Up-Armoured T-34s

"Changes and simplifications of the hull and turret

On November 25th, 1941, the factory moved to a simplified hull. The mechanical cutting of the rabbets was simplified. The stamping of the lower rear plate (part 34.29.007) was also simplified. The full album of bluprints and technical requirements were sent out in the first few days of February.

According to the decree of the Committee of Defense the factory should have began building tanks with applique armour on the hulls and turrets by January 15th, 1942. In practice the first hull with applique armour was produced on February 25th, and the first turret on February 21st. In total there were 80 hulls and 109 turrets built with applique armour.

Situational Awareness

"Instructions for tank watchers

1. Tank watchers are selected from each battery to warn about the approach of tanks. They are placed in important directions no closer than 800-1000 meters to their positions.
   The tank watchers are subordinate to the battery commander and battery duty officer. 

British Demo

By the summer of 1941 the British were still struggling to equip their army with modern anti-tank weapons in the face of a German invasion, which was considered all but a certainty. This rush resulted in a number of weapons, from more conventional anti-tank cannons to rifle grenades and bombards. The comparison of the weapons' effectiveness is fairly predictable.

Tanks Review

"Exchange of experience in using tank weapons in the Patriotic War

The use of tanks in battle, especially in the winter offensive of 1943, showed several peculiarities of using tanks in battle, their advantages and disadvantages.

1. Typical distances for firing from a T-34 tank from standstill in defense or ambush is 1000 meters. When firing on the move or from short stops during offensive action the distance is the same.
   The practical rate of fire of the 45 mm gun is 3-4 RPM. For the DT it is one disk (63 rounds) per minute. From the 76 mm gun it is 16-17 RPM. In a cohesive crew the radio operator can help hand ammunition into the turret without being distracted from his work.
   

Long Awaited Tank Destroyer

History often moves in a spiral. The story of Soviet medium SPGs illustrates this fact well. In the summer of 1940, when development of SPGs on the T-34 chassis began, a tank destroyer was one of them. In the spring of 1942, the concept of the SPG changed, and the SU-122 was born. However, in May of 1943 a mobile means of defeating enemy tanks in the medium weight category was needed. On August 8th, 1943, more than three years after the request for a medium tank destroyer came through, the SU-85 was finally accepted into service with the Red Army. How well did Soviet industry deal with the vehicle that came to replace the SU-122, and how did it perform the tasks given to it on the battlefield?

Staples

Checking for tiny inaccuracies to detect forged documents is a pretty common phenomenon. Soviet counterintelligence had it down to an art. Forged documents confiscated from captured spies were analyzed for more signs to be used in the future.

"Party membership booklet: bright red cover with barely noticeable stripes. Rough and blurry font. The staples are made from stainless steel. The photo is printed on glossy paper."

Industrial Accident

"Unscheduled report of an extraordinary event

Unit: GBTU Scientific Research Proving Grounds

Region: MVO

Event: wound during trials

Time: 10:00 August 8th, 1944

Location: shooting range of the NIBT Proving Grounds, Kubinka station, Western Railroad

Victims:

Rank and position	Name	Year of birth	Nationality	Education	Social status	Party affiliation	Place of birth	Nature of wound
Sergeant Loader	Toldykin, Fedor Pavlovich	1924	Russian	7 grades	Kolkhoz farmer	VLKSM	Sorochkinsk, Chkalov oblast	Ragged forehead wound
Sr. Sergeant Gunner	Butorov, Ilya Innokentivich	1922	Russian	5 grades	Worker	VLKSM	Bysherovo, Buryat Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic	Minor head bruise

Description of the event:

On August 8th, 1944, at 10:00 when testing the effect of the D-25 122 mm gun (#266-44) installed on an experimental ISU-122 #249 against armoured hulls, the gun fired unexpectedly when loaded during the fourth shot, as a result of which the recoil of the gun wounded the loader Sergeant Toldykin (ragged forehead wound) and gunner Senior Sergeant Butorov, who received a minor bruise on the forehead."

CAMD RF 81-12038-312 p.373

Detailed Trials

"Approved by the Commander of Artillery of the 38th Army, Major-General of Artillery Likhachev

June 31st, 1944

Plan of firing trials demonstrating penetration ability against enemy T-4 and Panther tanks held by the 9th Guards Independent Kiev Order of Lenin Order of the Red Banner Tank Destroyer Artillery Brigade of the Supreme Command Reserve, as an element of the 38th Army

Held on June 4th, 5th, and 6th, 1944

Objective of the firing trials demonstration:

1. To illustrate to the NCO and private ranks the effectiveness of various types of shells fired from domestic weapons against enemy tanks.
2. To establish the penetration of weapons and the best distance from which to fire.
3. To inspire confidence in the power of our artillery against tanks.
4. To demonstrate the weak points of enemy tanks.
5. The demonstrate the effectiveness of dense fire of the small arms of an anti-tank battery against enemy submachinegunners that are advancing on the observation post.

Experimental Work at Factory #183 March 1941

"To the Chief of the 3rd Department of the BTU, Military Engineer 1st Class comrade Afonin

Summary report of experimental work performed at factory #183 in March 1941

1. Trials of cooling fans: three types of cooling fans entered trials.
1. 1st variant: instead of blade supports special ribs were used. A vehicle with this fan travelled for 800 km. Trials will continue in April.
2. 2nd variant differs from the production type only in the riveted rim that is the same as the BT-7M type. A vehicle with this fan travelled for 400 km. rials will continue in April.
3. 3rd variant: production fan attached to the flywheel with a friction clutch to slip in cases of rapid changes of RPM in the driveshaft. A vehicle with this fan travelled for 80 km. Trials will continue in April.
2. Trials of the constant mesh gearbox were completed. This gearbox shows no advantages over the production type, and the top speed in 4th gear dropped by 5 kph, which is not desirable. There were also a number of defects found in several parts. It is pointless to implement this design into production.
3. New types of cast driver's hatches with different types of thermal treatment were tested by fire. One type showed good results in terms of ballistic resistance. The decision to put it into production is being made by the BTU.
4. Trials of a new type of turret ring with a different bearing runner to tighten tolerances. Trials showed that tolerances are tighter, but the turret can jam. Work on other variants is being performed.
5. 8 types of air cleaners were produced. One of the types showed the best results (95% clearance) and was sent to Leningrad for government trials.
6. Reinforced Hadfield steel tracks were produced and tested. The assembled tracks made it to 2500 km after which the pin eyes were severely worn and the tracks began to break, the same thing as with production tracks.
7. Major modernization of the T-34: the model is complete. The design bureau is producing blueprints for the experimental design.

Military Representative of the GABTU, Military Engineer 3rd Class, Alekseev"

CAMD RF 38-11355-41 pp.306-307

A Barrel Too Long

Rapid growth in power of tank and SPG guns continued throughout WWII. Designers of some nations achieved the increase in firepower through a harmonious increase of gun caliber and barrel length. Other schools of design preferred to keep the caliber, but significantly lengthen the gun. The second approach was very common for German armoured vehicles. This decision had both positives and negatives. It turned out to be not so simple to install long guns on medium tanks. The Panzer IV/70 is a good example of this. An attempt to create a more powerful variant of the Jagdpanzer IV gave the tank destroyer both new abilities and serious problems.