Experience in the Far East

Soviet tanks and SPGs during the Battle of Lake Hasan and its impact on Soviet tank development

Battle is the main stimulus for development of tank armament and protection. No matter how much technology evolves during peace, only war will give a proper measure of its effectiveness. A conflict where tanks was used could be analyzed to show where to go from here. Even small conflicts like the Rif War yielded valuable experience for its combatants.

T-26 crews near Lake Hasan, summer 1938.

Soviet tanks first saw battle in the fall of 1929 during the East China Railroad Conflict. The experience gained there was minimal. Spain was a much better lesson, as Soviet T-26 and BT tanks were used fairly intensively. Experience in using the T-26 in late 1936 and early 1937 in Spain gave a lot of material for Soviet tank designers. Other local conflicts were also valuable. For instance, the events at Lake Hasan that erupted 85 years ago were the first time where the Red Army used its tanks and SPGs against a peer enemy.

Single Hatch for Tank Turrets

The interwar period was a time of new technical solutions, and tanks were no exception. Even though tank development was allocated a limited budget, experiments never stopped. The budgets began to swell in the early 1930s, which coincided with a rapid growth of tank characteristics. Various improvements were implemented, including those that improved the crew's working conditions. 

T-34 in Crimea, 1944. Factory #112 was the last to keep the turret with a single hatch in production. One of their tanks can be seen in the foreground.

One of the characteristic features of Soviet tanks and armoured cars in the late 1930s was the conical turret that came to replace the earlier cylindrical shape. Some vehicles also received a single hatch for their two-man turret. The T-34 tank was the most famous vehicle with this solution. This idea was dropped only to resurface in post-war designs. Let us discuss why this hatch appeared in the first place and why it disappeared.

Copper Horns

The need for communications equipment in armoured vehicles became clear soon after their creation. Semaphores and signal flags were just a half measure. It was necessary to equip tanks with radios, but the road to equipping even a part of them was a long one. The modern system with a radio in the turret and a whip antenna was also far from the initial norm. There were many alternative visions of how a tank radio antenna should look.

The rail antenna was a characteristic feature of Soviet tanks in the 1930s.

 

Rail antennas became one of the characteristic features of Soviet tanks in the interwar years. "Horns" around the turret became a calling card of this generation of tanks. Few people stop to consider where such a strange antenna came from and how it works, especially since their age was brief. They were no longer used by Soviet industry after 1939, as opposed to the nation that came up with them originally.

Shermans in "August Storm"

In Soviet historiography, the Soviet-Japanese War of 1945 is overshadowed by grandiose operations against Berlin and Vienna earlier that year. However, Western historians pay close attention to this campaign and debates on whether it was the A-bombs or the Soviet invasion that forced the Japanese to surrender rage on to this day. Famous historian David Glantz even invented a grandiose name for this operation: August Storm. The Red Army's advance was indeed lightning fast, in part thanks to foreign vehicles. This included the M4A2(76)W HVSS, the most advanced Sherman variant sent to the USSR.

Clouds gather

Stalin promised to enter the war against Japan within three months of Germany's defeat at the Yalta conference in February of 1945. Colonel-General Alfred Yodl signed an order for unconditional capitulation of all German forces on May 7th, 1945, coming into effect at 23:01 on May 8th. This kicked off the countdown for a Soviet offensive against Japan. The Red Army had three months to move an enormous force to the other side of an equally enormous country.

Concentration of the 6th Guards Tank Army in the vicinity of Tamsagbulag. The army included the 9th Guards Mechanized Corps that used Sherman tanks.

The 6th Guards Tank Army was one of the units that was destined to transfer to the far east. On June 26th, 1945, the unit was reallocated to the Transbaikal Front. It would have to cover a distance of 9000 km to cross from Czechoslovakia to Choibalsan. 88 trains of 60 cars each were allocated for this journey. The full transfer took 30 days, but the first elements began to form up by July 17th. New tanks awaited them there: 100 M4A2(76)W including the latest tanks with HVSS suspensions. These tanks were described in documents as "M4A2 with wide tracks". The 46th Guards Tank Brigade was fully equipped with these vehicles. One company from each of the tank regiments of the 18th, 30th, and 31st Guards Mechanized Brigades that made up the 9th Guards Mechanized Corps also received new tanks.

From Choibalsan, the tanks would make a 300 km march to Tamsagbulag, where the army would prepare for the upcoming offensive. This march took place in extreme conditions. The temperature reached 45 C during the day, as a result of which marches took place only at night to avoid overheating the engines and running gear. This also helped hide the tanks from air reconnaissance, as there was nowhere to conceal them in the desert. The army's documents describe the M4A2 as less sensitive to hot weather than the T-34-85. The American tanks could cover more ground every day, but at the cost of increased fuel consumption. The Shermans normally burned 40 kg of fuel per hour, but this went up to 60 kg in Mongolia. Each tank could only run 90-100 km before refuelling instead of 150 km. The T-34-85 burned only 26 kg of fuel per hour.

M4A2(76)W HVSS, the newest tanks of the 9th Guards Mechanized Corps.

The Last of Stalin's Robots

Unfortunately, museums frequently mislabel their own exhibits. The biggest problem with that is an incorrect information from a museum label is going to propagate. For example, Kubinka seriously thought that they had two BA-6 armoured cars, even though one was actually a BA-3M. The collection of the Patriot Park museum which used to be displayed at Kubinka has many downright unique exhibits, some of which were also misidentified. For example, this tank is called OT-130, but that is not the case.

TT-26 tank as displayed today.

In reality, the tank currently displayed in the pavilion depicting the war against Japan is the only surviving TT-26 teletank. This tank was once the subject of Yuri Pasholok's volunteer painting team. Let us tell the tale of this unique tank with a unique combat history.

Tanks in Snow 1941-42

Winter is a difficult time for any kind of vehicle, including tanks. Since the Russian winter is long, the USSR paid a lot of attention to how tanks put up with it. This applied in full to mobility in winter. Driving through deep snow banks was a mandatory part of testing every armoured vehicle starting with the MS-1. The MS-1 showed insufficient traction in snow, which is a part of the reason why the "Eagle's Claw" track was introduced. Winter tests of the Vickers Mk.E tank in the USSR were also a key factor in accepting the tank into production. 

T-34 tanks were often the only Soviet tanks that could move outside of roads in winter.

Ever-Changing Tank Nomenclature

One of the topics that resurfaces in arguments about armoured vehicles is classification. It wouldn’t be so bad if people far from the science of armoured vehicles made mistakes, but quite notable historians also throw fuel on the fire. The T-28 is one of the most misunderstood vehicles. There is a certain group of people who draw modernisations onto the T-28 that would allegedly make it a suitable replacement for the T-34. After all, both have a 76 mm gun, similar weight, two tracks, basically the same thing! The fact that the T-34 was built to replace the BT doesn’t bother them, neither does the fact that it was the SMK that was first supposed to replace the T-28 and then the KV. The T-28 tank was included in heavy tank brigades. This seems like a very strange fact if one is not familiar with the Red Army’s system of classifications. Similar mistakes are made regarding tanks of other nations. For instance, the Panther is often called a heavy tank, but it’s enough to look at where these tanks went and what vehicles they replaced. Today we will cover the Soviet tank classifications, touching foreign vehicles a little for context. Keep in mind that the same names can mean different things in different times.

Classification of tanks in the Red Army. Bronevoye Delo magazine, March 1921.

A 16 ton maneuver tank designed by the GUVP. No one ever called this tank "medium".

The Main Soviet Pre-War Tank

There were many cases in tank building history where development programs were restarted almost from scratch. This happened with Soviet tank development at the end of the 1920s and start of the 1930s. By the end of the 20s, the USSR composed requirements for armoured vehicles and created their own tanks. The first such vehicle was the T-18 (MS-1) small support tank accepted into service on July 6th, 1927. This tank was a grand achievement for Soviet industry. It was a very modern tank for the mid-20s and, most importantly, it was mass produced. It was a challenge, but production was fully set up by 1930. The problem was that the tank was already obsolete by then. The Red Army fully understood this. The first solution was to modernise the T-18, but the idea of finding a suitable replacement abroad was also raised.

T-26 tank on display, February 23rd, 2021

Two Turrets from Leningrad

The creation of the two-turreted T-26 tank

The most famous Soviet tanks of the interbellum era at BT light tanks. Their high mobility, convertible drive feature, and a certain photogenic quality made them the best known Soviet tank series. One popular theory classified the BT tanks as "highway aggressor tanks" that indicated the offensive nature of the Red Army and popularized the idea that the BT tanks were the Red Army's main tanks. This is only an indicator of how wrong that theory is.

T-26 tanks armed with either only machine guns or both a cannon and a machine gun on parade in Moscow.

Regimental Support Gun

The history of vehicles and weapons developed and produced in Leningrad in the summer of 1941 and during the blockade is an interesting topic for researchers. One of the most interesting parts are the improvised armoured cars, guns, and SPGs. Some of them are widely known, but others remain in obscurity. One such vehicle that became the foundation of the blockade SU-26 SPG will be covered in this article.

Starshina Commanders

 "In 1941 order #0433 signed by then Deputy People's Commissar of Defense comrade Fedorenko ordered the assignment of Lieutenants and Junior Lieutenants as the commanders of medium and light gun tanks.

Based on this order, commanders of T-26 and BT tanks also have to be officers.

Considering the shortage of officers and less demanding training for commanders of T-26 and BT tanks compared to modern vehicles, I consider it possible and reasonable to appoint well prepared troops with the rank of Starshina who have a lot of experience in these tanks.

I ask for your decision.

Attached: order of the People's Commissar of Defense.

Deputy Commander of Armoured and Motorized Forces of the Red Army, Colonel-General of the Tank Forces, B. Korobkov

Member of the Military Council of the Armoured and Motorized Forces of the Red Army, Colonel-General of the Tank Forces, N. Biryukov"

CAMD RF F.38 Op.11355 D.1518 L.35
Printed in Glavnoye Bronetankovoye Upravleniye Lyudi, Sobytiya, Fakty v dokumentakh, 1944-1945 p.421

Video: Tanks in Snow, Winter 1941

It's winter again, and with it comes a sequel to my Tanks in Snow video. This time I narrow the scope a little bit and talk about how tanks in the Red Army performed in the winter of 1941-42, specifically about the T-26, T-60, Valentine, and Matilda tanks.

The Zenith of AA Machine Guns

The USSR began working on the issues of protecting armoured vehicles from air attack in the early 1930s. The first plans were to create specialized self propelled anti-aircraft guns, but work on these topics did not pan out. Instead, the Red Army received tanks with AA machine gun mounts. This mount was developed at experimental factory #185. It was accepted into service as the P-40 in 1935 and entered production a year later. M.A. Shufrin was the lead engineer on this project. Ironically, his initials were rarely seen in association with factory #185, even though this was one of the few products of factory #185 that truly saw widespread use. Mass production of the mount began in 1937. Variants were installed on the T-26, BT-7, T-28, and T-35. At its inception it was the best anti-aircraft gun mount in existence. It allowed the DT machine gun installed on it to rotate a full 360 degrees. The DT machine gun was equipped with AA sights.

The KV-1 was the only new generation Soviet tank equipped with an AA machine gun, although it was not used frequently.

Soviet Camo that Came Too Late

The appearance of tanks on the battlefield in September of 1916 quickly forced many to reconsider some preconceived notions about their use. The first to make changes were the British, who pioneered the concept on the battlefield. The pair of wheels that aided in turning the tank was quickly dropped. There were two other important changes: one was the use of fascines and logs for crossing obstacles, the second was camouflage. WWI marked a turning point in the use of camouflage. Previously uniforms were bright and colourful, but now being hidden was very important. Camouflage was used in uniforms, artillery, and military vehicles. This did not mean that camouflage would entirely displace single tone paint schemes, but tanks were repainted soon after they were involved in their first battles. The use of camouflage decreased after the end of WWI. Most major tank building nations dropped the idea of widespread camouflage, with the exception of the French, who kept on using it. The Germans also returned to three colour camo in the late 1920s. A second wave of camouflage swept through all nations in the mid-1930s. Some tanks remained in camouflage at the start of WWII, but the Germans dropped it, moving from Feldgrau Nr.3 (don't be misled, this is actually a shade of olive green) and then black-gray RAL 70121 as the base coat.

A T-28 tank with three colour camouflage developed for the Middle Asian Military District, summer of 1939.

Winter Camo

 "GABTU Scientific Research Proving Grounds

Approved:
Proving Grounds Chief Colonel Romanov, December 15th, 1941

Approved
Proving Grounds Commissar, Regimental Commissar Dolgov, December 16th, 1941

Conclusions regarding experimental winter camouflage of armoured vehicles

Introduction

On orders from the GABTU, T-34, T-50, BT, T-26, and T-40 tanks were painted in winter camouflage patterns between September 19th and October 2nd, 1941. The trials were performed at the GABTU proving grounds.

The goal of the trials was to:

1. Establish the pattern that was the most effective at breaking up the outline and shape of the tanks.
2. Establish the shade of colours that blend together with the surroundings in winter.
3. Develop a formula for paint that is sufficiently resilient and easy to produce.

After the pattern, colour, and formula are selected, the proving grounds will apply it to samples of all vehicles used by the Red Army. After experimental camouflage is applied, an instruction manual on winter painting will be composed and requirements will be distributed to factories.

Light Turretless Artillery Tank

The first work on SPGs began in the USSR in the 1920s. They began as just projects, but prototypes began appearing in the early 1930s. The first such vehicles were built in 1931, generally light ones. Even though the results were negative, this was not a complete failure. Soviet SPGs were produced in series, although small ones, and some of them still saw battle. This also applies to the "artillery tank", the AT-1. Much was expected of it, and the vehicle was indeed quite decent, but it had one serious issue: the AT-1 ended up without a gun.

Chief Designer of the 1930s

When one lists Soviet tank designers, M.I. Koshkin is usually remembered first as one of the main authors of the T-34. He is usually followed by A.A. Morozov, who succeeded Koshkin as the Chief Designer of factory #183 in Kharkov and in Nizhniy Tagil after the evacuation. Zh.Ya. Kotin, the author of many tanks from the KV-1 to the IS-2, also ranks highly. N.A. Astrov, the creator of the T-40, T-60, T-70, and other light vehicles is slightly less famous. However, if one explores an earlier period of Soviet tank building, one will see many other much less known names. Their obscurity is largely due to their complicated history.

One such history belongs to the main character of today's article, Semyon Aleksandrovich Ginzburg. He oversaw the creation of the most numerous and most successful Soviet tanks of the interbellum era: the T-26, BT, T-28, and T-35. As the Chief Engineer at factory #185 he directed the creation of a number of tanks and SPGs. His designs include the T-50 light tank and SU-12 (SU-76) SPG, which played a fatal role in his career. Let us recall this man, whose contribution to Soviet tank building was truly immense. The war for his tanks began back in 1936 and finished in August of 1945 in the Far East.

Armoured Confusion: Start of the Great Patriotic War

One of the most popular topics of discussion in Soviet tank circles is their use in the Great Patriotic War. As strange as this may sound, the production and use of Soviet tanks during the war is not a very well studied topic. This is caused by shallow surface level research and resilience of "common knowledge", little of which overlaps with any facts. There are so many of these myths that it's impossible to cover them all in a single article. Let's examine only the first half of the Great Patriotic War and misconceptions linked to this period.

War Plans

The Red Army was undergoing a pretty radical reorganization in the summer of 1941. Fans of the theory that the USSR was about to attack Germany and Hitler merely delivered a preemptive strike will be disappointed to find out that not only did the Red Army not consider itself in any situation to fight a war in 1941, 1942 wasn't looking much better either. Compare the number of tanks on hand to the number of tanks required according to authorized strength.

Tank type	Authorized strength		On hand as of Jan 1st, 1941	% Authorized strength as of Jan 1st, 1941		Expected inventory as of Jan 1st, 1942	% Authorized strength as of Jan 1st, 1942
	Peacetime	Wartime		Peacetime	Wartime		Peacetime	Wartime
KV	2100	2100	243	11.5	11.5	1093	52	52
T-34	4200	4200	350	8.3	8.3	2850	67.8	67.8
BT	5487	8273	7752	141.5	93.7	7752	141.5	93.7
T-26	13,802	15,872	9987	72.3	62.9	9987	72.3	62.9
T-50						500
T-37/ T-38	2420	3681	3596	152	100	3596	182	116.7
T-40			100			800
Armoured cars	5298	6853	4461	84.2	65	6271	118	91.7

Total as of January 1st, 1941: 22,530 tanks (of those 59 T-35 and 443 T-28), 4461 armoured cars

Via Yuri Pasholok

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.