Video: Hetzer vs SU-76M with Totally Tanked

The SU-76 and Hetzer seem like very different vehicles at first glance, but they have more in common than you think. Find out what made these vehicles similar and what made them different in my recent chat with Totally Tanked.

Roof for the SU-76M

A number of questionable publications on the SU-76 created the idea that the SU-12 (SU-76) initially had a roof over the fighting compartment, but it was later removed, never to return. This is far from the truth. The SU-12 prototype and a large number of production vehicles had no roof initially. Stalin personally demanded that a roof be installed on every vehicle starting with the first one, but this was only put into practice in the second half of March 1943. The claim that roofs were removed on the front lines is not supported by photographic evidence. Vehicles without roofs always have their headlights and other stowage in different positions, same as the prototype. The roof was also present on the SU-15 prototype, although the improved SU-15M (SU-76M) didn't have it.

SU-76M with a rigid roof developed at factory #40 in the summer of 1944.

SU-76 Requirements

 "Approved by the Deputy People's Commissar of Defense, Colonel General of Artillery Voronov

October 17th, 1942

Tactical-technical requirements for a 76 mm assault SPG

1. Purpose of the SPG

The 76 mm SPG is designed to support moto-mechanized units to combat firing emplacements, tanks, and personnel both with direct and indirect fire.

2. Requirements for the artillery component of the SPG

The SPG uses the stock rotating part of the ZIS-3 76 mm model 1942 gun. The ability to install a 57 mm IS-1 gun must also be retained.

The SPG must meet the following requirements:

1. Practical rate of fire of no less than 12 RPM in direct fire and at small elevations.
2. Gun elevation of at least +15 degrees.
3. Gun depression of at least -5 degrees.
4. Traverse range of 30 degrees (15 in either direction).
5. The rate of traverse must be about 1.5 degrees per turn of the flywheel. The effort on the flywheel must not exceed 4 kg.
6. The rate of elevation must be about 1 degree per turn of the flywheel. The effort on the flywheel must not exceed 4 kg.
7. The recoil brake must be armoured. The armour must be 8-10 mm thick.
8. The oscillating part of the gun and the recoil brake armour must be fully balanced.
9. The bore axis height must be no more than 1650 mm.
10. The gun position must allow for comfortable loading at all angles of elevation and traverse.
11. The gun sight must be a mass production type either from the 76 mm regimental gun or the ZIS-3.
12. Crew of 4 (including the driver).
    During travel, collapsible seats for three men must be installed in the fighting compartment.
13. The gun must be rigidly fixed in travel and not move vertically or horizontally.
14. The SPG must carry two PPSh SMGs.
15. The SPG must carry 60 rounds of ammunition for the gun and 1000 PPSh rounds.
    The ammunition must be stored in places that make it comfortable for the loader to work with, fix securely in its slots, and be easy to unlatch and retrieve.

Ammunition Storage

 "#01725
June 9th, 1945

In accordance with your letter #843079s dated May 25th of this year, we present the following ideas regarding rational locations of ammunition in ammunition racks and painting of the racks with the goal of prevention of explosions.

For the SU-76

1. Given 35 round of HE, 15 AP, and 10 APCR, place:
1. 11 rounds of HE on the right side, 17 on the left side, 7 under the gun cradle.
2. 15 rounds of AP in the upper bustle.
3. 10 rounds of APCR in the lower bustle.

SU-76M Experience

 "Report by the Commander of the Armoured and Mechanized Forces of the Leningrad Front
#0174917
July 31st, 1944

The SU-76 shows itself well in battle, but the open top and rear as well as a lack of machine gun in a ball mount are significant drawbacks.

In battle, the SU-76 fights alongside infantry among its ranks within range of enemy machine gun fire and grenades. The SU-76 crews are completely open and singular submachine gunners can come up from the flank or rear and destroy the crew with submachine guns and grenades. This is characteristic of battles in forests.

SU-76 Misuse

 "#850469
June 19th, 1945

The GBTU Tank Usage Directorate received reports of incorrect use of SU-76 SPGs issued to rifle corps.

For instance, the 37th and 39th Rifle Corps of the 9th Guards Army used the SU-76 SPGs from the 1513th and 1524th Light SPG Regiments as tractors to tow captured vehicles over the course of 4-6 days, expending 25-30 engine hours and 250-450 km of travel for each SPG.

I order that:

1. The use of tanks and SPGs to tow vehicles is forbidden. Tractors and prime movers are to be used for this purpose.
2. Commanders of Armoured and Mechanized Forces of Fronts are to check the correctness of usage of all tank and SPG regiments attached to rifle corps.
3. The commander of Armoured and Mechanized Forces of the 2nd Ukrainian Front must investigate the instance of incorrect usage of SU-76 SPGs of the 1513th and 1524th Light SPG Regiments attached to the 37th and 39th Rifle Corps and hold the guilty parties responsible.

Deliver this directive to commanders of armoured and mechanized units and formations of the Red Army and rifle corps commanders that have tank or SPG regiments attached.

Report on the execution of this order by July 10th of this year.

Deputy Chief of Armoured and Mechanized Forces, Colonel General of the Tank Forces, Korobkov".

CAMD RF F.38 Op.11362 D.16 L.23

Printed in Glavnoye Bronetankovoye Upravleniye Lyudi, Sobytiya, Fakty v dokumentakh, 1944-1945 p.549

The Final SU-76

The SU-76M (SU-15) light SPG was accepted into service with the Red Army on July 8th, 1943. This was the second most numerous AFV in the Red Army after the T-34/T-34-85. The SU-76M design was good and changed little throughout the war, but feedback from the front lines led to a modernization by the end of it, primarily aimed at improving the protection of the fighting compartment. This vehicle did not receive a new index. It is sometimes referred to as "SU-76M post-war production", but that is not the case. Production began in April of 1945 and lasted for only two months after the end of WW2. These "post-war" SPGs fought during the Soviet-Japanese war of August 1945.

Armoured Confusion: Mid-war

The history of Soviet wartime armoured vehicles bore several misconceptions. There are many reasons for this. A number of myths came from a lack of information. Sometimes historians' own guesses that had little to do with reality were interpreted as fact. Unfortunately, the authors of some myths are still considered experts to this day and these exercises in fiction are still cited as fact. Initially the author planned on two articles dedicated to misconceptions about the Great Patriotic War, but there were too many misconceptions for 1942-1943, and so the second article won't be the last.

Temperamental Columbina

Even though the Red Army understood the need for a light SPG even before the war, the SU-76's road to the battlefield was long and difficult. Despite popular belief he USSR's manufacturing capabilities were not as great as those of the Western Allies, who didn't need to move their factories thousands of kilometers and set up in an empty field. The front line troops would have been happy to have light tanks, SPAAGs, and tracked APCs, and captured or Lend Lease vehicles of this type were happily used. However, only the SU-76 could be had in sufficient amounts, a vehicle that received mixed impressions.

Running In

 "December 8th, 1944

Description of the running in process of rifle regiment personnel from the 60th Guards Pavlograd Order of the Red Banner Division with SU-76M SPGs conducted on November 11th, 1944.

Based on the enciphered telegram delivered from the 32nd Rifle Corps on November 6th, 1944, the division performed running in of rifle regiment personnel with SU-76M SPGs.

Snow "Shoes"

The tank was born on the battlefields of WWI where it had to combat not only enemy fortifications, but also mud. Tanks were often lost not from enemy fire, but from being stuck on cross country terrain. Engineers and the military first started thinking about how to improve mobility of their vehicles. Further improvements focused on improving mobility in general, but advanced methods of driving on soft terrain did not progress past experiments. Engineers returned to the issue of improving off-road mobility in WWII. In addition to mud, tanks got a new enemy: snow. This issue was most prevalent on the Soviet-German front where there was more snow than anywhere else for obvious reasons.

The Red Army's Most Numerous SPG

The SU-12 was accepted into service with the Red Army on December 2nd, 1942. It was a good design with a fatal flaw: the parallel placement of its engines. This layout was the SPG's Achilles' heel. The amount of defects linked to the engine and transmission was very high. Many SU-12s never made it to the front lines. The flawed components had to be drastically redesigned. This is how the SU-15 was born, better known as the SU-76M. This was the Red Army's second most numerous AFV, beaten only by the T-34. This article covers the development and mass production of the SU-76M from the summer of 1943 to the spring of 1945.

T-34-85 Reliability, 1945

The service life of the T-34 tank continued to increase throughout the war. The engine could be expected to put out 250 hours of service by 1945, with individual drivers able to get to 300. These were not individual occurrences, as the 2nd Guards Tank Army's experience shows.

Lesson Plan

"March 20th, 1945

Syllabus for technical preparation of crews for usage of tanks and SPGs in spring-summer conditions

Objective: to teach the main rules of  moving over to using tanks and SPGs in the spring and summer and learn the specifics of using tanks and SPGs in the spring and summer.

Time allotted: 12 hours, one hour per day

Location: in classrooms and in vehicles

Training conducted by: technical deputy commanders of companies and battalions

Light SPGs with Big Guns

The SU-76M SPG, armed with the ZIS-3 76 mm gun, was the second most numerous vehicle in the Red Army. This gun was one of Grabin's best, and had very respectable characteristics. Nevertheless, the idea of installing a more powerful gun was persistent, and some variants, such as the SU-85B, came close to entering production. However, the Red Army never received its domestic Marder.

Prospective SPGs

"April 14th 1944

Confirmed: Chief of the GBTU USA, Major General of the Tank Engineering Service, Alymov

Plan of the 3rd Department of the GBTU USA for April-May 1944

Work	Executor	Due date
Controlling the completion of 100 mm D-10S gun installation into the SU-100 at factory #9 and the Uralmash factory.	Konev	May 1st, 1944
Organizing and performing large scale trials of the SU-100 from the first batch.	Konev	June 1st, 1944
Taking part in SU-152M trials with an OBM-143 gun and giving conclusions.	Ryabtsev	May 1st, 1944
Controlling the installation of and participation in trials of the 122 mm high power gun into the ISU. Giving conclusions.	Ryabtsev	May 15th, 1944
Controlling the production and testing of the 85 mm high power gun.	Konev	June 1st, 1944
Organizing and execution of trials of the SU-85 (GAZ). Giving conclusions.	Volgushev	May 15th, 1944
Controlling experimental work at factory #38:
·         Testing the installation of the 122 mm howitzer into the SU-76M	Afanasenkov	May 15th, 1944
·         Correction of defects of the SU-37 discovered during proving grounds trials.	Vasilevskiy	May 1st, 1944
·         Organization and execution of SU-37 trials after the prototype is improved. Giving conclusions.	Vasilevskiy, Volgushev	May 20th, 1944
Organization and execution of proving grounds trials of the SU-37 produced by factory #40. Giving conclusions.	Vasilevskiy, Volgushev	May 15th, 1944

Via Yuri Pasholok.

SU-57

"Decree of the Committee of Defense #___
__ September 1944
Moscow

Contents: acceptance of the SU-57 57 mm SPG

1. Accept the 57 mm SPG produced on the chassis of the SU-76M SPG into service with anti-tank artillery regiments. Give it the name "57 mm SU-57 SPG model 1944".

Winding Down

"To comrade V. Molotov

In accordance with your decree on May 15th, 1943, on the letter from GAU Chief comrade Yakovlev regarding reducing the supply of tank guns for SU-122 and SU-76 SPGs in the second quarter of 1943, I report the following:

The GAU (comrade Yakovlev) asks to reduce the quota for the second quarter compared to what was approved by the GOKO #3292 on May 6th, 1943, for production of the SU-76, SU-122, and KV-8S:

• 76 mm ZIS-3 divisional guns: from 350 to 250
• 122 mm M-30 mod. 1938 howitzers: from 400 to 340

Cancel the order for 30 45 mm guns with the ZIS-5 elevation mechanism completely.

Regarding the reduction of 122 mm howitzers, comrade Yakovlev refers to the closeness of factory #9 and the Uralmash factory, for which it is satisfactory to have a two-week buffer of howitzers, no more than 65 units, but the factory does not have that many.

The People's Commissar of Tank Production (comrade Zaltsmann) does not disagree with comrade Yakovlev's proposal.

The GBTU (comrade Afonin) disagrees only with the reduction of M-30 howitzer supplies to Uralmash, as the reserve at Uralmash as of May 1st is only 12 units. Given that the quota for SU-122 SPGs in the second quarter of 1943 is 315, the reduction of howitzer supplies to 340 is excessive, especially since it does not fill the GAU's reserve for two weeks of production in the amount of 65 units.

I consider it reasonable to accept the proposal of comrade Yakovlev, with the exception of maintaining the amount of M-30 howitzers at 400 units.

E. Kruglov."

CAMD RF 38-11355-1743 p. 161

Far East Variety

As I've written before, the tank fleet of the Far East Front was rather heterogeneous. Large amounts of T-26 and BT tanks were preserved there, since there was little for them to do in Europe. When the war moved over to the Far East, these tanks were ready to spring into action.

"Report on the materiel of the Armoured and Mechanized Forces of the 1st Red Banner Army as of August 8th, 1945

Unit	Authorized strength						Actual strength
	KV	T-34	BT-7	T-26	ISU-152	SU-76	KV	T-34	BT-7	T-26	ISU-152	SU-76
75th Tank Brigade	-	86	-	-	-	-	-	43	-	46	-	-
77th Tank Brigade	-	86-	-	-	-	-	-	42	42	-	-	-
257th Tank Brigade	-	86-	-	-	-	-	-	40	-	46	-	-
48th Independent Tank Regiment	21	-	-	-	-	-	21	-	-	-	-	-
335th Heavy SPG Regiment	-	-	-	-	21	-	-	-	-	-	21	-
338th Heavy SPG Regiment	-	-	-	-	21	-	-	-	-	-	21	-
339th Heavy SPG Regiment	-	-	-	-	21	-	-	-	-	-	21	-
455th SPG Squadron	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-	-	-	-	13
456th SPG Squadron	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-	-	-	-	13
457th SPG Squadron	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-	-	-	-	13
459th SPG Squadron	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-	-	-	-	13
460th SPG Squadron	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-	-	-	-	13
466th SPG Squadron	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-	-	-	-	13
Total	21	258	-	-	63	78	21	125	42	92	63	78

Conclusions:

1. The army's units are fully equipped with armoured vehicles.
2. Instead of the authorized amounts of T-34 tanks, the tank brigades are half full of obsolete T-26 and BT-7 light tanks.
3. The 48th Independent Tank Regiment's KV tanks require medium repairs and cannot participate in the operation."

Interestingly enough, at least one of these BT-7 tanks was a refurbished tank equipped with applique armour.

Via Valeriy Lisyutin.