F-34 vs Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E

 "Results of firing on the German T-IV tank with the 76 mm model 1940 (F-34) gun on the T-34 tank

Photo 68. Penetration of the right side, 40 mm thick (20+20 mm) from 800 meters.

King Tiger Field Penetration Trials

"Report on the results of testing the T-6-B King Tiger superheavy tank in order to determine its weak points held on September 2nd, 1944, near Staszów by a commission composed of the following: [names]

The results of the trials are summarized in the following table:

Component of the tank	Gun caliber	Type of ammunition	Range	Angle	Result
Hull front	152	HEAT*	250 m	90	First hit: 350 mm wide breach in the machine gun ball.
				46	Second hit: 70 mm deep dent 230 mm in diameter.
	85	AP	200 m	46	60 mm deep dent 170 mm in diameter.
Turret front	57	Subcaliber	200 m	75	165 mm deep dent 70 mm in diameter.
Turret side	152	HEAT*	1200 m	70	Penetration, 200 mm breach.
			250	86	Penetration of both sides, entrance breach is 190 mm in diameter, exit breach is 840 mm in diameter.
	85	AP	200	86	Penetration 170 mm in diameter.
Superstructure side	152	HEAT*	465	85	Penetration of both sides, entrance breach is 170 mm in diameter, exit breach is 750 mm in diameter.
	85	AP	400	85	Penetration 150 mm in diameter.
	76	Subcaliber	300	88	Penetration 40 mm in diameter.
		AP			Dent 75 mm deep 84 mm in diameter.
	57	Subcaliber	200	88	Penetration 70 mm in diameter.
		AP	200	88	Penetration 60 mm in diameter.
	45	Subcaliber	150	80	Penetration 30 mm in diameter.

Comparing Shells

 "Report of the GBTU Self Propelled Artillery Directorate on results of comparative penetration trials of American, German, and domestic AP shells
May 13th, 1945

Firing according to the attached velocities was done at the Main Artillery Proving Grounds of the GAU at NKB proving grounds at Sofrino

Results of firing the shells at armour plates at prescribed velocities (see table)

#1: 76 mm AP shells against 50 and 75 mm thick plates.

The experimental shell from 60Kh30 steel shows undoubtedly superior results compared to the stock shell or the American shell.

76 mm vs T-34

Even though the T-34 was not designed to withstand 76 mm AP shells, trials with various kinds of 76 mm ammunition were still included in the tests of defective hulls and turrets.

"d) Firing 76 mm type 2-03545 armour piercing shells

Trials of the 2-03545 shell, accepted into service, are shown in table 11 and on figure 50. The table shows data for two different hulls: shots 21-24 and 155-168 were fired at the first hull, shots 48-58, 113-125, 140-146, and 149 were fired at the second hull.

How to Kill a Tiger

There were many guides on how to take out Tiger tanks printed in the Red Army. I've shown two of them here, but this one is a lot more detailed.

APCR and HEAT Instructions

"Artillery HQ of the 25th Rifle Corps

May 23rd, 1944

#[illegible]378

To artillery commanders of divisions. Copy personally for the 77th Guards Rifle Division

I send out a copy of instructions issued by the GAU KA regarding the use of 76 mm subcaliber ammunition, 76 mm HEAT, and 122 mm HEAT.

The Corps Artillery Commander orders that:

1. The instructions are to be taught to all artillery personnel of the units (for the appropriate caliber) before May 27th, 1944.
2. Personally check the knowledge of these instructions by officers on May 27th, 1944, and report on the results of the check.
3. Subcaliber and HEAT ammunition must always be stored with the guns and kept in reserve against tanks and SPGs. Do not permit firing at other targets.

Chief of the Artillery HQ of the 25th Rifle Corps, Lieutenant Colonel Solodilov"

F-34 Gun Mantlet

"Requirements for the F-34 gun mantlet

1. The front facing shield covering the gun port needs to be 52 mm thick if cast and 45 mm thick if rolled.
2. The armouring of the cradle and recoil elements can be stamped or rolled and welded. The front cover needs to be removable. The thickness of the front cover needs to be 35 mm, the vertical sides sides sloped at 20 degrees must be 30 mm thick, top and bottom at least 15 mm.
3. The design of the gun mantlet needs to reliably protect the crew from bullets and splash from all elevation angles from -5 to +30 degrees. The armour strips that prevent bullets and splash from entering must be at least 15 mm thick.
4. In order to balance the system, a weight of at most 50 kg can be installed on the recoil guard. If a weight of more than 50 kg is required, a balancing mechanism must be added underneath the gun cradle.

Representative of the BTU Chief, Military Engineer 1st Class, Korobkov

Representative of the 3rd Department of the BTU, Military Engineer 1st Class, Afonin

January 18th, 1941."

CAMD RF 38-11355-10 p.65

T-34s vs Tiger

"

Report

On military trials of T-34 and T-34-85 tanks against the T-6 "Tiger" tank

2nd Tank Battalion, 63rd Guards Tank Brigade

June 16th, 1944

1. The 2nd Tank Battalion fired the guns. The battalion commander, Guards Captain Chirkov, was directed by the brigade commander, Guards Colonel Fomichev, in the presence of the deputy commander of the 10th Guards Tank Corps, Guards Colonel Belov, Chief of Staff of the 18th Army, and the senior officers of the 18th Army.

2. Firing was done against a German Tiger tank from 400, 600, 800, and 1300 meters.

None More Frightening than the Cat

German industry created three armoured vehicles during WWII that had a significant effect on tank building worldwide. The appearance of the Tiger made Allied tanks obsolete. The few Ferdinand SPGs that were built introduced serious changes into the Soviet tank program. The third tank was the Panther, and its influence was comparable to that of the Tiger.

The tank was a quite unpleasant surprise for the Red Army and its allies when it made its debut at Kursk. Despite its deficiencies, the Panther is a good candidate for the best German tank of the war. The Panther was superior to the Tiger in terms of armament and frontal protection, and was made in significantly higher numbers. Many tank designers were looking at the Panther when they were making the next generation of medium and heavy tanks.

The New T-34

"Decree #428ss of the State Committee of Defense of the Council of Commissars of the USSR

November 19th, 1940

Moscow, Kremlin

On changes and additions to the tactical-technical requirements of KV, T-34, and T-40 tanks

...

On the T-34 tank, in addition to tactical-technical requirements approved by Committee of Defense decrees #45ss on February 27th, 1939, and #443ss on December 19th, 1939, introduce the following changes and additions:

1. The total mass of the T-34 tank is limited to 26 tons.
2. The approved armament of the T-34 tank is the 76 mm L-11 gun with the coaxial DT machinegun in the tank's turret, a second DT for the radio operator, and one submachinegun (PPD) in the turret to fire from hatches. Begin arming the T-34 tank with the F-34 gun starting with January 1st, 1941.

New Turret, Old Gun

The 85 mm gun and enlarged turret for the T-34 were developed as separate projects. I already wrote about what happens when you put the 85 mm gun in the standard hex turret, but there was also the option for the opposite: an enlarged turret with the same 76 mm F-34.

T-34 with the F-34 gun (left) and D-5 gun (right)

F-34 Installation

"Technical Meeting Minutes

Held on September 8th, 1940, at the State Order of Lenin Comintern Factory #183

Present:

• Factory #183 Chief Engineer, Makhonin
• Factory #183 Deputy Chief Designer, A.A. Morozov
• Factory #92 Senior Engineer-Designer, P.F. Muravyev
• Factory #92 Technician-Designer, B.G. Lasman
• Factory #183 Senior Engineer, Maloshtanov
• ABTU Military Representative, Military Engineer 3rd Class, Baikov

Topic: comrade P.F. Muravyev's presentation regarding the possibility of installing the 76.2 mm F-34 tank gun in the T-34 turret and the conversion of the T-34 turret made necessary by the requirement that the F-32 and F-34 be made interchangeable.

Panther's Side

The Panther's thick front armour could not be penetrated by any Soviet tank gun in use in 1943. This immunity, however, did not apply to the side armour, which turned out to be vulnerable to even the rapidly ageing 45 mm gun.

The sloped part of the sides proved a tough nut to crack. The 45 mm gun doesn't work here, and hits from 300 and then 100 meters do not penetrated. However, other parts of the tank can still be penetrated from this side: the turret has two holes in it from 45 mm APCR (300 and 400 meters) and one from 45 mm AP (400 meters). The vertical side of the hull (unfortunately not pictured) can be penetrated from 500 meters. The rear was also penetrated from 300 meters (also not pictured).

The 76 mm gun has no issues with this armour at all, however. Even firing at an angle of 60 degrees, from 600 meters the armour piercing shell penetrated the side armour. The sloped hull did poorly against this weapon, as you can see, forming a fairly sizeable breach. Despite the thick front plate, even an ordinary T-34 would not have to flank very far to be able to destroy its much heavier opponent.

CAMD RF 38-11469-40 p.22

New Gun for the T-34

"On arming the T-34 with an 85 mm gun instead of the 76 mm F-34 gun

In order to improve the artillery armament of the T-34 tank, the State Committee of Defense decrees that:

1. The 85 mm tank gun designed by TsAKB (comrade Grabin) is accepted into service and named "85 mm tank gun model 1944 (S-53)".
2. T-34 tanks, starting with January of 1944, will be armed with the 85 mm tank gun model 1944 (S-53), installed with the stock turret ring, instead of the 76 mm F-34 gun.

KV Gun Upgrades

"The following work is necessary to perform trials of KV tank armament and improvement of blueprints:

1. Install the F-34 gun instead of the F-32 gun into the KV-1 tank at factory #92 by March 1st, 1941.
   A commission composed of representatives from ChTZ, the Kirov factory, GABTU, and GAU must perform trials and approve blueprints by March 5th, 1941. Factory #92 received a KV tank with a 76 mm F-32 gun on February 2nd, 1941.
2. Install the 107 mm F-42 gun instead of the M-10 gun into the KV-2 tank by May 1st, 1941. Perform trials and work on blueprints, presenting them to the NKO no later than May 15th, 1941. Factory #92 received a KV tank with a large turret on January 29th.

Rough Handling

It's no secret that the F-34 gun was also tested out on the KV-1 as a part of the various efforts to improve its firepower in 1941. After the gun was tested, the tank was converted back into its original form.

Experimental KV-1 with an F-34 gun.

Here's a little more about the tank's post-trial fate:

Experimental Guns

"To the Deputy People's Commissar of Defense of the USSR, Marshal of the Soviet Union, comrade Kulik

July 23th, 1940

I report on the status of experimental work on tank and anti-tank armament specified in meeting minutes from June 16th, 1940

1. Working blueprints of a powerful 76 mm anti-tank gun based on the USV produced by factory #92 are complete and sent to the manufacturing plants, aside from blueprints for the balancing mechanism and the rear of the mount.
2. Working blueprints for a powerful 76 mm tank gun based on the F-34 were developed and sent to the manufacturing plants.

Tractor Tanks and SPGs

"Minutes from a technical meeting at Comintern factory #183 regarding producing SPGs at factory #183
August 27th, 1941

Participants:

• Factory director, Y.E.Maksarev
• Chief engineer, P.M. Krivich
• Chief designer, A.A. Morozov
• 52nd Department Chief, N.G. Zubarev
• GABTU regional engineer, D.M. Kozyrev
• Military Engineer 2nd Class R.E. Sorkin
• Senior GAU military representative, G.P. Lozbinev

The following topics were discussed:

• Installation of an 85 mm AA gun designed by factory #8 in an SPG designed on the T-34 chassis.
• Installation of a 76 mm F-34 tank gun designed by factory #92 in an SPG designed on the Vorozhilovets tractor chassis.
• Installation of an 85 mm AA gun designed by factory #8 in an SPG designed on the Vorozhilovets tractor chassis.

Under Pressure, Part 2

In Part 1, we saw what happens to a tank crew when it's hit with a HEAT shell, whether that shell penetrates or not. However, getting hit with a kinetic penetrator has consequences too! Let's take a look.

"To compare, a table of measurements inside armoured compartments on impact from armour piercing and high explosive 76, 85, 100, and 122 mm shells with sensors positioned 200-1000 mm from armour, under the condition that the armour integrity was not compromised."

StuG in the USSR

At the start of the Great Patriotic War, Soviet military intelligence and the GAU had a very approximate idea about the types and characteristics of German tanks. This deficiency led to an overestimation of the possibilities of German armour and the launch of the KV-3, 4, and 5 programs in March of 1941. Even information on real German tanks was sparse. Intelligence missed the increase of the front armour of PzIII and PzIV tanks to 50 mm and use of 50 mm guns. This lack of information had to be made up for in the most reliable way during the war: studying trophies. Among the vehicles that were glossed over by Soviet intelligence was the StuG assault gun.

Present from Kiev

The first use of this vehicle, envisioned by Field Marshall Manstein, was in France, in May-June of 1940. It would be incorrect so say that Soviet intelligence learned nothing about the StuG. However, it did not earn much attention, and its description was brief.

"As a rule, assault gun squadrons accompany infantry in attacks of fortified positions and strongholds in the direction of the main attack, first in motorized divisions, then later in tank and infantry divisions. The squadrons are armed with 75 mm tank guns installed on the chassis of the PzIII medium tank with a special turret and armour. The main task for these vehicles is the destruction of the enemy with direct fire."

The Soviet military had no idea about the importance and effectiveness of these low, mobile, and well armed fighting machines. Meanwhile, in June of 1941, more than 10 StuG battalions (Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung, or StuG.Abt.) assembled on the Soviet border. Among them was 197th StuG. Abt. under the command of Major Helmuth Christ.

Red Armymen posing on a captured StuG III from StuG. Abt. 197, August 1941.

This battalion was formed in October of 1940 and was armed with StuG Ausf. B vehicles. StuG. Abt. 197 had its baptism by fire alongside the 132nd Infantry Division in May of 1941 during the invasion of Yugoslavia. During the start of the invasion of the USSR, the battalion was subordinate to 

XXXXVIII Tank Corps of Army Group Center. Soon after the fighting began, it was transferred to XXXXIV Corps in Army Group South.

That same vehicle at the NIIBT Proving Grounds, early September of 1941. The damage to the suspension and the letter E on the side can be clearly seen.

On August 15th, the battalion was located at the city of Kanev, where fierce battles for the Dnieper were fought. Soviet infantry counterattacks managed to capture at least two StuG III Ausf. B from StuG. Abt. 197. The vehicles from 3rd battery was captured intact and was used in a photoshoot with the soldiers who captured it. The second vehicle, #90247 with the name Prinz Eugen, was also mobile. According to StuG. Abt. 197 records, both vehicles were lost after hitting mines. After brief repairs, they were transferred to the Soviet rear.

The assertion that at least one of the vehicles went to fight with a Soviet crew is often made, but this is not true. In early September, the vehicles from 3rd battery was already at the NIIBT Proving Grounds. As for Prinz Eugen, it was transferred to the rear of the Central Front. A brief description was composed, with the trophy getting the name "medium German tank T-3 with an immobile turret". The description included external and internal characteristics of the vehicle. These characteristics were fairly close to the real ones. Despite the urgency, the specialists who studied the vehicle had time to partially take it apart and put it back together.

The second captured StuG III Ausf. B from StuG. Abt. 197.

The NIIBT Proving Grounds went in a different direction. Instead of beginning a detailed study, they made a brief composition of its characteristics. A summary of German armour was ready by September 11th, 1941. The tactical-technical characteristics in this summary were more precise, especially when it came to armour thickness. Aside from measurements, a brief trials were also staged, where the StuG reached a speed of 50 kph.

That same vehicle from the left. This StuG had the personal name "Prinz Eugen".

In NIIBT documents, the StuG was referred to as "artillery tank" or "Artsturm" for short. It's not known who invented this term, but it stuck to the StuG in Soviet documents.

Tough Nut

The StuG III was studied to compose a guidebook on German vehicles that was so desperately needed at the front. Because of this, trials were performed in an accelerated way, and some conclusions may be unfounded.

StuG III from the rear.

"The artillery assault tank is designed to act in the first echelon of tanks. The tank has no turret. It can only fire forward in a 28 degree arc by turning the gun on a mount. There are no machineguns. The lower part of the artillery tank, the suspension, the engine, the planetary turning mechanism, and the controls are taken from the PzIII. The gearbox is the same as the one on the PzII Ausf. B and only differs in its size. 

The armour of the tank can be defeated by guns of all calibers. It is possible to destroy the tank through the opening above the gun mount using a bottle of incendiary fluid or a grenade."

The conclusions regarding protection seems hasty. Of course, there were some poor decisions made regarding the vehicle, and the protection of the casemate was one of them. The gun sight opening "caught" shells, but it was changed in the Ausf. C version. The gun mount was also far from ideal as far as shell resistance went. However, the protection offered by the front armour went underappreciated by the proving grounds. The StuG III was the first mass produced German vehicle with anti-shell armour. The front armour of even the StuG III Ausf. A was 50 mm. The vehicle was reliably protected from the 37 mm gun. The PzIII and PzIV only received improved armour a year later.

Poster with vulnerable parts of the StuG, which slightly differed in reality.

It was already obvious that the 45 mm gun will have problems with German armour in late 1940. A 30 mm thick evacuation hatch from a PzIII tank bought in Germany was fired upon, penetrated, and even shattered, but not on the first try. These results showed that thicker armour would be impenetrable. Nevertheless, in September of 1941, the verdict was "vulnerable to artillery of all calibers". The same verdict was repeated in the flyer from the "Destroy German Tanks" series.

A full fledged study of the vehicle's armour was only made in September of 1942. PzIII, PzIV, Pz38(t) and the StuG were tested at the NIIBT Proving Grounds at Kubinka and their Kazan branch. The tanks were fired upon by Soviet, American, British, German, Czechoslovak, and French tank guns. Their resistance at 50, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 800 meters was measured.

Results of firing the 45 mm gun (1 and 2).

First, the vehicle was fired upon by the 45 mm mod. 1942 tank gun in the T-70 tank. It penetrated the 30 mm armour with no problems from a range of 850 meters. Firing at the front was a different story. From 100, then 50 meters, the result was the same: 20 mm dent. The shells fell apart on impact.

Hits from 2-pdr shells. The penetration was likely by chance.

The story can end here with the conclusion that Soviet armament was bad, but similar results were shown by another gun: the British 2-pdr (40 mm) in a Canadian Valentine VII tank. The sides also proved effortless. As for the front armour, it was only penetrated once, and the penetration was deemed unsatisfactory, since the shell landed into the joint between the central and lower front plates. In all other cases, the shells made 25 mm deep dents. One can only feel sorry for British tankers whose main armament was the 2-pdr gun until the fall of 1942.

Penetrations by 37 mm subcaliber rounds from the A-7 gun on the Pz38(t)

A similar result was attained by the 37 mm A-7 gun on the Czechoslovak Pz38(t) tank. It could confidently penetrate the sides, but the front was invulnerable: the shells left 40 mm deep dents. The results were different for subcaliber shells: they could penetrate at 100, 200, and 400 meters.

The 37 mm M5 gun installed in the American light M3 tank performed better. Its M51 shell easily penetrated the front of the StuG at 100 meters, and 35-50 mm deep dents were formed at 150 meters. This can primarily be explained by the larger casing size used by Gladeon Barnes in its creation, giving the gun's shells a higher velocity compared to British and Soviet analogues.

The ordinary armour piercing shell from the M5 37 mm gun confidently penetrates the front armour.

The 47 mm SA 35 gun on the Somua S35 was even more effective. It could penetrate the front of the StuG III from 400 meters, but at this range only every other shot penetrated. The German 5 cm KwK 38 L/42, the stock armament on PzIII tanks by 1942, could penetrate the front of the StuG at 800 meters.

Penetrations left by the SA 35 gun installed in the French Somua S35 tank.

The 75 mm M2 gun used in the American M3 medium tank achieved curious results. The first Lend-Lease convoys didn't bring armour piercing ammunition, so HE was used. The results were poor, not a single penetration was made. The maximum that was achieved was a 10 mm dent. In addition, a deep dent was formed in the transmission cover while firing at the upper front plate. The 76 mm F-34 achieved different results and made Swiss cheese from the StuG at all distances. The armour caved in upon impact, forming many fragments.

Results of the 75 mm M2 gun used on the American M3 medium tank.

Landmark

At the same time, the StuG III was being studied at NII-48. The composition of the armour and joints between plates were being examined and successful design decisions that could be implemented in Soviet production were extracted. 

"The hull of the German Artsturm tank:

The hull is welded. The ceiling of the fighting compartment is attached by bolts with a hidden head. Initially, the front plate was 50 mm thick, the sides were 30 mm thick, and the rear was 20 mm thick. Later, the rear 20 mm plates were replaced by 50 mm plates.

The hull is composed of rolled Chromium steel with 0.1% Vanadium. The Brinell hardness of the plates is 337-476, the diameter of the print is 2.8-3.32. The armour is malleable, has good resistance, and doesn't chip.

...

German PzIII, PzIV, and Artsturm tanks are made with Chromium steel and have good shell resistance. The composition of armour can be used to produce armour thicker than 50 mm. Curing, rolling, thermal conditioning and welding of Chromium steels mark 5140 and 5150 is already mastered by our industry and putting this armour into production will not be a problem.

A Chromium electrode containing 2.1% Chrome and 0.2% Carbon can be recommender."

Layout of the StuG's armour from NII-48's report.

It is worth mentioning that work on 45 mm subcaliber shells and a 45 mm gun with a lengthened barrel was going on before the trials of German tanks. The results of the trials only hurried both designs.

Initially, the German novelty was of no interest to Soviet designers. Later, the StuG III had a big effect on the development of medium self propelled artillery. Before, Soviet SPG designs were, as a rule, open topped tank destroyers with rotating turrets, like the U-20 project. By spring of 1942, the priorities shifted to assault guns with closed casemates, similar to the StuG III, but that is a topic for another article.

Original article by Yuri Pasholok.