11 January 2012 16: 42
          Of course, it was very crowded in the tank, especially in the first towers ...
          If 57 mm were placed in the first tanks, then they would have been enough for a longer time - not to compare with 76 mm, which even after 43 ...
          Read carefully - gasoline lights up much easier, but also puts out a lot of leche! DT, if it flares up. then try to put out! Not to mention if it gets on clothes ...
          1. Yukon
            +3
            11 January 2012 23: 22
            Quote: J_Silver
            Read carefully - gasoline lights up much easier, but also puts out a lot of leche! DT, if it flares up. then try to put out!

            Quite right, in addition, in the T-34 tanks were located inside the combat squad on the sides, and in German tanks in an isolated aft compartment.
          2. +3
            12 January 2012 13: 36
            Dear J_Silver, I read it carefully, and I will explain it in my mother’s tongue: the tanks of that time always had a lot of fuel vapor (gas from the Fritz and our gasoline, and diesel fuel in the T-34 and KV). So, when the car was hit, it was the fuel vapor that first caught fire which, by the way, were saturated with tanker overalls. Try to set fire to steam of gasoline and a pair of diesel fuel (the focus when the torch is poked into a diesel engine and into gasoline), the output is obvious. As long as the diesel fuel burns, you can even put out the fire. But gasoline flashes immediately, it’s almost impossible to put it out. And if it flares up that gasoline, that DT, it is equally difficult to put out.
            1. J_silver
              +2
              12 January 2012 14: 30
              I can only send it to the post a little higher, about the location of the tanks ...
              Far from being the same and stewed, but this is chemistry, I would not want to go into details ...
            2. -1
              12 January 2012 15: 00
              And the pairs of salar were detonating --- so the conclusion is not very obvious.
              More important is how the fuel tanks are placed and their isolation from the crew and ammunition.
              A trick with a bucket of focus remains.
              1. vovan1949
                +1
                14 January 2012 01: 32
                Vapors of any fuel at atmospheric pressure do not detonate, they flash. Knocking is a little different. Gasoline vapors flash at a lower temperature than diesel vapors
          3. vovan1949
            +1
            14 January 2012 01: 25
            I agree, but in order to extinguish it is necessary to first ignite, and if you do not set it on fire, then extinguish it, then there is nothing. I have a gas lighter in my pocket, but I have never put it out for 45 years, because so that she caught fire - we must try.
        2. Yukon
          +5
          11 January 2012 23: 19
          For an armor-piercing incendiary shell, it makes no difference what to set fire to - gasoline or diesel fuel. And the bonds for cumulative and even more so - the temperature in the place of contact with the fuel is more than 1000 degrees. C.
      2. vovan1949
        +1
        14 January 2012 01: 17
        Bullshit. The flash point of gasoline has always been and will be lower than the flash point of a solarium. At some point, gasoline will flare up while the diesel engine will work. Happy New Year!
    2. Farkash
      +11
      11 January 2012 13: 17
      . At the beginning of the war, Germany captured such a huge number of tanks that they would have been enough for more than one tank army. Some captured T-34 turned out to be several thousand.
      However, dear AsceticYou gave the country coal! smile

      Production of T-34 tanks by NKTP plants (in parentheses is the planned number) [sn 3]
      Plant 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 Total
      KhPZ No. 183 (Kharkiv) 117[sn 4] (500) 1560 (500) — — — 1677
      No. 183 (Nizhny Tagil) - 25 5684 7466 1838 15 013
      No. 112 "Red Sormovo" (Gorky) - 173 [sn 5] 2584 [sn 6] 2962 557 6276
      STZ (Stalingrad) - 1256 2520[sn 7] - - 3776
      ChTZ (Chelyabinsk) — — 1055 3594[sn 8] 445 5094
      UZTM (Sverdlovsk) - - 267 464 [sn 9] - 731
      No. 174 (Omsk) — — 417 [sn 10] 1347 [sn 11] 1136 2900
      Total 117 (500) 3014 (500) 12 572 15 833
      By June 22, 1941, 1066 T-34 tanks were sent to the troops [4]. On July 1, 1941, by Decree No. 1 of the State Defense Committee, the production plan for T-34 tanks at Plant No. 183 and STZ was significantly increased, and the Gorky Plant No. 112 (Krasnoye Sormovo) was additionally involved. Measures are being taken to optimize production chains. So, for example, if in June 1941, plant number 183 was handed over to the military acceptance representatives of 170 T-34 tanks, then in July - 209, and in August - 266 combat vehicles.
      1. Farkash
        +2
        11 January 2012 13: 39
        I apologize for the sloppy comments, I tried to fix it, but some kind of glitch happened on the site, read the last paragraph.
      2. bob
        bob
        +1
        6 February 2012 15: 40
        about thousands of captured T34 he certainly bent
    3. +6
      11 January 2012 14: 26
      Quote: Ascetic
      Some trophy T-34 turned out to be several thousand.

      Well, why tell tales? Where so much?
      Quote: Ascetic
      In the Third Reich there was such a shortage of oil products,

      is it like that in 1941-42? what in mkst with several thousand T-34 were unable to capture a couple of echelons of diesel fuel? I wonder what German diesel trucks drove?
    4. Denzel13
      +2
      11 January 2012 15: 21
      Author, You are right, because at the beginning of the Second World War in the Red Army was (if my memory serves me 892 t-34), so talking about a few thousand is at least unprofessional. Read more archives!
      1. +8
        12 January 2012 11: 01
        Quote: Denzel13
        In the supply of troops, fatal interruptions arose, which were urgently stopped by a large release of technologically advanced lightweight T-60 and T-70, Moscow, lend-lease and defective T-34.


        Something is not clear about the inferiority of the T-34 ...

        The only thing that did not catch the Germans was that the commander (in the first versions) as usual with us, played the role of a loader and an arrow from a cannon. The same garbage was with the Czech Т38. They forced the Czechs to remake the tower.

        With regards to diesel ... Here it is not nifiga diesel fuel. The diesel fuel was, and was in sufficient quantities, the Germans even transport U-52 diesel engines were equipped, and many seaplanes. The point here is that the B-2 life cycle was a total of 100 hours. Stated But the Germans turned out to be unable to arrange the production of such a motor, and even from aluminum. Enough of their problems.
        So it's not diesel fuel. And not in the winter frost 1942 near Moscow. And the fact that for years now, 20, I have been watching attempts to justify 9.05.1945 by hook or by crook.

        I want to shout: WELL WHAT YOU WITHOUT A SOLYARKA, THAT WON'T COME TO FIGHT, BARS?
        1. 0
          12 January 2012 15: 45
          Quote: Banshee
          Something is not clear about the inferiority of the T-34 ...

          It means that with the loss of Kharkov and the evacuation of many defense factories, the quality of the T-34 produced decreased very much, there was a lot of marriage - many skilled workers went to the front. For example (Baryatinsky’s in T-34 was described in more detail in the battle) that electric motors were not installed on ventilators and the turret turning mechanism simply because there were none.
          And the T-34 project was completely forgotten before the T-34M project.
        2. vovan1949
          +1
          14 January 2012 01: 54
          Do not understand. What, it is necessary to justify the victory results? By hook or by crook?
          I want to yell: Well, we won in this war, we won. WE WILL NOT BE MORE.
          Or maybe the respected Denzel13 wanted to say not to justify but to refute, revise or interpret the results of 9.05.1945/XNUMX/XNUMX, then it is clear.
    5. +6
      12 January 2012 13: 18
      How could the Germans seize "thousands" of T-34s at the beginning of the war, if on June 22, 1941, only 1300 of them were produced with a penny, and there were even fewer KV tanks. If you believe your words, then the Germans captured them all? call the T-34 "flawed", but the T-34 is recognized as the best tank of the 2nd World War.
      The trouble with the T-34 is that in 1943, like Hitler 1941, Stalin believed that his tanks were far superior to the enemy's equipment, and to modernize the existing fleet of vehicles - well, who would have done that on the eve of a big battle? they drew conclusions from the combat experience, having modernized the T-4, armed them with new guns, increased their armor. Well, as for the T-6, our T-34 with its 76-millimeter cannon had no chances at long distances. The only way out is to beat the Tiger. They tried to do so, fought with what they had, and fulfilled their duty even at the cost of their lives. Eternal memory and eternal glory.
      1. J_silver
        +5
        12 January 2012 13: 25
        I wonder how Stalin could believe in the invulnerability of our tanks, if all the facts spoke otherwise.
        The T-34 began to yield in armament already in 1942, after the Germans received new shells and began to put long-barreled guns, and in fact there was nothing to oppose! Only the numbers ...
        Do not stop the conveyor - in general, you will remain without tanks! So they upgraded in those areas where this did not reduce the quantitative production of tanks ...
        1. +4
          12 January 2012 17: 27
          Sorry, but to whom did the T-34 be inferior in 1942? T-IV, which had to be urgently upgraded, because its short-barreled howitzer 75-mm was nothing good?
          Or are we comparing it with "Tiger", which appeared in the same 1942? Oh, well, yes, here:

          Quote: revnagan
          As far as the T-6 is concerned, our T-34 with its 76 millimeter cannon has no chances at long distances


          Why are we trifling? Let's compare the "Tiger" with the BT-7! What really ... Well, or with the T-70, really.

          Nothing that these tanks are slightly different classes? And KV different modifications we did not have? That bastard Stalin, in kind ...
          1. J_silver
            +1
            12 January 2012 19: 05
            Stalin was a realist, but a bastard or not a bastard - this is not for me, I do not discuss this topic ...
            Excuse me, in what year did the Germans have cumulative shells? What armor penetration did even 50 mm have on the T-3 (so as not to write long, but correctly)? And when was the short-barreled gun replaced by the long-barreled one on the four? Since then, the advantage in armament has disappeared ...
            You want to say, from the very beginning the L-11 was a normal gun, or was the F-34 very good? But only such tools were able to do in the required quantities ...
          2. +1
            12 January 2012 20: 35
            Why, they were compared near Prokhorovka not with a reference book in their hands, but on the battlefield. This is not a knightly tournament where the equal is on an equal footing. Moreover, you can compare machines of the same class Pz.kf VI and, for example, KV, with its 76 mm. gun, like the T-34. Or its modification KV-1S. Well, and what chances does it have in open terrain and a distance of 1000 m? KV with 85 mm gun appeared after Prokhorovka. Kv-2? a large clumsy target In my opinion - the result is the same. With "Tiger it was possible to fight (effectively) only at a distance of less than 500m. Therefore, they tried to maneuver closer and hit at close range.
            Regarding the fact that the T-34 was inferior to the Pz.kf IV in 1942, I did not say this. The T-34 surpassed this vehicle in all respects (except for the thickness of the frontal armor) until the very end of the war. But the fact that in the Battle of Kursk our entered with obsolete tanks - a bitter truth. And our grandfathers had to compensate for the German novelties with their courage and blood. After the modernization, the T-34 became a worthy rival of the Tiger, although it did not surpass it in some indicators. By the way, Guderian's diary has an entry in, made in 1941, "The superiority of the T-34 over our tanks is expressed in a sharp form."
            1. J_silver
              +2
              12 January 2012 21: 13
              Unfortunately, the T-34s of their four after the establishment of a long gun no longer exceeded ...
              1. +2
                13 January 2012 00: 15
                Quote: J_Silver
                And when was the short-barreled gun replaced with a long-barreled four?


                Spring 1942 ...

                Quote: J_Silver
                You mean, L-11 was a normal gun from the very beginning, or was the F-34 very good?


                I want to say that they coped with German armor.

                Quote: revnagan
                After the modernization, the T-34 became a worthy rival to the Tiger, although it did not surpass it in individual indicators.


                Again to the question of comparison. T-34 is a medium tank. "Tiger" is a completely different weight category. Why compare them? Of course, there is nothing good in the fact that ours had to go to the tigers on the T-34, I will not argue. But the Germans did not have thousands of "Tigers" either. A total of 1350 of them were produced. And the T-34 - about 35 ...
                But the T-34 is a medium tank for solving completely different tasks than the "tiger", which the creators positioned as a heavy breakthrough tank.
    6. +1
      22 February 2018 14: 16
      Thousands of T-34s? Before the start of the Second World War, a total of 1100 units were produced, and from 500 to 700 units were delivered to the western districts.
  11. Makhalych
    +7
    11 January 2012 12: 23
    Quote: Ascetic
    At the beginning of the war, Germany captured such a huge number of tanks that they would have been enough for more than one tank army. Some captured T-34 turned out to be several thousand.


    Where is this from ??? However, like everything else ...
    Find and read the documents on the losses of the T-34 at the beginning of the war, on their number in parts before the war, and on the number of captured Germans. This info is and is available.
    "Not for one tank army" ... :-))) Isn't it funny yourself?
    Some scribe ... "Historians" are awful ... :-)))
    1. +4
      11 January 2012 13: 44
      in the battles of the summer of 1941, the Germans captured not just big, but huge trophies. In particular, the number of captured Soviet tanks and armored vehicles in the German army exceeded the number of all foreign military vehicles combined!
      Of the 1941 tanks captured and shot down by the Germans in the summer and fall of 14 (according to German data), by October only 079 to 18 vehicles had been commissioned.
      up to 500 BT tanks, from 900 to 1100 T-26 tanks, more than 40 T-28 and 45 T-34 and KB tanks went to them in good condition, i.e., the order of 1700 out of 14 079, By June 1941 in the spacecraft, according to various sources, from 890 to 1100 T-34, almost all of them were damaged in the battles and were delivered to the enemy during the retreat, Only one day of fighting on June 24 was 37 T-34s were irretrievably lost. Therefore, the figure is about 1000 T-34 tanks by July 1943
      takes place since in almost all less or less adequate materials we are talking about significant the number of Germans T-34
      1. 0
        11 January 2012 14: 32
        Quote: Ascetic
        14 079 tanks (according to German data); by October, everything from 18 to 40 vehicles was put into operation.

        Maybe they should have put into operation at least their beaten cars, and not carry with BT and T-26?
        Quote: Ascetic
        Therefore, the figure of the order of 1000 T-34 tanks

        not this excuse
        Quote: Ascetic
        Some trophy T-34 turned out to be several thousand.

        does not work
        Quote: Ascetic
        it is a significant number of Germans T-34

        In the form of scrap metal, it can be mixed with T-70 --- but not in any way that they can be restored without any special expenses (otherwise you can repair the armored corps - as it is shown in the Tank workshop)
      2. Splin
        +4
        11 January 2012 20: 47
        Statistics is a good thing. But somehow disbelief. My grandfather retrained in April for 34-ku. When they threw cars due to lack of fuel, they all blew up. We got out of the boiler near Lviv without a single tank in the brigade. But not a single car was left. How did their Nets think?
  12. +12
    11 January 2012 12: 24
    In addition
    Field Marshal Erich von Manstein, who developed the operation "Citadel" and conducted it, subsequently wrote:

    She was the last attempt to maintain our initiative in the East. With its failure, equivalent to failure, the initiative finally passed to the Soviet side. Therefore, Operation Citadel is a decisive, turning point in the war on the Eastern Front.

    - Manstein E. Lost victories. Per. with him. - M., 1957. - S. 423
    According to Guderian,

    As a result of the failure of the Citadel offensive, we suffered a decisive defeat. The armored forces, replenished with such great difficulty, were incapacitated for a long time due to great losses in people and equipment, and it would be very problematic if they could recover to defend the eastern front ... It is useless to say that the Russians used the victory “to the full” - lull after that on the Eastern Front was not. Since then, the enemy has undoubtedly seized the initiative

    - Guderian G. Memoirs of a soldier. - Smolensk: Rusich, 1999
    1. +6
      12 January 2012 11: 07
      Here! And there is nothing to cover! Manstein and Guderian believe that they have suffered a defeat, and Mr. Dedov has a stake on his head ... We lost, that's all.

      Comrade Mukhin wrote well about such "truth-seekers". I recommend reading: V. Mukhin. "Lessons of the Great Patriotic War", "Yauza-press", 2010 It is well written about such people. Shit thugs.
  13. grizzlir
    +19
    11 January 2012 12: 31
    I know that many are now trying to make a name for rewriting history. Listen to me, a 40-year-old man whose paternal and maternal grandfathers died and whose father had already plowed on the collective farm at the age of 6 and was a member of the labor front. 2 my maternal grandfather's brothers went through war True, both fought one with the 42nd, the other with the 44th, both mechanic drivers on the T-34. Grandfather Vanya was drafted at 42m, was trained at a tank school and his first battles were just on the Kursk. I remember very well his stories, he did not talk about his heroes, he said that it was very it’s scary, especially under Prokhorovka, that everything was burning, the tanks went into continuous fire, the first rows of thirty-four turned into torches. He said that he screamed at the top of his lungs out of fear, that they got several hits but there were no breaks, When they got into German tank orders they already figured out where theirs where strangers became impossible. The tank caterpillar flew off and the ammunition ended and they sat in the car until the end of the battle, because it was impossible to stick out due to stray bullets and fragments. When the battle began to calm down, the crew pulled on the caterpillar and got to the im.And I also remember how he said that they went to watch the wrecked TIGERS and PANTERA, which, as the author of the article assures, was not in the battle. The PANTHER was without damage, but it was completely burnt. He told how the wrecked tanks were evacuated, and most of our tanks were put into operation , the Germans pulled out their own on the one hand, ours on the other, of course they and they couldn’t take it away, set fire to both of us. And now my words are: everyone knows which TIGER was difficult to repair, and how much T- 34 was better repaired, so who then could faster put into operation the wrecked tanks. Grandfathers are no longer alive, eternal memory to them, but I will remember their first-person stories while I live and tell my children and tell my grandchildren so that they know what really happened and did not believe the invented articles.
    1. +1
      12 January 2012 20: 48
      Quote .....- In Soviet times, the version that our tanks were attacked by German "Panthers" became widespread. However, it has now become clear that the Panthers were not at all in the Prokhorov battle. Instead, the Germans "set" Tigers on the Soviet soldiers and .... "T-34", captured vehicles, of which there were 8 in the battle from the German side .............. - Forgive this is complete crap - here is the information you need - ".... Low technical reliability was, in particular, the reason for the unsuccessful use of these tanks in Operation Citadel. The 10th Tank Brigade, which was supposed to play the role of a battering ram in this battle, had 192 Pz.Kpfw.5 Panther tanks in its two battalions. "
      (The combat strength of the brigade can be judged if only because the tank corps of the Red Army at that time had 209 T-34 tanks in staff.) When the brigade was moved to its original position for the offensive, about a quarter of the vehicles failed due to technical damage, and by the morning of the next day, only 38 combat-ready tanks remained in the brigade.
  14. Splin
    +10
    11 January 2012 12: 51
    So as not to suffer with the question of who won, look at Discovery about the battles on the Kursk Bulge. The Americans are clearly not fans of Soviet victories, but they also recognize Prokhorovka as the greatest tank battle. Yes, we put a lot then and we could only outweigh the enemy numerically, but we WIN! The Germans, even if only withdrew, but they never again were able to muster such a significant force. It was not in this battle, and indeed rarely in the Great Patriotic War itself, the Suvorov motto "to win not by number but by skill." But on May 9 our troops were in Berlin.
    1. +1
      11 January 2012 15: 14
      Retreat is a defeat in the battle, as well as not the opportunity to continue offensive operations. This means that even if the enemy had success in promoting the troops and capturing key points, the enemy suffered such significant damage that he could not further develop his success in the directions and was forced to stop, and subsequently retreat, because there was no way to hold them.
      1. Splin
        +2
        11 January 2012 16: 10
        A retreat is just a form of maneuver. On the Borodino field, we retreated, so the French consider the biggest one-day battle to be their victory, and we are ours.
        1. +1
          12 January 2012 11: 09
          The battle lost is not a lost war. The result is important, not the process.
  15. 13017
    +1
    11 January 2012 13: 39
    the main thing is that we won and in Russia not when we did not cherish a soldier ----- women give birth
  16. Oleg967
    -1
    11 January 2012 13: 52
    The largest tank battle of World War II took place near the city of Senno. http://senno.ucoz.ru/publ/3-1-0-2
    1. Makhalych
      +2
      11 January 2012 15: 34
      There was a little different.
      And not just under Senno, but in a decent triangle territorially. And not immediately, but over a period of time.
      But the tanks there really clashed more.
      1. J_silver
        +2
        11 January 2012 16: 44
        So in the 41st all of Ukraine beaten and abandoned tanks forced ...
        1. Makhalych
          +1
          11 January 2012 16: 57
          Quote: J_Silver
          So in the 41st all of Ukraine beaten and abandoned tanks forced ...


          Well ... Not so bad. Although of course, there was everything. recourse
          1. J_silver
            +3
            11 January 2012 17: 57
            Want to say that everything was fine in the 41st? And didn’t you have to leave for Moscow? And where then did all the tanks go, that near Moscow they were counted piece by piece?
            1. Makhalych
              +7
              11 January 2012 19: 08
              I want to say that there is no need to hysteria and try to pour shit on people who in that war gave everything they could to keep the country alive !!!
              And then it starts here:
              - They fought badly.
              - They ran.
              - Losses are unthinkable.
              And so on and so forth ...
              Normally they fought, and the Yiddis gave such that even 30 years or more after that War all sorts of nits were shaking from the abwehr of the USSR alone.
              There are no victories without defeats.
              And we won, and this is the main thing.
              1. J_silver
                +3
                11 January 2012 19: 53
                And who is hysteria? Very well fought? How could they ...
                And personally, I’m not going to throw mud at anyone here - not one person from my relatives remained in the war ...
              2. 0
                12 January 2012 21: 28
                Makhalych, hold five!
            2. +3
              12 January 2012 13: 52
              No, in 1941 it was not good. Until Moscow itself had to retreat. To the question, where did the tanks go, and where did the tanks of the Anglo-French forces go? Answer-tanks were stretched out along their front and therefore could not repel the concentrated attacks of the Panzerwaffe. Angles with the French had 2 times more cars than the Fritzes, and in quality they were in no way inferior to the Germans, and even surpassed them. Still, the Germans were in Paris a month later. The same was with us, but with one difference - our grandfathers came to Berlin, Vienna, Budapest, not the Germans to Moscow.
              1. J_silver
                +1
                12 January 2012 14: 39
                Yes, we know very well. who and where came as a result! And we don’t suffer that we came, but this does not mean that we don’t need to understand the reasons for our own shortcomings ...
                If our tanks were not perfect, then this is not a problem at all, they corresponded to the very damage of the development of equipment and technology ...
                Half the country, the most developed part, under the German - it’s good that they could create weapons at all, while learning from mistakes ...
                In America, tanks were collected by well-fed and healthy workers, no shortage of materials, but even that, with rare exceptions, not tanks, but shit ...
                In Germany, too, not guys-fzushniki with women hungry tanks riveted, and although not particularly well-fed, but quite prosperous "conquered peoples", and then some Czech went from the factories of Skoda to drink beer, and not at all in an unfinished cold barrack .. ...
      2. Splin
        +2
        11 January 2012 20: 09
        It is necessary to reprint the article of the site dated October 6, 2010 "The tanks burned like candles" about the tank battle of the Lepel counterstrike. At that time, the authors did not wash the bones and did not share their observations.
  17. 755962
    +4
    11 January 2012 15: 45
    They didn’t cherish the soldiers ... They cherished the military secret like a zenith Oh how! Therefore, there are no white spots ..
    1. Makhalych
      0
      11 January 2012 16: 18
      Duc, a secret for that is a secret, what would it be protected. Especially military. :-))
      A soldier ... Not everything was like all sorts of liberals shout.
  18. +9
    11 January 2012 17: 31
    One thing is clear. Winners are not judged, and what our grandfathers did for us is worthy of respect and deep admiration.
  19. Insurgent
    0
    11 January 2012 21: 34
    Everything is clear about the article, probably Rezun wrote
    1. +1
      12 January 2012 11: 12
      Yes, something resectable. But the light on it did not converge with a wedge (and it’s a pity, it’s a wedge and oh), there are all sorts of Zaleski, Melekhov, deovs, and other filth that is trying to blacken our past. Slaves of freaking crappy dollar, fuck you guessed it! Did not pass in 41, will not pass and now!
  20. NUT
    NUT
    0
    11 January 2012 21: 48


    In the course of the "tiger" our thirty-four will fill up three times until it gets to him and even then it will not break through the forehead, but it was in the frontal

    From 26 minutes specifically about Prokhorovka:

    http://kinolot.com/dokumental/2339-osvoboditeli-tankisty-2010-satrip.html

    I hope the authors of the information dig on an adult
  21. NUT
    NUT
    0
    11 January 2012 21: 54
    Along the way, the "tiger" will fill the thirty-four three times until it gets to him and even then it will not break through the forehead, but went to the frontal

    From 26 minutes specifically about Prokhorovka

    http://kinolot.com/dokumental/2339-osvoboditeli-tankisty-2010-satrip.html

    I hope the authors of the information dig on an adult
    1. froglodit
      -1
      12 January 2012 03: 44
      the liberators accidentally led me to find an interesting passage, it is mentioned among them, I personally learned a lot of new things, I recommend, by the way, the attitude to the liberators after it is not so bad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nip8UXfkmQ8&feature=related
      1. +3
        12 January 2012 11: 21
        And what is interesting? An ordinary propaganda video of the time. And you, naively, wanted the Germans to set themselves up as blockheads? Then go and read Suvorov-Rezun, it will be very interesting and informative for you.
        1. froglodit
          +1
          12 January 2012 16: 39
          Yes, but how is it filmed, and it is clearly visible that the liberators took a piece out of context and distorted the information, and the amount of anti-tank weapons in 43 years, I would have watched our films with interest, but besides the instructions for pilots il2 you can find very little, and by the way the translation is clearly professional, did not notice?
    2. +2
      12 January 2012 11: 34
      Drabkin - a man worthy of respect.
    3. Scythian Turanian
      +4
      12 January 2012 13: 56
      NUT,

      The main enemy, on the eastern front from the beginning to the end of the war, was and remained the Pz-4. Which was a successful Wehrmacht tank, comfortable for the crew, and made up the basis of the Wehrmacht's tank divisions. And it was the most massive in the German Army. And Soviet tankers were more afraid of them in real clashes. And in the days of the Union of Socialist they remembered this. Even in the "technology of youth" for 81 years. A separate article was devoted to these tanks under the heading "tank museum

      The article was called

      MAJOR OPPONENT



      61. German medium tank T-IVE. Combat weight - 21 tons. Crew - 5 people. Armament: one 75-mm gun, two 7,92-mm machine guns. Armor thickness: hull forehead - 50 mm, side - 30 mm, turret - 40 mm. Engine - "Maybach" HL 120 TRM, 300 hp. from. Highway speed - 40 km / h. In store down the highway - 200 km.

      With this modification they attacked the Soviet Socialist Republic on June 22, the 41st



      62. German medium tank T-IVH. Combat weight - 25 tons Crew - 5 people. Armament: one 75-mm cannon, two 7,92-mm machine guns. Armor thickness: hull forehead - 80 mm, side - 30 mm, tower - 50 mm. Engine - "Maybach" HL 120 TRM 112, 300 hp. from. Highway speed - 40 km / h. In store down the highway - 320 km.

      63. German assault tank IV. Combat weight - 28 t. Crew - 5 people. Armament: one 150 mm cannon, one 7,92 mm machine gun. Armor thickness: hull forehead - 100 mm, side - 50 mm. Engine - "Maybach" HL 120 TRM, 300 hp. from. Highway speed 40 km / h. In store down the highway - 210 km.

      And these modifications and the assault gun-tank took an active part in the Wehrmacht's army in the operation "citadel" on the Kursk Bulge in the summer of 43


      Although they say a lot about "tigers" and "panthers", various Western and Russian authors have made out in their articles to a bolt in the descriptions of this miracle of technology and weapons, too, they do not praise, they did not make such a significant contribution to the destruction of Soviet armored vehicles. It is more of an ideology to show the technological superiority of the West over the USSR. Yes, and they were mainly or almost entirely in the SS tank divisions (and there were only five of them on the eastern front, SS tank divisions), although they were pulled up to every more or less large operation of the German Armed Forces. They did not show anything much, only distinguished themselves by fanaticism, especially the "Reich" "Great Germany" and the "Hitler Youth" at the end of the war, already on the territory of Europe. In general, the first debut of the "royal tigers" of the most powerful tanks of the Second World War was completely unsuccessful, the colony tiger-2 or "royal tigers" were shot from an ambush by Soviet T-34-76 and anti-tank artillery of various callibers. According to German data, 44 tanks were lost in that battle at the Sandomierz bridgehead in 11. According to Soviet data, 17 tanks.
      1. Splin
        +1
        12 January 2012 17: 05
        History has some inclinations. Some of the tank generals of the 3rd Reich wrote that if Hitler hadn't spent money on the Tigers and Panthers. then tank wars could have gone differently. After all, after the upgrade, the four was a worthy answer to our T-34, and the three with an extended gun could successfully fight the Kharkov car. ... True, the Fritzes after France decided that even that length of a 50-mm cannon would be enough and only about 30 "stitched" triplets invaded the USSR. But these machines are several times cheaper than their heavy counterparts, and thank God that it worked out. So. Our mistakes were somehow compensated by their mistakes.
      2. lds040580
        0
        3 September 2012 10: 37
        your untruth - the first tigers wallied near Peter in 41
  22. 443190
    +4
    12 January 2012 10: 33
    Why argue there .... We needed a Victory !!! And our grandfathers and great-grandfathers, regardless of any laws of logic, got it for us !!! I wonder if the current generation of PEPSI can do this ??? Whatever the case, one must remember the lessons of history. Thanks to HEROES !!!
  23. ruaben
    +4
    12 January 2012 16: 17
    It amazes me the opinion of modern historians if the Germans lost 80-59 tanks from which they repaired half + captured the trophies, so how cute having at least 400 tanks left did they not counterattack? advice from all tanks to kill in defense a big gap?
    it’s just a shame the more time from this battle, the fewer eyewitnesses of this meat grinder, the smaller the losses of Germans.
    Some German scholars argue that the Fritz lost only 2-3 tanks for free and after that, such authors and historians would like to just spit in the face.
    1. J_silver
      +1
      12 January 2012 16: 25
      If almost all the tanks were in service, and there was nothing ahead, then it was necessary to press the Germans in the rear to the rear of Rokossovsky, or turn to Moscow ...
      And then immediately some more important matters were found ...
    2. +1
      12 January 2012 21: 12
      I read and read the comments, and thought: -where I saw these figures before. And I remembered: A.B. Shirokorad, the book "Tank War on the Eastern Front" .page 437. Prokhorovskoye battle. From the side of the Germans-215 tanks and 57 ACS, incl. 15 PZ.kf VI, from our side - 475 tanks (including T-70-180! Pcs.) And 40 self-propelled guns.
      And even earlier I watched a film on the Discovery Channel dedicated to the Prokhorov battle. The author, if I read correctly, is Bob Carruthers. So he claimed that for each Tiger there were 10 of our tanks, and for each T-4 there 3-4 cars.
      But, according to Shirokorad, the total loss of armored vehicles near Kursk from our side amounted to 334 vehicles. I will repeat, over the entire Kursk battle. This is such a strange mathematics in the West.
      1. +1
        13 January 2012 00: 19
        Shirokorada you can believe. Rezunizm does not suffer.
        1. J_silver
          +2
          13 January 2012 12: 38
          Yes, I don’t particularly trust Shirokorada - also a dubious person ...
    3. psdf
      0
      29 August 2012 10: 51
      It seems that that War is going on ... It’s just that the battlefield has moved from the land that grandfathers and great-grandfathers have upheld in the heads of new generations who like aphthars fill their brains with lies.
  24. Wolkin
    +3
    12 January 2012 17: 18
    In Soviet official historiography
    And was it not official? Introduce.

    However, so far in the history of this battle is full of "white spots".
    .... the battle by various researchers is very controversial.
    Which ones? There are probably no documents. No archives. What documents do carved researchers use?

    The question is, why did the Soviet command hide information about the battle near Prokhorovka?
    The answer, PROBABLY EVERYTHING, ... in the desire to keep huge losses secret ... ... especially as it was the fatal mistakes of the military leadership that led to their occurrence.

    The first fatal mistake - having accumulated strength in a certain area, we decided to fight.
    It was necessary to give up everything and retreat. And it is best to allow the encirclement of their troops on the Voronezh and Central Fronts.
    Especially since:
    Until 1943, German troops confidently moved forward in almost all directions.
    But the stupid leadership decided ... ... to exhaust the Germans, and then smash them with advancing counterattacks.

    The start of the battle near Prokhorovka was unexpected for our troops.
    ... that for the Germans it was an unexpected battle.
    Quite by chance, in this section of the front, a large number of tanks accumulated on both sides.

    But the Germans had better intelligence.
    Option 2: The attack is the "operating time" of the Germans. For the author ... .. more likely ... ..

    Stunned Soviet tankmen instead of retreating, stumbled forward!?!

    According to data provided by German generals, about 700 Soviet vehicles participated in the battle. Other data call the figure of 850 Soviet tanks
    In any case, about a thousand tanks converged in the battle near Prokhorovka. It was here that the Germans first used telemarkets.
    And we have PTAB-2,5-1,5 (but German sources do not mention them). http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C8%EB-2
    What are the generals? Which others? In which publication? ... although in official Soviet historiography ...?!?!

    However, the Tiger and T-34 are very easy to confuse with the Panther. I'm not a tanker, maybe I'm wrong? Moreover, the "T-34" from the German side, they accurately counted, -8 pieces.
    Further, about the fantastic losses from the Soviet side, according to "modern historians."
    ... Moreover, the German data on the “duel" in general contains data on only 59 lost tanks, 54 of which were evacuated, and they were able to take out several Soviet cars ....

    And so, the irretrievable loss of the Germans 5 (five) tanks. Plus 4 Soviet tanks purchased.
    Total loss of 1 tank.

    Such huge sacrifices were the result of numerous mistakes and miscalculations of the command of the Voronezh Front, which was headed by N.F. Vatutin.

    The civilized peoples of Europe fought without errors and readings. And our savage cannibals could only, by chance, win. ... Only the successful completion of the fighting on this sector of the front saved them ... That's it by chance, and that’s all.

    Who won the victory ...?
    The final conclusions of the author: The victory of the Red Army is nothing more than a myth.
    Only in 1995 ... after the construction of the temple ...
    Thanks to the descendants waited for the earth ....

    Maybe I misunderstood the article? Am I mistaken in something?
    1. NUT
      NUT
      +1
      12 January 2012 19: 39
      There was Wolkin and it’s not an official story about that war, and I regret that in my youth I was more interested in drinking and girls, their grandfathers wouldn’t lie for nothing, and everyone had their own stories that the armies in Könnensberg had stopped in battle, that in the winter near Moscow with fifty, or maybe more, enemy tanks, our mice voles (electronic wiring) were eaten, indicating that honey. to the sister for the &% back (order) the Red Star, and to the soldier for the attack yuh in $ & aka, that in the first days of fighting for three there is one rifle, and you take back the trophy that you, at best for a long time to Siberia. Oh how many different stories are told
      It’s a pity the men died, now I would have asked about a lot
      One firmly realized that our men and women had mastered that terrible war not because of, but in spite of the leading and inspiring role of the Communist Party, the Soviet Government and the brilliant red commanders ...
      1. J_silver
        +1
        12 January 2012 21: 16
        And here you are lying - and I do not congratulate you on this ...
        1. +1
          13 January 2012 00: 29
          Quote: NUT
          and you take away the trophy that you, at best for a long time in Siberia.


          Tales of Uncle Rezun ...
          Absolutely unseen was considered the use of captured weapons, that the Germans, that we have. Look at the profile photo sites. And ours with MP-40, and the Germans with PCA. About German cars just keep quiet.
          And about Siberia nonsense. Illogical. From Siberia, prisoners were collected and sent to the front, to bathe in blood. Yes and ZK themselves went voluntarily.

          Do you know why Alexander Matrosov was given the title of Hero? Before him there were many similar cases, but caught on this?
          Yes, because when a recurring criminal felon goes voluntarily to the front (and the Matrosov was no longer in the penal battalion by that time, that is, he had already shed blood) and this does ... Next, I think you can not continue?

          Quote: NUT
          Our men and women mastered that terrible war not because of, but in spite of the leading and inspiring role of the com.party, the soviet government and the brilliant red commanders ...


          Yeah. That is, the war was won by Ivan Brovkin, Vasily Terkin, Private Ryan and Soldier Jane. And all of these Montgomery, Eisenhower, Rokossovsky, Zhukov, nafig from the beach?

          Oh, and the people went, your energy and for peaceful purposes ...
          1. NUT
            NUT
            0
            13 January 2012 02: 20
            Yes, Zhukov won the war, but could he have won if he had Private Ryan and soldier Jane instead of Ivan Brovkin and Vasily Terkin?
            And how many Turkin and Brovkin fathers - commanders, for their stupidity and mediocrity, for nothing, for nothing?
            And in the battles, our Ivanov and Vasiliy won not so much by the commander’s mind as by a wise peasant
            Well, June 1941 from June 1943 is strongly distinguished
            1. J_silver
              0
              13 January 2012 12: 41
              For no reason or no reason - and at that time it wasn’t understood, now you definitely won’t install it, so it's better not to talk about it in vain ...
            2. Rodver
              -1
              28 February 2012 13: 45
              Definitely could not win. Only having a Russian soldier can even defeat a technically more equipped enemy.
    2. +1
      13 January 2012 02: 54
      Quote: Wolkin
      The Tiger and T-34 are very easily confused with the Panther.

      unless with 2 km, or after a direct hit with 100 kg of bomb
    3. vovan1949
      +1
      24 January 2012 16: 19
      Wolkinu. The civilized peoples of Europe fought without errors and readings. And our savage cannibals could only, by chance, win ....
      Yes .... We survived. You read the fabrications of such victims of perestroika and marvel at the wonder: why do you hate Russia so much that you consider the fascists civilized
      1. Rodver
        -1
        28 February 2012 13: 51
        vovan.
        Do not be too fixated. Both the article itself and almost all the comments contain Russian patriotism. You should not look for enemies here.
        It must be remembered that a real soldier is always respectful of his opponent - also a soldier.
  25. 0
    12 January 2012 19: 08
    http://otvaga2004.narod.ru/publ_w4/048_proxorovka.htm
  26. Punch 2011
    0
    12 January 2012 19: 42
    I wonder how the Red Army was to be fought. Once again, digging into the blank defense and, as usual, throwing grenades under the tanks. The Germans learned to break through any defense with the help of tanks and mechanical units with good interaction with aviation and artillery. And we decided to go on the offensive. I recalled how one of the books about the Battle of Kursk describes how one of our advancing tank brigades (there were 90 tanks most likely the T-70) was practically destroyed in 22 minutes. We are now sitting and clever on the net, we everything is clear and understandable, maps of battles at hand, handbooks at hand, but to go back to that time and how we would behave, I don’t know
  27. +1
    12 January 2012 21: 02
    ... I would also like to add that the Germans very widely used our captured weapons, so in particular the Marder-2 SU based on the Panzer-2 tank was armed with a captured Russian 76-mm F-22 cannon, and they were produced hundreds, the German tank ace E. Zaibold fought until the end of the war on our captured T-34 having won - 69 victories !!! ..and this is not an isolated example
    1. -1
      15 January 2012 02: 20
      Only the cannon and the tank were pretty much redone
  28. 0
    12 January 2012 21: 27
    History of the Great Patriotic War in 12 volumes. You would read ... And that right is inconvenient, like smart people ... Yes, and Amer showed the film, and then they should lie ...
  29. kind
    +2
    13 January 2012 00: 17
    On this topic, a lot of ransacking in the archives and then wrote books Zamulin Valery Nikolaevich. These are "Kursk break", "The secret battle of Kursk", "Forgotten battle of the Arc of Fire". At the moment, I consider these books to be a good complete source on that battle.
  30. Gur
    +2
    13 January 2012 09: 07
    Zadolbali historians truth-seekers, arranging with the connivance of the authorities and the silence of the people dancing on the bones of the dead and our history. If you are such truth-seekers .. deal with the living .. deal with the Chechen war .. cut the womb of the truth .. about how you betrayed and abandoned yours, how you traded weapons, how you turned in the data on the movement of the colonies. The generals are alive, some rulers are still alive, the correspondents are still alive .. parents for the rights of the militants .. expose them. And here I think that your gut is thin, it’s easier to scoop up near the dead and to cry for the dead, than to crumble on the living .. and as a result, you yourself can be dead.
    In the article, as in many others .. it is tracked .. such a soft trace to continue about poking our story .. another opus that moves us to repose and feel like cattle. FUCK FROM TWO Lords !! WE OPENED FRITZOV !! And they beat them number !! Reichstag still keeps the inscriptions of our soldiers!
    1. J_silver
      +3
      13 January 2012 12: 43
      Yes, it would be better to deal with Chechnya while the participants and eyewitnesses are alive, it would be nice to draw the proper conclusions ...
  31. +2
    14 January 2012 05: 23
    vomit custom article. now every pi ....... nya is trying to trample the memory of the war in the mud. and many believe.
  32. +1
    14 January 2012 22: 36
    Tank battles near Kursk were not limited to Prokhorovka, it was allocated because it was the last major battle using armored vehicles. The question of who won it was given by Guderian himself. He admitted that all his work on the revival of the Wehrmacht armored forces ended in collapse. After this, the tanks in The Wehrmacht was used as a defensive weapon, apart from tactical successes. Back to Prokhorovka, the Germans stopped the offensive because both were exhausted by this time. However, the longer they were at Prokhorovka, the more they were at risk of a strike on the flank of 1 tank army of M. Katukov, who had previously repelled all their attacks and hung over the left flank. Manstein, understanding this danger, indicated a departure.M.E.Katukov brought the Germans a lot of trouble near Moscow, commanding a tank brigade, managed to detain Guderian by destroying 133 tanks from him, after which he evaluated the actions of the T-34 in skillful hands.In general, M.E.Katukov developed a new tactic for using tanks in battle. He would l a worthy rival of Guderian, it is a pity that we forget about it. Eternal memory to him.
    1. 0
      21 July 2019 15: 40
      And we discredit the name of the chief marshal of the armored forces of Rotmistrov.

      Destroyed by the author of Article 5 Guards TA 5 days after Prokhorovka went on the offensive.
  33. More
    +1
    15 January 2012 23: 40
    Hello everyone. After the fifteenth time I was able to register. I’ve been reading you for a long time. Respect is not comic.
    I'm about Prokhorovka. I live not far. For work traveled the entire area. And by virtue of natural curiosity, I had plenty of fun with interesting old people and old women who saw and heard all this and even participated in some way. They told me very interestingly. In general, more than half of the locals can tell a lot about that battle.
    If you are interested, I will continue later.
    1. puzirilo
      0
      18 January 2012 00: 01
      I would like to know more. Write if there is such an opportunity.
      1. 0
        21 July 2019 15: 36
        Want to read more lies?
  34. Jamess
    +2
    30 January 2012 21: 11
    "The blood-stained earth waited for the gratitude of the descendants."
    So, until 1995, there was no recognition of the feat and gratitude of the descendants? And you, my friend, scum, as I can see! That, then you lick ass priests is your own business. There are a legion of people like you who were filled with the Holy Spirit overnight. But there is no need to sign for the whole of Russia. Nobody gave you the right to do this. And your little article is frankly crappy. Debunking commanders and flattering ordinary soldiers - this has always been a profitable business for the historiographic cattle. Did you at least command a squad in the army yourself? And what can you know about the war? "Analyst"! .. Better read "War and Peace" and Bolkonsky's reflections on the night before the Battle of Borodino.
  35. +4
    2 February 2012 13: 31
    "Until 1943, German troops confidently advanced in all directions" How to understand this phrase of the author? In my opinion, as completely absurd. And for what purpose did he write his article? Yes, not with the aim of establishing the truth, but in order to belittle the feat of our fathers and grandfathers. According to the "memories and reflections" of Zhukova, on July 12, 800 tanks and self-propelled guns participated in the battle near Prokhorovka, about 700 on the German side. 23 pcs just under Prokhorovka! In the future, the Germans used these guns only from an ambush .. I want to say: yes, both the T-4, and the T-5 and T-6 were very formidable opponents, but at a long distance, because of their very powerful long-barreled guns with a high initial the speed of the projectile and very high quality sights. On the other hand, they had a lot of shortcomings, for example, almost all T-5 (panther) tanks were out of order, even without making a march to advance to the starting position for an attack, the T-6 (tiger) turret slowly turned, unrepairable, high silhouette, low power reserve. Caught in the mass of enemy tanks, they practically lost all their advantages and Soviet tankers hit them almost close to the side and behind. Probably now, having set a goal, you can find statistics on how many of our tanks were destroyed and how many Germans were specifically in this battle, but the fact that they were great on the part of the Germans for this is the logic itself, because the Germans refused to continue further attacks, this is evidenced and eyewitness accounts.
    1. 0
      21 July 2019 15: 35
      I support you. And an additional fact. The 5th Guards TA defeated by the author 5 days after the battle of Prokhorovka went on the offensive.
  36. psdf
    0
    29 August 2012 10: 38
    What a tearful compilation of disparate facts. The general meaning is blurred and not intelligible. Afftar - go write school papers.
    Who cares - a balanced, and it seems to me, pretending to be objective presentation of the events of those days:
    http://nvo.ng.ru/history/2003-10-31/5_prohorovka.html
    PS Gratitude descendants waited immediately after the war. Monuments, a museum were subsequently opened, and later a memorial complex dedicated to the Battle of Kursk in Belgorod (the city of the First Salute). And the central theme is Prokhorovka (30 km from Belgorod).
  37. Deepragon
    +1
    27 January 2013 05: 59
    Take a look at the performance characteristics of German and Soviet tanks. The Germans participated in modifications of the 42-43 years with additional armor plates on the PzIII, PzIV and StuG-III (bringing the armor to 70-80 mm), with long-barreled guns with a penetration of 500-96 mm at 120 meters at st. The "Tiger" has a penetration of 500-110 mm at 156 meters with a phenomenal accuracy for that time - a scattering diameter of 40-50 cm at 1100 m. The penetration of our guns at these distances = 35-80 mm.
    With an average rate of fire in a stationary position of 5-7 rounds / min, the path of owls. tanks 1000 km = 3,5 min at a speed of 20 km / h on rough terrain. Therefore, the first km - 1600 shells = 266-300 tanks (when 1 shell from 6 hits the target). And what is there to talk about. Mash.
    When 50-70 tanks broke through, here is the most interesting.
    Ours, in fact, accomplished the feat. And the fact that they met - the trip is simple - it happened.
    Our - eternal memory - HEROES. To carry out 100-200 tanks in such conditions is a feat.
  38. Fourmik
    +1
    April 8 2013 02: 09
    Stop arguing about the performance characteristics of tanks and the qualities of fighters on both sides, each side had its own advantages and disadvantages. It’s better to look at the front line before the Battle of Kursk, specify the number of troops and ask yourself a few questions, or someone else.
    Firstly, if we look at the map, we will see almost the same protrusion to the north above the Kursk salient, only in the other direction. Why did the Soviet command not plan an operation like the German "Citadel" for their part and surrounded the enemy troops west of Kursk?
    Secondly, historical data show that on the Kursk Bulge the Germans had three times less manpower and almost 2 - 2,5 times less in tanks and planes (do not forget about aviation!). And in this situation, they attacked, and ours, with three times superiority, they built defense! What, with intelligence on both sides was bad, or the horseradish command?
    Did you not think that Stalin and K * could have captured the fascist armies north of Kursk and then this battle would not have happened, and the losses would probably have been less on our part?
  39. Katusha
    +1
    4 January 2014 08: 01
    The tank battle near Prokhorovka is a super-large one .. Before and after that, nothing like that monstrous in scale and technology of those times will ever happen again !! Prokhorovka is another of the glorious places of Russia's military prowess.
    Along with Lake Peipsi, Kulikov’s field, the passage of Suvorov’s troops through the Alps .. Hero’s strength is slumbering in blood by all of us ..
    God forbid to wake this force ..
    1. +1
      23 September 2016 16: 36
      Well, that's the biggest! Do not forget that in 1941 on the western border (because of the stupidity of the army commissar Mehlis!) We lost most of our tank and motorized corps in one border battle within several days. I advise you to read "From Dubno to Rostov" by A.V. Isaeva.
      1. +1
        23 September 2016 16: 46
        Quote: polkovnik manuch
        Do not forget that in 1941 on the western border (due to the stupidity of the Armenian Commissar Mehlis!) We are in the same border

        What does the Mehlis have to do with it? Where was Pavlov and what did Komfronta do before June 22? Did he run to the opera, contemplate the ballerinas? Why didn’t Pavlov comply with Stalin’s order, the Directive of June 18?
        Why in Surprise, fulfilled a STOCK, no?
  40. kvs45
    0
    6 May 2015 01: 02
    Quote: vovan1949
    Bullshit. The flash point of gasoline has always been and will be lower than the flash point of a solarium. At some point, gasoline will flare up while the diesel engine will work. Happy New Year!

    If you set fire to matches, yes, and the armor-piercing chamber projectile on the drum and burns from salary are much stronger! Fire resistance is determined not only by the type of fuel, but also by a number of other measures, the Tiger had a partition separating the crew from the tanks and dvigla + the world's first automatic fire extinguishing system, which our tanks did not have
  41. 0
    23 September 2016 08: 55
    An interesting article, I didn’t know how many times I drove past those places, I always thought, here we smashed them, but it turns out not so simple ...
    1. 0
      21 July 2019 15: 30
      And you do not believe everything that nowadays write stories.
      Only one fact, 5 days after the battle of Prokhorovka, the guards tank army defeated by the author of Article 5 went on the offensive.
  42. +1
    23 September 2016 16: 31
    Even if our losses were many times greater than the German ones (which I personally don't believe in). any tactical textbook says that the attacker always suffers more losses. My aponents will say, but the Germans were also advancing at 41! Yes, they were advancing! Do not forget that the Battle of Kursk was at 43 (two years after the start of the war!) And the Red Army had already won major victories, albeit with heavy losses (the same Stalingrad). And for those who think that the Battle of Kursk and in particular little has been written about the battle of Prokhorovka. I advise you to read "Prokhorovka - without the stamp of secrecy" by Lev Lopukhovsky and "Battle of Kursk - a German view" by Stephen Newton. And finally stop pleading for the dignity of the fallen Heroes of the Fatherland!
  43. +1
    28 September 2016 13: 51
    It looks like the real Prokhorovka went in the comments too! I have one question for those who believe that they "fought incorrectly" and "filled up with corpses." WOULD YOU COULD BE THE COMMANDER OF THE T-70 PLACE (that is, being an officer who understands what's what), CHANGE "TIGERS" TO THE BATTLE ORDER? eh? But no chance. But you have to fight. There is a terrible understanding of this that is needed. And there is an order. And your neighbors have orders. And if you wag, you substitute them. In general, the article turned out to be rotten. The author, do not blame me. I don’t know what I wanted, but "Novodvorskoye oh wei" ruined everything completely.
  44. +1
    28 June 2017 09: 46
    And the Germans in general, according to them, everywhere had 10 times less losses than ours. And it doesn’t matter at all whether they won the battle or lost - their losses according to reports are always simply ridiculous. One can only wonder how they, with such a favorable balance of power, did not drive us out to the very Urals.
  45. +1
    18 July 2017 01: 10
    1. The USSR did not have overwhelming superiority in tanks in Operation Citadel
    according to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, we have 3444 Germans 2733
    by KOSAVE we have 3306 Germans 2700
    this despite the fact that the Germans self-propelled guns, armored personnel carriers and tankettes including with artillery weapons, did not belong to the tanks, as often attached tanks.

    2. The disastrous loss figures are confirmed by many German historians, including Guderian,
    this despite the fact that the evacuated tanks, like the salvage tanks of the Germans, were not considered losses, regardless of their fate.

    3. A simple analysis of the battlefield shows that the tactics of the Soviet tank forces were chosen correctly.
    In the conditions of superiority of the enemy at long distances, get close and hit point blank.

    4. It was after the battle of Prokhorovka that the Germans strategically began to defend themselves and then retreat. This is what explains the main purpose of the Troll attacks.
  46. 0
    21 July 2019 15: 25
    The author is a liar.
    5 days after the battle of Prokhorovka, the 5th Guards Tank Army, defeated by Mr. Dedov, went on the offensive.
    I am ashamed to lie so poorly and defame the name of the chief marshal of the armored forces.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"