World of Tanks History Section: Stonne, 1940

In 1940, France, a European superpower, was crushed under the onslaught of German forces. The French signed a humiliating peace in Compiegne, in a train car. The city and train car were the same as where Germany signed their capitulation 22 years prior.

Anglophone historians, looking at 1940-1941, compare the rapid fall of France with the successful evacuation at Dunkirk, Battle of Britain, and the North Africa campaign. They tend to not shy away from the conclusion that the French army was bad and that they fought poorly.

However, as one German officer said, he will never forget three battles: Stonne, Stalingrad, and Monte-Cassino. Stonne was in fact in France, the same France that "didn't know how to fight".

A mountain in a torrent

One of the most terrifying tank attacks came at the French in May of 1940 from where they least expected it. Heinz Guderian's tanks passed the wooded mountains of the Ardennes. Crushing an unfortunate French division in their path, "Fast Heinz" made it to the Meuse river. A portion of the forces crossed the river, engineers quickly built a bridge for vehicles, and the foothold was expanded the next morning. German divisions rushed towards the heights south of the French city of Sedan, towards the small village of Stonne.

At dawn on May 15th, a battalion from the German division Grossdeutschland with support from tanks moved to attack the village. The French defenses consisted of infantry, a handful of armoured cars, and 25 mm AT guns. These guns welcomed the Germans by leaving two PzIVs on the battlefield. The more agile PzIIs managed to break through into the village. German infantry, initially chased off with machinegun fire, restored their spirits and fortified on the outskirts of the village. A large German force flanked the village. The French, threatened with encirclement, retreated, leaving behind their armoured cars. The Germans tried to follow, but that cost them two more tanks. Germany won the first round.

Having received reports of the German attack, the French command sent 15 Hotchkiss H39 tanks to Stonne. The description of this counterattack could apply to any battle of the Red Army in the first months of the Great Patriotic War: as soon as the Germans opened fire at the infantry, it went prone and refused to follow the tanks, despite the commander's best efforts. The result of the tank attack was the same: the Germans held out, and the French lost several tanks.

By this time, Stonne grew from a small village to a key point on the map. Ten more tanks were moving towards it: the armoured colossus that was the B1 bis.

Day of fire and metal

Heavy B1 bis tanks were similar to British "rhombuses": their tracks went all the way around the hull, an archaic solution for the start of the 1940s. However, the thick armour and powerful armament, a 75 mm howitzer and 47 mm gun, made the French heavyweight the best tank in its class.

According to tradition, each B1 bis had a personal name along with a serial number. For instance, Lieutenant Caraveo's tank was called Tulal, after a city in Morocco.

May 15th was one continuous battle for Stonne. The village changed hands several times. French infantry continued to show little enthusiasm when supporting its armoured forces. Without support, even the most powerful tank is vulnerable. After two attacks, only 3 B1s remained in action.

Having gathered their forces and pulled up a few Hotchkisses and FCM 36es, the French managed to knock the Germans out of Stonne by noon. The Germans responded with an artillery barrage and a dive bomber strike, turning the village into ruins. In the evening, the Germans were left holding Stonne.

Night fell. The opponents gathered their strength and called up reinforcements. Nobody doubted that there was more to come. The morning was going to be hellish.

Tragic heroism

Before dawn, Stonne was worked over by French artillery. After the barrage, the French attacked again. This time, 14 B1 bis tanks drove into battle.

Famous French tanker, Captain Pierre Billotte, commanded a tank named Eure in this battle. On one of Stonne's streets, he met with a column of German tanks. He ordered the 75 mm gun to destroy the head tank, methodically shot up one tank after another, then moved on. The German guns were not powerful enough to cause his tank any harm. A second column encountered by Eure met the same fate. By the end of the day, Billotte had 13 tanks and 2 AT guns to his name. After the battle, his tank had nearly 150 dents from enemy shells. There were no penetrations.

On the next day, only two tanks, Tunis and Mistral, turned 50 German trucks, tractors, and APCs, several light tanks and AT guns into scrap metal in only half an hour.

The battle for Stonne continued for another week, but the B1s did not participate. They were moved to other parts of the front. However, one cannot leave out the battle of a tank called Jeanne D'Arc on May 28th. It lost its 75 mm howitzer, but kept fighting with machineguns and tracks. Two more hits jammed the turret and damaged observation devices. The tank was hit 90 times, but only a shell from an 88 mm AA gun finally stopped it. The crew managed to leave the tank and return to their lines.

Any army could be proud of tankers like these. It is not their fault that victory requires more than heroism, but cooperation, logistics, tactics, and many other components.

Original article available here.

8,8 cm L/100 Pak

The Germans considered that the 130 caliber long 8.8 cm anti-tank gun might be a tad too long, so Krupp designed a slightly smaller weapon.

Note that this is a Pak, not a KwK. Players of World of Tanks will be disappointed to learn that no E-50s were going to be driving around with this monstrosity plugged into them, especially since, as Yuri Pasholok writes, the project was cancelled in 1943 when the superheavy Soviet tanks it was designed to fight failed to materialize.

Impressive statistics! The extra barrel length increased the penetration of the AP shell to 251 mm (estimated with DeMarre formula using the KwK 43 as a reference, by German penetration standards). 

Via Yuri Pasholok

Fiery Ram

Ramming a tank while on fire? That's old news. The real trick is doing that, and then continuing to fight.

"Award Order

1. Name: Sorokin, Georgiy Aleksandrovich
2. Rank: Junior Lieutenant
3. Position, unit: T-34-85 commander, 1st Tank Battalion, 51st Uman Order of the Red Banner Tank Brigade
   is nominated for title of Hero of the Soviet Union.
4. Year of birth: June 20th, 1924
5. Nationality: Russian
6. Party affiliation: none
7. Participation in the civil war and subsequent actions in defense of the USSR, Patriotic War: January 27th, 1944 to June 16th, 1944 on the 2nd Ukrainian Front, 1st Belorussian Front since June 20th, 1944
8. Wounds and concussions in the Patriotic War: heavily wounded on August 3rd, 1944, near Volomin
9. In the Red Army since: July 26th, 1942
10. Recruited by: Armavir recruitment office, Krasnodar krai
11. Previous awards: none

Brief and specific description of heroism or achievements: in battles for the Socialist Motherland, comrade Sorokin displayed exceptional heroism, bravery, and courage. On August 3rd, 1944, when deflecting an enemy attack near Garna station, he destroyed 4 enemy tanks, 20 APCs, and up to 100 soldiers and officers. Wounded, in a burning tank, he rammed an enemy tank. When wounded, he did not leave the battlefield, but jumped out of his burning tank and moved to another tank, continuing to destroy the enemy. 

Comrade Sorokin is worthy of the title of Hero of the Soviet Union."

CAMD RF 33-793756-45

Sales Pitch

"British Military Mission in the USSR
January 15th, 1945

To Major-General Kutuzov
People's Commissariat of Defense
Moscow

In response to your letter from December 13th

I have been told that the Soviet Trade Delegation in London is making a request for a sample of the Challenger tank (A30). Because of this, I was instructed to send you a brief description of the tank, provided below:

"Challenger" tank, A30

This is an armoured Cromwell type tank with a depressing 17-pounder gun and two machineguns. It weighs about 32.5 tons and has a maximum speed of 40 kph. The front armour is 63 mm. The Challenger is equipped with a Rolls Royce 600 hp engine, giving it 18.4 hp/ton.

R.N. Brinkman
Colonel, General Staff
Head of the Army Section"

CAMD RF 38-11355-2747

The purchase, however, was never made.

More Art

I've previously shown examples of some very pretty report covers, but the cover for the 259th Tank Brigade combat journal blows them out of the water.

Browning Defects

"To Armoured Forces Chief, Major-General Solomatin
April 6th, 1942

I report to you that the American "Browning" machineguns that have arrived exhibited a large amount of defects and misfires during trials.

1. When firing at full auto, the bolt carrier breaks in the place where there are slots for the wedge to lock. The metal around the break crumbles. Upon careful investigation, it was discovered that the carrier is made up of low quality (brittle) metal and cannot bear the pressure caused by gases forming in the chamber when the gunpowder charge burns. The design of the bolt carrier is also insufficiently robust. Upon recoil, the full force of the blow hits the locking wedge of the bolt carrier, but since the bolt carrier is insufficiently robust and made from brittle metal, it breaks. In total, 4 breakdowns of the carrier occurred in the 416th Independent Battalion, in the following machineguns:
1. Machinegun #46173, discovered on February 12th, 1942, while removing factory grease.
2. Machinegun #126514, discovered during shooting on March 22nd, 1942. The machinegun shot 185 times.
3. Machinegun #240565, discovered during shooting on April 1st of this year. The machinegun shot five (5) times.
4. Machinegun #238003, discovered during shooting on April 4th of this year. The machinegun shot two (2) times.
5. Machinegun #15571. The extractor head broke off due to a weak design. The head has an opening for a directing rod, which weakens it. The metal is also poorly hardened. The same machinegun had a broken case mount. When the extractor is broken, it is lowered more than usual, and when the bolt moved forward it hits the case mount and breaks it.
2. Springs deform due to low quality of materials and poor hardening.
3. The sear nose spring broke due to a weak design.
4. The trigger plunger breaks due to a weak design (the thread is carved too deeply).
5. There are frequent jams due to splitting cases."

CAMD RF 38-11599-815

Fire Protection

While a tank's crew might feel safe inside its armour, the battlefield is full of dangers that could still kill them. Even if an enemy AP shell does not kill the crew, the fire that erupts as a result of the hit might. In order to give the crew an increased chance at survival, fire protection suits were developed.

24. Trials of fire protection suits made from TOZ fabric.

This specific design wasn't perfect, but was promising.

"As a result of trials of fire protection suits made from TOZ fabric on chiffon, calico, cotton, and regular moleskine fabric, it was determined that suits using chiffon and calico cannot be used due to their poor toughness, but cotton and moleskine fabric could be used by tank crews after removal of discovered defects and fire resistance trials."

CAMD RF 38-11355-2458

Tiger Rammer

"Award Order:

1. Name: Timofeev Andrey Aleksandrovich
2. Rank: Sergeant
3. Position, unit: Mechanic-driver of a T-34 tank, 3rd Tank Battalion, 12th Guards Tank Brigade
   is nominated for the title of Hero of the Soviet Union.
4. Year of birth: 1918
5. Nationality: Russian
6. Party affiliation: none
7. Participation in the civil war and subsequent actions in the defense of the Soviet Union and in the Patriotic War: 1st Ukrainian Front since December 6th, 1943.
8. Wounds and concussions in the Patriotic War: died on December 7th, 1943
9. In the Red Army since: May 8th, 1943
10. Recruited by: Krasnaya Presnya recruitment office, Moscow
11. Prior awards: none

Brief and specific description of personal heroism or achievement: Sergeant Timofeev, a mechanic-driver of a T-34 tank, entered battle against a numerically superior opponent at Zanki. Skilfully driving his tank, comrade Timofeev helped his commander destroy 4 PzIV tanks in a 1.5 hour battle while under strong tank and artillery fire. At a new line of defense, comrade Timofeev skilfully camouflaged his tank and corrected fire through his open hatch, resulting in two heavy Tiger tanks being knocked out. 

Deflecting enemy infantry and tank attacks, with no cover from his own infantry, the tank was surrounded by enemy tanks and infantry and set on fire. As the best son of the peoples and a patriot of our Motherland, Timofeev rammed an enemy Tiger tank with his burning tank. Upon collision, both tanks exploded. As a result of the battle, comrade Timofeev assisted in the destruction of 7 tanks, 3 of them Tigers.

Comrade Timofeev died the death of brave men. For exceptional bravery and courage displayed in battle, for skilful use of a tank in battle that destroyed 7 enemy tanks and up to 30 soldiers, comrade Timofeev is worthy of the government award of the title of Hero of the Soviet Union, posthumously.

Acting commander of the 12th Guards Tank Brigade, Guards Major Dudnev"

CAMD RF 33-793756-47

World of Tanks History Section: T-14 Armata

30 years ago, engineers from Nizhniy Tagil created a foundation for a new tank with Object 187 and Object 187A. The innovative but unfortunate Object 195 was then built in metal. What was the fruit of the labours of Ural engineers?

On the way to a breakthrough

Successful decisions in the 1960s allowed Soviet engineers to achieve a tank with a very tight layout. The tanks were compact, not very heavy, and had excellent protection. On the other hand, if the enemy shell did punch through the armour, it was nearly guaranteed that it would destroy components or kill the crew. The ammunition rack in the fighting compartment was especially worrying.

In the end of the 1980s, all major Soviet tank factories were working on new tanks. Engineers aimed to boost the firepower (including by means of increasing the gun caliber), increase protection, and automate the vehicles. Additionally, a new layout was necessary, as the classic layout was no longer sufficient for survivability on the battlefield.

Soviet engineers had a difficult task. They needed to develop an innovative solution to protect the crew and fighting compartment, separating them from the ammunition rack. Kharkov, Nizhniy Tagil, and Leningrad were working on this task. The Nizhniy Tagil project from Uralvagonzavod, Object 187A, was never built in metal, but was the basis of the experimental "Perfection-88" program. In 2000, the Object 195 vehicle was created based on that research, a predecessor for the T-14 tank built on the heavy universal tracked Armata platform.

What is the logic in creating a unified platform? Production of spare parts is simplified. It is easier to repair the tanks, easier to train the personnel. A unified platform allows for larger production runs, which reduces unit cost. Vehicles on the same chassis have more or less the same speed, which is important when marching. For instance, a bridgelayer should not lag behind MBTs, as it needs to arrive on the battlefield at the same time.

Armata's older brother

Object 195 built by Uralvagonzavod included two important novelties: an unmanned fighting compartment and an armoured capsule for the crew. However, the new was just the somewhat forgotten old, as there were attempts in the 1950s to separate the crew and armament into different modules, but only in a prototype. Similar work was conducted in the 1980s.

Object 195's capsule increased armour from all sides: sides, roof, front. The tankers were also separated by armour from the fighting compartment. The design was such that when the ammunition detonated, the blast wave would go everywhere but in the direction of the crew. This did not guarantee survival, but it increased the odds by orders of magnitude.

The unmanned fighting compartment was completely automatic. It contained the ammunition and loading mechanism. The turret served only as a weapons mount. At the same time, it acted as added protection against ammunition that penetrated the roof. It is much harder to penetrate such an obstacle than a single armour plate. The crew entered the turret only during an emergency, such as a breakdown in the loading mechanism.

The main armament of the Object 195 was the 152 mm smoothbore 2A83 gun, which provided many options when destroying targets with APFSDS shells or ATGMs.

Object 195 passed state trials in the late 2000s but never made it into production. There were several causes for this. The 152 mm gun was too powerful, there was no worthy adversary for its ammunition, and none were visible in the near future. The ammunition capacity was also very small, only 24 rounds. This is acceptable when fighting only enemy tanks, but the modern MBT has to solve a wide array of problems, and it is very possible that frequent restocking of ammunition will be difficult or impossible. There were also complaints about the armour: if the front was adequately protected, the roof and sides did not meet new increased requirements. Factories were also not ready for this new tank.

Soon after work on Object 195 was complete, Object 148 arose, also called T-14. This is the tank that today is called Armata. The T-14 includes all the best parts of Object 195, but on a qualitatively new technological level.

A portrait of the T-14

The Armata inherited the armoured crew capsule, unmanned fighting compartment, and rear engine compartment from Object 195. The tank has a modular design that makes repairs and modernization easy. Most components can be easily replaced. If necessary, the mass can be increased. It is a veritable 50-65 ton "Lego tank" (this is the alleged weight limit of the chassis).

The powerful front armour is comparable with the crew compartment capsule. The upper and lower front plates are protected by a new generation of reactive armour, in addition to composite armour. It is designed to destroy or destabilize incoming ammunition that threaten the main armour. Additional reactive armour also protects the sides. All armour components of the T-14 are easy to replace.

Why is the crew capsule in the front, right against the front armour? The tank's designers estimate that no modern tank gun or those that are likely to be developed in the near future can penetrate the front armour of the tank. The crew is most protected when it is closest to this shield. The only way the tank can be penetrated in the sides is if it is fired upon at a nearly 90 degree angle, and even then, the capsule is still protected by many layers of armour and reactive armour.

The T-14's turret is a mount for sights, various equipment, and of course the 152 mm 2A82 high power gun. The gun is designed to have high precision even without the high-tech fire control system. The gun has two variants: with a bore evacuator and without. The latter is installed in the Armata. As there is no crew in the fighting compartment, the gases that escape into it do not matter.

The engine is an X-shaped 12-cylinder diesel with 1200-1500 hp that can run for 10,000 hours at maximum power. This is high enough as it is, but can be even higher in economy mode. Even this mode retains good mobility. In order to make repairs easier, the engine and transmission exist as a single module, which can be replaced in under an hour.

The suspension has 7 road wheels like Object 195. Designers considered it optimal. Compared to its predecessor, the T-14 did not gain weight or increase in size, even though it is still heavier than a T-90A or T-80U.

In order to increase mobility, the T-14 is equipped with an adaptive controlled suspension that can be configured depending on the terrain, speed, and combat mission. The stiffness, travel, etc. are all configurable. The average and maximum speed of movement are increased, as is the precision when shooting on the move (although it is a secondary factor, as this is the job for the fire control system and gun stabilizer).

Every modern tank is filled with high-tech gadgets, and the T-14 is no exception. The tankers are now operators. They receive information from several channels of the fire control system, screens show maps and various information. The systems are controlled with buttons, joysticks, and touchscreens. The driver drives the tank with a steering wheel instead of levers, as it is more comfortable.

Unofficial sources claim that the T-14 will be equipped with a radar with a phase array that can track up to 100 targets at long ranges. The T-14 does have a phase array, but it is a part of the new Afghanit protection unit, which is designed to intercept enemy ammunition with special offensive elements. The new system protects not only from RPGs, but from roof penetrators and all types of shells: HEAT, HE, and subcaliber AP.

Each vehicle is a collection of compromises. Not all innovations designed by engineers made it in. For instance, the additional radar channel had to be excluded from the fire control system, but matrices for heat sensors designed for the new tank, completely made in Russia, are already entering trial production.

The road ahead

The T-14 is one of many vehicles that will be built on the Armata platform. Bridgelayers, flamethrower vehicles, minelayers and minesweepers, engineering vehicles, etc are all planned.

Today, three types of vehicles exist on the Armata chassis: heavy BMP-15 (an APC), BREM (armoured repair and evacuation vehicle), and the T-14 itself. A trial batch of each vehicle was built and will be shown at the May 9th parade in Moscow. After that, the vehicles will go to be improved, trialled by the army, and state trials.

The road of the T-14 to a production model is far from over. It is a potential path, as any "child" is victim to growing pains. It will be modified and improved before it can earn the name of a Main Battle Tank. The T-14 has great potential for modernization. Armament can be improved, the electronic "filler" can be upgraded, the armour can be increased. The tank's designers estimate that the lifespan of the tank is about 50 years.

Original article available here.

High Roller

I've talked about some pretty crazy suggestions, but I don't think I've ever seen something like this.

The inventor prescribes his 200-250 ton creation a speed of 250-300 kph, claiming it will literally crush everything in its path. Unlike traditional mine rollers, the engine is placed in the roller, while the tank part is dragged behind. The ground pressure of this vehicle would be "only" 6 kg/cm^2 (about 4 times greater than the Maus). Naturally, the person reviewing the project was not very impressed:

"Conclusion on comrade Lazarev's project (tank destroyer) sent on November 22nd, 1942

Comrade Lazarev proposed a tank destroyer with the following characteristics:

• Mass: 200-250 tons.
• Speed: 250-300 kph.
• Armour: 150 mm.

Comrade Lazarev evaluated this idea as worthy of attention, but it is not founded on any kind of technical calculations or theoretical basis. 

Comrade Lazarev's proposal does not have a single technical calculation, and only has a description, which is composed poorly from a technical standpoint. For instance, the issue of speed. Comrade Lazarev proposes that the tank destroyer can achieve a speed of 250-300 kph, with a mass of 200-250 tons, which is hardly possible even with modern technology. A special suspension would have to be built which can navigate terrain at such speeds but also provide high speeds.

On the issue of the transmission, comrade Lazarev writes that engines inside the cylinder move forward when it strikes something, and then they return to their initial positions. Comrade Lazarev does not mention how the engines would still transfer power at this moment. Comrade Lazarev also did not think about how to transport this vehicle or how it would cross water hazards.

Comrade Lazarev has not thought out the issue of creating a suspension for this tank. I think that comrade Lazarev's suggestion is not well thought out and therefore technically impossible to implement.

Senior assistant of the 6th Tank Repair Directorate, Engineer-Major Homyakov."

CAMD RF 38-11350-1003