Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Heroes and Leaders mod

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Lock ‘n Load: Heroes of Stalingrad >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Heroes and Leaders mod Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/18/2018 7:00:08 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		More than 50 different modifications and experimental vehicles based on the T-26 light infantry tank chassis were developed in the USSR in the 1930s, with 23 modifications going into series production. The majority were armored combat vehicles: flame tanks, artillery tractors, radio-controlled tanks (teletanks), military engineering vehicles, self-propelled guns and armored personnel carriers. They were developed at the Leningrad Factory of Experimental Mechanical Engineering (from 1935 known as the Factory No. 185 named after S.M. Kirov) by talented Soviet engineers P.N. Syachentov, S.A. Ginzburg, L.S. Troyanov, N.V. Tseits, B.A. Andryhevich, M.P. Zigel and others. Many Soviet tank engineers were declared "enemies of the nation" and repressed during Stalin's Great Purge from the middle of the 1930s. As a result, work on self-propelled guns and armored carriers ceased in the USSR during that time. T-26 light tanks were also modified into armored combat vehicles in the field during wartime.
Flame-throwing tanks formed around 12% of the series production of T-26 light tanks. It should be mentioned that the abbreviation "OT" (Ognemetniy Tank which stands for Flame-throwing Tank) appeared only in post-war literature; these tanks were originally called "KhT" (Khimicheskiy Tank which stands for Chemical Tank), or BKhM (Boevaya Khimicheskaya Mashina; Fighting Chemical Vehicle) in the documents of the 1930s. All chemical (flame-throwing) tanks based on the T-26 chassis (KhT-26, KhT-130, KhT-133) were designated BKhM-3. The vehicles were intended for area chemical contamination, smoke screens and for flame-throwing.
The TKhP-3 chemical equipment for smoke screens and chemical contamination was developed in 1932. This equipment could be easily installed on any T-26 light tank and was produced by the "Compressor" Factory, (introduced for smoke screening as the TDP-3 from summer 1934; 1,503 such sets were produced to the end of 1936).
The KhT-26 (OT-26) — Flamethrower was a variant of the T-26 developed in 1933. The port turret was completely removed and the starboard turret was equipped with a flamethrower and a coaxial 7.62mm machine gun, both operated by a 2-man crew. The effective range of the flamethrower was only 35 meters. It was approved for production under the designation ChT-26 (Chemical Tank) but was also called BChM-3. In total, 615 vehicles of this type were produced in 1933-34, before production was halted in favor of the OT-130 and OT-133.
The KhT-130 (OT-130) — Flamethrower was a variant of model 1933, using a larger 45 mm gun turret (a gun was replaced with a flamethrower). The KhT-133 (OT-133) — Flamethrower was a variant of model 1939 (a gun was replaced with a flamethrower). These were used in special battalions which contained 45 FT tanks each, plus a few T-26 and armored cars.
In comparison to man-portable flamethrowers, flame tanks carried much more fuel, and could fire longer-ranged bursts. Due to their ability to get in range of enemy positions in comparative safety, they were invaluable for rooting out heavy infantry fortifications.
The maximum range of a flamethrower was typically less than 150 meters. Because of this limitation, the flamethrower was virtually useless on an open battlefield. However, they proved a potent psychological weapon against fortified troops. In many instances, troops surrendered or fled upon seeing a flame tank fire ranging shots, rather than risk being burned alive.
Crews of 'flame' tanks were not necessarily more vulnerable than those crews in the regular, standard version of the tank, but the crews of flame-throwing tanks were often treated differently should they be captured alive by enemy troops. Due to the perceived inhumanity of the weapon itself, captured crews of such tanks were often treated much less humanely than crews of regular tanks. Instances of 'flame-tankers' being executed by the opposite troops upon capture were not uncommon. Flame tanks also suffered from the fact, along with flamethrower-armed troops, that all enemy within range would usually open up on them due to the fear of the weapon.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 121
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/19/2018 7:07:38 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The T-27 was a tankette produced in the 1930s by the Soviet Union. It was based on the design of the Carden Loyd tankette, bought under license from the United Kingdom in 1930.
The Soviets were not fully satisfied with the Carden Loyd design and made a number of changes before putting it into mass production under the designation of T-27. Compared with the British original, the hull was larger, the running gear was improved and the weapon mount was modified to take a Soviet-built 7.62 mm DT machine gun. A number of other changes were made by Chief Engineer N. Kozyrev and Lead Engineer K. Sirken to improve the tankette's ability to cope with the Russian climate and terrain. It lacked any communication devices, as communication between vehicles was intended to be carried out using signal flags.
The tankette was accepted into service on February 13, 1931. It was manufactured in two factories simultaneously, the Bolshevik factory in Leningrad and what would later become the GAZ factory in Nizhni Novgorod. In 1931, 393 copies were produced, follow in 1932 by 1693 others and in 1933 by 1242 others. The hull of the T-27 was composed from rolled armor plates assembled by riveting and by welding. The roof possessed 2 square hatches. The T-27 was armed of an alone machine gun DT of 7.62 mm model 1929. The T-27 had not any communication equipment and the communication between vehicles was done through of the signal flags. The Tank was propelled by a gasoline GAZ-AA engine with liquid cooling, of 4 cylinders, developing 40 hp to 220 rpm. The crew was of 2 men: the commander-machine gunner and the driver.
The principal use of the T-27 during its service life was as a reconnaissance vehicle. Initially, 65 tankette battalions were formed by the Red Army, with each having about 50 tankettes. This figure was later reduced to 23 per battalion. The tankette was also intended to be air-mobile. In 1935, the Soviets experimented with transporting T-27s by air, by suspending them under the fuselages of Tupolev TB-3 bombers.
The T-27 saw active service in the Soviet republics of Central Asia during the 1930s, where the tankettes were used in campaigns against basmachis. However, they fairly quickly became obsolete due to the introduction of more advanced tanks. The Red Army found them reliable and simple to operate, but the T-27 coped poorly with swampy and snowy terrain due to the narrowness of its tracks. It was also difficult to find crews, as the tankettes were so small that it was difficult to find crews of sufficiently diminutive stature. By the end of the 1930s the T-27 was relegated primarily to training use, with some being used as tractors to tow field guns. Two T-27 tankettes were captured by Romanian forces as of 1 November 1942.
2,157 T-27s remained in service or on service by January 1941 and some took part in the initial stages of the Great Patriotic War (part of World War II, in which USSR fought against Germany) later that year. The last recorded combat use of the T-27 was in the Battle of Moscow in December 1941. A small number of captured units also entered German service.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 122
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/20/2018 6:24:49 AM   
terminator


Posts: 1047
Joined: 12/10/2009
From: France
Status: offline 		Hi,
Interesting topic

< Message edited by terminator -- 3/20/2018 6:28:09 AM >

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 123
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/20/2018 8:03:13 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		Thank you very much Terminator.


_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to terminator)
Post #: 124
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/20/2018 8:04:03 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The T-37 was a Soviet amphibious light tank, slightly altered of the British Vickers A4E11. The T-37 was the first series of mass-produced fully amphibious tanks in the world and was used in recon units of infantry, cavalry, and mechanized formations. They were also used to perform tasks in communication and as defense units on the march, as well as active infantry support on the battlefield. About 2,500 of all types were built. The tank was first created in 1932, based on the British Vickers tankette and other operational amphibious tanks. The tank was mass-produced starting in 1933 up until 1936, when it was replaced with the more modern T-38, based on the T-37.
The T-37 were used in large numbers during the Soviet invasion of Poland and in the Winter War against Finland. The T-37 was also used by the Soviets in the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, but most of them were quickly lost. Surviving tanks of that type fought on the front lines until 1944, and were used in training and auxiliary defense until the end of World War II.
Leningrad builders continued the development of a more suitable amphibious tank, and they designated their latest model as the “T-37”. It had the same GAZ AA engine as the T-41, the same transmission, wide use of automotive parts, and the Krupp chassis, which Soviet engineers first encountered as a result of a technological partnership with Weimar Germany. It is widely thought that the T-37 was a copy of the Vickers floating tank, with the Soviet purchase of such tanks in mind. Is true that the Soviet T-37 prototypes were heavily influenced by the British models.
Even before the end of 1932, the high command of the Red Army was planning to order 30 T-37's. In order to facilitate faster production, Factory No. 37 (that is what the No. 2 VATO plant was renamed) was handed over all OKMO production related to the T-37, as well as one British Vickers tank. In 1933, the No. 37 plant was given an order of 1200 T-37’s.
The T-40 was the successor to the T-37/T-38 as a recon vehicle, and also pressed into service as an infantry support AFV when heavier tanks became scarce toward the end of 1941. Only about 220 were built before production was halted in favor of the superior T-60.
The T-40 was an improvement over the T-37 and T-38 in several respects. The coil-spring suspension of the T-38 was replaced by a modern torsion-bar suspension with four pairs of road wheels. The boat-shaped hull was entirely welded, in contrast to the riveted hulls of the T-37 and T-38. The welded, conical turret shape improved protection, although the armor was still very thin. The vehicle's armament consisted of a single 12.7 mm DShK heavy machine gun, which was a much more potent weapon than the 7.62 mm DT machine gun mounted on the T-37 and the T-38.
Water propulsion was achieved via a small propeller mounted at the rear of the hull. The propeller was set into an indent in the hull rear, and was thus better protected than the exposed propeller of the T-38. Buoyancy was provided by the large boat-shaped hull.
The T-40 entered production just prior to the outbreak of war, and was intended to equip reconnaissance units. As the need for large numbers of tanks became critical, a secondary non-amphibious variant was designed on the T-40 chassis. This design became the T-60. The T-60 was simpler, cheaper, better armed, and could fulfill most of the same roles. Under the stress of war, production of the T-40 was halted in favor of the T-60. Thus only 222 T-40s were issued, compared to over 6,000 T-60s.
The T-40 was widely photographed at the time of Operation Barbarossa and also during the defense of Moscow. Many were knocked out during the fighting. The type was very rarely seen after the end of 1941, although some T-40s remained in service as late 1946 in some school units.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 125
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/21/2018 8:31:30 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		With the beginning of the World War II, the Soviet union had really need of light armored vehicles in mass for the reconnaissance and convoys escort missions. To this era every infantry division was supposed to possess a company of light tanks endow with 16 tanks.
The T-60 scout tank was a light tank produced by the Soviet Union from 1941 to 1942. During this period, 6,292 units were built. The tank was designed to replace the obsolete T-38 amphibious scout tank. Nicholas Astrov's design team at Moscow Factory No. 37 was assigned the task of designing amphibious and non-amphibious scout tanks in 1938. The T-30B prototype, sharing the T-40's chassis but simpler in construction and with heavier armor, was accepted as the T-60 scout tank, and production began in July 1941, just after the German invasion. Design was rationalized with reduced dimensions but armor plating was increased. The realization of this tank take only 15 days in August 1941. Because of the impossibility to produce the T-50 in the factory n°37, the priority was therefore granted to the new model that easily could be produced in very big numbers immediately.
The T-60 was designed as a recon tank, but was nonetheless often pressed into service in support of infantry attacks since, due to attrition, by late 1941 recon tanks comprised roughly 50% of a tank brigade's strength. Beginning in 1943 many had their turrets removed and were used as gun tractors or SP rocket launchers. By the end of 1941, Soviet light tank platoons consisted of three vehicles each; prior to this each contained five tanks.
Although at first intended to carry a 12.7 mm machine gun like the T-40, the armament was later upgraded to the 20 mm TNSh cannon, a tank version of the ShVAK, on the advisement of the People's Commissar for Tank Industry Vyacheslav Malyshev. The new tank was quickly accepted for the service under the name of T-60, and an order of 10000 copies was issued. This weapon could penetrate 15 mm of perpendicular armor at 500 m which proved inadequate against the newer up-armored German tank designs. A new turret was designed and tested successfully in the summer of 1942. The new turret had the gun moved to its right side to make more room for the crew member and a co-axial machine gun was added. The project was terminated when Stavka chose the recently produced T-70 as the new standard light tank.
The initial plan foresaw to produce the 10000 T-60 in five factories: the factory n°37 to Moscow, the factory n°176 GAZ (Gorkovskiy Avtomobil'niy Zadov) of Nizhnij Novgorod, the factory KPZ (Kolomensliy Parovozstroeitel'niy Zavod) of Kolomna, the factory n°264 (Krasnoarmeiskiy Sudostroitel'niy Zavod) of Stalingrad and the factory KhTZ (Kharkovskiy Traktorniy Zavod) of Kharkov.
When the KhTZ was evacuated because of the German advance, it was excluded from the production program of the T-60. It was quickly replaced by two others factories: the factory n°38 of Kirov and the factory n°37 of Sverdlovsk. Others factories were implied in the production of various pieces as the factory KIM of Moscow, the factory Krasniy Proletariy of Moscow and the factory n°592 of Mystishy.
The first T-60 were made from September 1941, to the factory n°37. This factory was evacuated nevertheless shortly after while 245 tanks had been produced only. The factory n°37 was evacuated and diluted on three sites. Nevertheless with elements of the KIM, a new tank factory n°37 was created in December 1941. During the following months this factory produced 512 tanks.
From September 1942, 1144 T-60 were made to the factory n°37 then this last passed to the production of the T-70. The factory that produced the more of T-60 was nevertheless the GAZ. In 1942 despite the beginning of the production of the T-70, the one of the T-60 continued to August. A total of 4164 T-60 was attained. In February 1943, the 55 last copies were sent to the front, then the production of the T-60 was abandoned.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 126
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/22/2018 8:44:12 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The T-70 was another attempt to create the right combination of firepower, mobility, and protection in a light tank. However, by this time it was seen that the T-34 could do anything the T-70 could, and a lot more that the T-70 couldn't. So with ever increasing numbers of T-34 tanks obviating the need for light tanks, the T-70 was withdrawn from tank brigades in early 1944 (although it remained in use with other formations and Soviet allied forces). More than 8,200 T-70 were built.
The T-70 was yet another stop-gap in Soviet tank production. The performance of Soviet light tanks of that time was abysmal, despite prolific production, whilst T-34 production suffered from problems. These tanks were horrendous owing to their poor maneuverability, weak guns, and inferior armor. The T-70 was an attempt by N.A. Astrov to counter these three problems. Whilst the gun was generally better suited to the reality of tank-on-tank warfare, it still had poor mobility and underwhelming protection. The tank’s legacy passed on into the somewhat well-known SU-76 self-propelled gun, which was also a less than desirable tank.
Late designs of the T-60 attempted to mount a new turret in order to handle a stronger gun. They redesigned the turret with flat armor and larger dimensions. They also placed it slightly off-set to the left, with the engines on the right for ease of production. The T-70 was accepted for production right away in March 1942. However, despite attempts to create a modest improvement on the T-60, it was, in some ways, no better. It may appear that mounting a new 45 mm ZiS-19BM gun and giving the tank 45 mm frontal hull armor increased protection and firepower. However, German modifications to the Panzer III and IV with regards to armor and guns negated all these advances that the T-70 came with. Also, the problems of having a two-man crew were still prevalent. Having a commander who also had to double up as the gunner meant that he was often over-stretched, especially if he had to direct the driver and fire very accurately. The restrictions of a two-man crew were seen in all Soviet light tanks with the exception of the T-26.
The T-70’s major shortfall was its mobility. The chassis of the T-70 was a direct copy of the T-60 but modified to front-wheel drive instead of rear-wheel drive. Reliance on other existing technology cut development costs significantly and led to a rather unorthodox design using two GAZ-202 lorry engines (which were rated at 70 hp each), one for each track. However, this led to serious problems, such as the driver finding it difficult to control two engines. Late production T-70 models were fitted with two GAZ-203 85 hp engines. The T-70 barely achieved greater speeds than the T-60 and its cross-country range of 180 km was 70 km less than the T-60, and half of a T-34/76 M1943. The T-70 was even less suited to taking part in the fast-paced, Soviet deep battle doctrine. Production ended in 1943 when it was just deemed unsuitable.
The most produced T-70 tank was actually called the T-70M. The original T-70 featured two GAZ-202 engines, one powering each track. The engines were instead mounted on the right-hand side of the vehicle, and a normal transmission was fitted. The original turret was also conical, but this was also replaced with a welded turret that was offset to the left of the hull. Conical turrets were replaced with welded turrets in April 1942. Despite technically being the T-70M, it was simply referred to as the T-70.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 127
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/23/2018 7:06:12 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The BT were the basic AFV of independent tank brigades, and of mechanized and cavalry divisions. They were intended for use in the long-range exploitation role. Developed from the M1931 design of the US Christie M1931 “race tank”, the BT could be driven on their wheels, sans tracks—although this theoretical advantage was rarely used. BT were well-liked by their crews, but their thin armor made them vulnerable to even ATR. Almost 5,000 BT were built.
The BT-5 (Bystrochodnij Tankov or “Fast Tank” type 5) was an improvement on previous models. The BT-5 shared with its predecessors the suspension, the hull (though slightly reinforced) and equipment. The turret was new, roomier and fitted for the first time with the standard 45 mm gun, also used on the T-26.
Aside from the turret, the BT-5 could hardly be distinguished from its predecessor. The hulls were identical, with the same internal arrangement and the same Mikulin M5 engine, supplying 400 hp. The armor was unchanged, ranging from 6 to 13 mm, in no way capable of withstanding even antitank rifle fire. Speed was seen as active protection. The big difference was the turret, similar to the model 1933 T-26 two-men turret with a 45 mm model 32 gun, the new standard Soviet AT gun.
Commander tanks, had a radio 72. A DT-5 coaxial machine-gun completed the armament. The gun had a single episcope. There was no commander cupola, just simple escape hatches. The turret itself increased the overall weight to 11.5 tons, and performance degraded accordingly. Top speed was 72 km/h instead of 100 km/h. The fuel tank shrank to 360 liters from of 400. The engine now gave a 35 hp/ton ratio and maximum range was decreased from 300 to 200 km (tactical range 90 km). But all this was sacrificed for largely improved firepower.
Like the previous model, production was assumed by KhPZ (Kharkov). Early models were provisionally fitted with an enlarged cylindrical turret (single hatch, with or without basket) and BT-2 heavy steel road wheels. But soon after this first series, UMM instructed the design teams in Leningrad and Kharkov to adapt their model to a common turret. Thus the early model 1933 was introduced, criticized later for its awkwardly placed hatch and inadequate stowage.
The road wheels were replaced by new, lighter convex models in 1933, which were used to upgrade the BT-2 as well. By 1934, the OKMO team had developed a better turret, with a large bustle and twin hatches, also shared with the T-26 until 1937. These were fitted to already existing vehicles . The commander tanks could be distinguished by their turret horseshoe antenna and 71-TK-1 radio set.
The BT-5 entered service in 1933 and, with gradual deliveries until 1935, equipped all armored cavalry brigades. The first active engagements came in Spain, in 1937, when a batch of 100 was shipped to the Republicans. They took part in the defense of Madrid. Some were captured later and saw service with the Nationalist Spanish state. Two brigades (6th and 11th Tank Brigade) were sent in the Far East, on the Sino-Russo-Mongolian border, to face Japanese incursions of the time. They proved instrumental at Khalkin Gol, with many BT-7s, proving too fast for the Japanese AT teams and still deadly for any AVFs deployed. However, they proved vulnerable to “close quarter” Japanese teams armed with Molotov cocktails.
Not long after, they were deployed in eastern Poland. They also soldiered during the “Winter War” in Finland, proving ill-adapted for the task with their thin armor. Losses were appalling. Finnish troops used Molotov cocktails as well and quickly found a weak point where the engine was installed, prone to catch fire and explode when hit, as shown in reports. In 1941, there were still hundreds of BT-5s in service despite the type having been replaced by the BT-7. But hundreds were lost or abandoned, worn out, during the summer offensive, liquidating what was left of the model. Only the lack of spare parts prevented the use of surviving vehicles until later in the war.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 128
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/24/2018 6:28:05 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The T-26 tanks were originally developed from the British Vickers 6-ton models, and for the most part equipped the tank battalions (22 T-26 and 16 recon tanks) of rifle divisions. Prior to the German invasion of Russia they were used in the Spanish Civil War, Manchuria, and the Russo-Finnish War. In 1941, T-26 and BT tanks formed 75% of the Soviet tank force. Over 12,000 T-26 were built, of which 5,500 were Model 1933. The Models 1937 and 1939 had a more sloping turret and thicker armor. It was one of the most successful tank designs of the 1930s until its light armor became vulnerable to newer anti-tank guns. During the 1930s, the USSR developed 53 variants of the T-26, including flame-throwing tanks, combat engineer vehicles, remotely controlled tanks, self-propelled guns, artillery tractors, and armored carriers. Twenty-three of these were series-produced, others were experimental models.
Though nearly obsolete by the beginning of World War II, the T-26 was the most numerous tank in the Red Army's armored force during the German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941. The T-26 fought the Germans and their allies during the Battle of Moscow in 1941–42, the Battle of Stalingrad and the Battle of the Caucasus in 1942–1943; some tank units of the Leningrad Front used their T-26s until 1944. Soviet T-26 light tanks last saw use in August 1945, during the defeat of the Japanese Kwantung Army in Manchuria. The tank was reliable and simple to maintain, and its design was continually modernized between 1931 and 1941. No new models of the T-26 were developed after 1940.
In 1933, the Soviets unveiled the T-26 mod. 1933. This model, which had a new single cylindrical turret carrying one 45 mm cannon L46 (length in calibers, which meant quite high initial velocity, over 700–800 m/s depending on ammunition) and one 7.62 mm machine gun, became the most common T-26 variant. The 45 mm 20K tank gun was based on the Soviet 45 mm anti-tank gun M1932 (19-K) and it was one of the most powerful anti-tank guns of its time. Actually, few, if any, western tanks existed with similar guns. The T-26 could carry up to three secondary DT 7.62 mm machine guns in coaxial, rear, and anti-aircraft mounts. This increased firepower was intended to aid crews in defeating dedicated anti-tank teams, as the original machine gun armament had been found insufficient. The turret rear ball mounting for the additional DT tank machine gun was installed on the T-26 tanks from the end of 1935 until 1939.
Beginning in 1937, there was an effort to equip many tanks with a second machine gun in the rear of the turret and an anti-aircraft machine gun on top of it, as well as the addition of two searchlights above the gun for night gunnery, a new VKU-3 command system, and a TPU-3 intercom. Some tanks had a vertically stabilized TOP-1 gun telescopic sight. Ammunition stowage for the main gun was improved from 122 rounds to 147. In 1938, the cylindrical turret was replaced with a conical turret, with the same 45 mm model 1934 gun. Some T-26s mod. 1938/1939, equipped with radio set, had a PTK commander's panoramic sight.
In 1931, the only Soviet factory suitable for T-26 production was the Factory in Leningrad, which had had experience of manufacturing the MS-1 (T-18) light tanks since 1927. But the production of the T-26 proved to be much more complicated than the semi-handicraft assembly of the MS-1, so the planned production of 500 T-26s in 1931 proved to be impossible. The Stalingrad Tractor Factory (STZ) was considered as one of the factories for production of the T-26 from 1932, but production in Stalingrad did not start until August 1933. This process went very slowly, with great difficulties because of delays with deliveries of machining equipment and press tools for the newly built factory. Factory managers tried to promote tanks of their own design rather than producing T-26s. As a result, the STZ failed to organize the series production of the T-26, but this experience helped to bring the T-34 into production in Stalingrad in 1941. The T-26s produced by STZ had no visual differences from other T-26s, but Stalingrad tanks were less reliable and more expensive.
T-26 quickly becomes one of the tanks most important of the Red Army and influenced many posterior projects. It is however paradoxical to note that the Russian tank crew members hated this tank but it was however produced in very great numbers. The crews reproached it its too weak shielding and its engine not powerful enough. Between 1931 and 1943 T-26 was modified 26 times in order to improve it but finally the engine output was to increase only of 7 hp, passing from 90 hp to 97 hp, which is very little.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 129
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/25/2018 6:44:52 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The T-28 M34 was the first Russian medium tank. It was loosely based on the British A6E1 and had two MG-armed turrets flanking the driver. The T-28 were used in Manchuria against the Japanese and in the Russo-Finnish War of 1939-40, as well as against the Germans. After 1938, most T-28 were consolidated into three heavy tank brigades, with each ide-ally containing 136 T-28, 47 BT, and 25 armored cars. About 600 T-28 types were built. The original T-28 were found to be easily penetrated by Finnish AT guns and so were strengthened by adding additional plates in the T-28E M40. These up-armored versions successfully assisted in breaking through the Finnish Mannerheim Line in early 1940 but did not fare well against the Germans in 1941. T-28 production was ended in 1940 in view of the much superior T-34 design.
The T-28 with its big brother T-35 was the emblematic tank of the Red Army of before the Great Patriotic War. It took part in many parades on the Red Square. In 1931, Russian engineers (Office of design OKMO) began work on a tank with three turrets at Leningrad. With the end of 1931, the first prototype was tested on proving ground. The new tank had been designed as tank ofbreakthrough (supports of infantry at long distance). Its architecture had much to the contemporary foreign designs. The provision with multiple turrets included a principal turret and two secondary turrets.
The main turret of this new tank was armed with a gun of 45 mm and a machine-gun of 7.62 mm DT. The two other turrets (smaller) were armed with a machine-gun of 7.62 mm DT. The principal turret swiveled thanks to an electric motor (an innovation for the time). The tests on ground revealed many defects on the level of the chassis and transmission. In 1932, the section of production of tanks of the Bolshevik factory was separated from the latter and was reorganized in independent unit, the factory n°174. The 174 was reserved for the production of the light tank T-26 and the production of the medium tank T-28 was thus entrusted to the industrial plant Krasniji Putilovetz as from November 1932. The T-28 did not have great success in combat, but it played an important role as a development project for Soviet tank designers. A series of new ideas and solutions that were tried out on the T-28 were later incorporated in future models.
The Soviets had 411 T-28 tanks when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941. A large majority of these were lost during the first two months of the invasion, many of them abandoned after mechanical breakdown. Some T-28s took part in the 1941 winter defense of Leningrad and Moscow, but after late 1941, they were rare in Red Army service.
Although the T-28 was considered ineffective by 1941, when the Red Army was fielding the first T-28s in 1933, the French Army was still largely equipped with the Renault FT, the British Army had some inferior Vickers Medium Mark I and II and the German Reichswehr had no tanks at all. In 1941, the majority of the invading German tank force had worse tactical specifications than the T-28. For example, 2000 out of the 5000 total German tanks deployed during Operation Barbarossa were the obsolete Panzer I and Panzer II light tanks that were not armed with large caliber guns.
The T-28 had a number of advanced features for the time, including radio (in all tanks) and anti-aircraft machine gun mounts. Just before the Second World War, many received armor upgrades, bringing its protection on par with the early Panzer IV, although its suspension and layout were outdated.
The T-28 had significant flaws. The plunger‑spring type suspension was poor. The engine and transmission were troublesome. Worst of all, the design was not flexible. Although the T-28 and early versions of the Panzer IV were comparable in armor and firepower, the sound basic design of the Panzer IV allowed it to be significantly upgraded, while the T-28 was a poor basis for improvement.
By the time the T-28 saw combat in 1939, events had overtaken it. The 1930s saw the development of the first reliable high‑speed suspensions, the first purpose‑designed anti-tank guns, and a gradual increase in the firepower of tanks. The Spanish Civil War showed that infantry units with small, towed anti-tank guns could defeat most contemporary tanks, and made the under‑armored tanks from the early 1930s particularly vulnerable.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 130
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/26/2018 9:21:40 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		At the time of its introduction, the T-34 was the most revolutionary AFV in the world. Its combination of medium velocity 76mm gun, well-sloped armor, high top speed, and excellent mobility across soft ground, placed it a generation ahead of all other existing tanks. This is not to say, however, that it had no faults. It was extremely cramped and tiring to operate, its two-man turret reduced its rate of fire and overall fighting efficiency, and the early models were prone to breakdowns. Despite these problems, the T-34 was an excellent design overall and its appearance came as a rude shock to the Germans, who had until then been smug in the belief of their own technical superiority. 967 T-34 were with the western Military Districts on June 22, 1941. In action, the T-34 proved to be almost invulnerable to the standard German tank and anti-tank guns. Initially though, the Soviet command dispersed them widely amongst the armored units and the vast majority of their crews had only a few hours of training, which often enabled the experienced German panzer crews to fully utilize their superior tactics to negate the T-34's superiority. On the other hand, the German infantry with their relatively immobile 37mm AT guns came to greatly fear the T-34, often being able to stop it only by attaching a grenade bundle or mine to its rear deck—not exactly a task they relished. The Model 1940 was the original production type; about 1,000 were built.
T-34/76 Model 1940 was produced by factory 183 of Kharkov (KhPZ) and maybe the factory of tractors of Stalingrad (STZ) from September 15, 1940 (date of exit of the 3 first models of factory 183). They will be followed by 115 others by the end of the year (well far from the initial plan). During the first half of 1941, 835 other specimens will be produced. This version was equipped with a turret made of rolled steel plates armed at the beginning with the gun of 76.2 mm L-11. However the production of gun had been removed in 1939 and only 400 specimens were equipped with this gun. L-11 was replaced by F-34 developed in 1939. The T-34 was equipped with a diesel engine V-2-34 developing 500 hp and with a gear box including five forward speeds and a reverse speed. It weighed in the 26 tons and had a maximum shielding of 45 mm. At the end of 1940, the first three T-34s produced were tested intensively in Kubinka, where many worrying defects for the capacities of combat of the tank were discovered. The question of the abandonment of the T-34 program was still put.
July 9, 1940, the Russian High command had decided to create 9 mechanized corps. Each corps was to consist of two armored divisions and a motorized division. Each armored division was to have 63 heavy tanks KV and 210 medium tanks T-34 like 102 light tanks (BT & T-26). Motorized division was to have 275 light tanks T-26. Then that T-50 was to replace considerable obsolete tanks in theory, 20 other mechanized corps were created on this basis. Let us note in more than each division of fusiliers was to have 16 light tanks in theory. Indeed 4620 T-34s were necessary to equip these units and only 3 had been produced! Some models were sent to fight at the time of the Finnish-Soviet war which finished before none could take part in a confrontation. First T-34 used to the combat were it against the Germans in June 1941 in Grondo in Bielorussia.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 131
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/27/2018 6:18:38 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		One of the lesser-known tools in the arsenal of the Red Army during the Second World War was the flamethrower tank. This weapon, which did not enjoy a long life on the battlefield, has been treated like a stepchild in the literature of the war. Flamethrower tanks, however, did make a contribution to the defeat of the enemy.
The OT-34 was a T-34 flame-thrower tank fitted with an internally mounted flamethrower replacing the hull machine-gun. Usually it was a modified Model 1941 with the ATO-41 flamethrower or Model 1942 with ATO-42. The OT-34-85 (sometimes called TO-34), was a T-34-85 flamethrower tank, with the ATO-42 in place of the bow machine gun.
During the 1930s, the Red Army pioneered the use of flamethrower tanks, based primarily on the T-26, but because of the defensive tactics of the Soviets during the first year of the war, the type fell into disuse. In 1942, interest revived, and a new tank flamethrower, the ATO-41 was developed. It was mounted in KV tanks as the KV-8 and in the T-34 tank as the OT-34. When used in the KV it replaced the main gun although a smaller 45 mm gun was carried next to the flame projector in a false gun barrel which simulated the usual 76.2 mm gun barrel. This was done to prevent German anti-tank gunners singling out the vulnerable flamethrower tanks for special attention. The T-34 version also had the fuel internally stored, but the flame projector was placed in the hull machine-gun position, leaving precious little room in the turret for the crew.
These original types were not entirely successful because of the small amount (100 liters) of fuel carried and other problems. An improved flamethrower was developed, the ATO-42, which was mounted in the KV-1S as the KV-8S and in the T-34 Model 1943 as the OT-34. It was also later fitted into the T-34/85 as the TO-34. The ATO-42 could fire four to five bursts every ten seconds, each burst consuming ten liters of fuel. The range varied from 60 to 120 meters depending on the mixture. Few of the KV-8S were built. OT-34 tanks were manufactured, with some of the earliest known examples being STZ (Stalingrad) manufactured tanks. However, UTZ (Uralmarch 183) tanks and Krasone Sormovo (112) tanks were also made. These were fielded very successfully up until 1945. This design also featured the KS-25 flame unit, this time on the hull gunner’s position. The Type 1942 automatic tank flamethrower was mounted on two types of tanks. On the T-34 it was contained in the front portion of the hull, and on the KV series tanks it was positioned in the turret as an additional armament. The reservoir with flame mixture was located inside the hull, taking up about one-half of the storage space normally given to the basic load of main-gun rounds. The T-34 flamethrower tank carried two hundred liters of flame mixture, enabling the tank to fire twenty shots at ten liters of mixture each. Mounted on the KV series tanks, the flame-thrower had sufficient mixture for fifty-seven shots. Both flame-throwers were capable of firing rapid successive shots, to a maximum range of too to 120 meters. The driver-mechanic controlled the weapon on the T-34, and the gunner on the KV tank. The ATO-42 was intended for use against exposed or covered enemy personnel and military equipment.
During the war five separate flamethrower tank battalions and one separate flamethrower tank brigade were established. Each battalion was equipped with twenty-one tanks and the brigade with fifty-nine. Operating under the authority of the Reserve of the Supreme High Command IRVGR these units served to reinforce various formations—as a rule on the axes of main attacks in offensive operations, but they could also be used in the defense. OT-34 flamethrower tanks were generally organized into independent battalions attached to tank corps, with each battalion consisting of 10 KV-8 and 11 OT-34. Later these battalions had 20 OT-34 and 10 T-34. The original independent flamethrower battalions had three companies, two of KV-8 with ten tanks and one company of OT-34s with eleven tanks. These units were put at the disposal of fronts or armies for special operations. Due to the lack of KV-8 flamethrower tanks, the units consisted of two companies of OT-34s and one company of T-34 gun tanks to provide covering fire.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 132
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/28/2018 7:43:09 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The T-34 M41 was initially reserved for use by platoon and company commanders, but clamors from the front for its more effective gun led to its superseding the Model 1940 in production. Soviet medium tank platoons generally consisted of three tanks apiece, with a company containing ten tanks.
T-34/76 model of 1941 was produced with approximately 9290 specimens starting from at the beginning of 1941 until 1942. It was produced by the factory 183 KhPZ of Kharkov which will be relocated in Nizhnij Tagil at the end of 1941 and renamed factory 183 UVZ, factory 112 of Gorki, the factory 100 ChKZ of Chelyabinsk (or Tankograd) and the STZ of Stalingrad (before its abandonment). This model weighed 2 tons more than the precedent because of the shielding higher of the new turret (52 mm maximum). This model is exclusively armed with the gun of 76.2 mm F-34. It is always equipped with the diesel engine V-2-34 of 500cv but with a new gear box with 5 forward speeds and a reverse speed.
In June 1941, a turret was developed made up of two welded parts. The preceding turrets were made up of rolled steel plates. The hull of T-34 is divided into three part: the compartment of the driver to the front, the compartment of combat in the center and the engine-transmission compartment to the back. The compartment of combat located at the medium included the station of the commander and the loader.
On the vertical walls of right side one could find three ammunition of 76.2 mm attached by thin straps in kinds of shells. On the vertical walls of left side were also laid out 6 ammunition of 76.2 mm attached of the same manners. The 68 other ammunition (total 77) were arranged in cupboards embedded in the floor. T-34/76 with turret hexagonal transported 100 ammunition of 76.2 mm: 86 ammunition in the cupboards of the floor, 8 ammunition on the walls of left, 2 ammunition in the back-right corner, 4 ammunition on the walls of right side. Always on the floor (in the center, forwards), stores of cartridges for the machine-gun of hull were arranged. On the left of these stores was the seat of the driver. In back-right the corner on the firewall, were the stores of the coaxial machine-gun of the gun, as well as the prisms of replacements for optics of the gun.
With before station of combat was the compartment of the driver including, the steering, installed in the nose of the tank, the seat of the driver (on the left), the seat of the operator radio-machine gunner (on the right), a radio station (on the wall of right side), the commands of the tank (steering levers, control panels, pedals of clutches), a 7.62 mm DT machine-gun of hull assembled on ball mount (on the right), some ammunition, the systems of vision, a pair of oxygen bottles (to start in urgency the engine), spare parts, some additional. The driver had for his vision of a window of drive with armored shutter assembled on hinges, on the glacis (which was closed in situation of combat). The steering of the tank was obtained is by varying the speed of one of the tracks or while slowing down on one among they.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 133
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/30/2018 12:28:51 AM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		During winter 1941-1942, the only factory to produce T-34/76, is the STZ of Stalingrad. The other factories are in the course of removal and installation behind the Ural. This model is recognizable thanks to a welded turret with simplified back but especially because a mask of the recuperator in the form of bevel. The road-wheels to save rubber are completely out of steel. Little appreciated by the crews, this road-wheels will be partially replaced by road-wheels with rubber forming a mixed assembly. The F-34 gun is simplified.
On this model are integrated the majority of the simplifications introduced on the assembly lines of the STZ at Stalingrad like the driver hatch with his two periscopes and the horizontal air entries. The round part uniting the lower to upper hull in front is welded from now on and not bolted. The back of the tank is also simplified. The lower plate of the tank loses its round-off. The rectangular transmission hatch is replaced by a round hatch. New track links of 500 mm and 550 mm are gradually adopted. The bow machine-gun is equipped with a shield of protection. On the models produced by Factory 112, metal angles will be grafted to protect the turret ring of the glares.
As the standardized machine tools used for the T-34 were not easily adaptable, changes were rarely introduced into the production process. Many features of the T-34 remained unchanged until 1942, despite the complaints of the crews and their commanders. The process was made simpler and the parts cheaper. For example, the commonly used F-34 gun was simplified to the point that nearly 200 pieces less were needed (from 861 to 614).
The gun sights and range finder remained crude, despite the fact that several gun mounts were alternatively used. The poor optics prevented the crews from using their guns at long range like the Germans often did. This led to aggressive tactics based on constant maneuvering, while the German tanks could stand in place and fire at approaching targets from a distance.
The lack of rubber often prevented the use of the standard rubberized wheels, and many bare-metal wheels of various designs were used. This can be seen on photographs as a strange mix of wheels. Early 1942 saw the introduction of a new, much better hexagonal turret, a sub-product of the abandoned T-34M project, which was a great improvement over previous models. Notably, the big hatch was removed and replaced by separated hatches (dubbed “Mickey mouse” by the Germans, due to the way it looked from the front with the hatches open).
First T-34 were equipped with a radio station with short waves 71-TK-3 (tank of command only). In 1941 it was replaced by a radio station with short waves 9R. From 1943, all the tanks were equipped with a station radio 9-RM or modernized 71-TK-3 with short waves (but with a greater range). The internal communication on the first models was done by means of intercoms TPU-2 or TPU-3 developed during pre-war period. Later they will be replaced by intercoms TPU-3-bisF (modernized TPU-3). Let us note that only the commander and the pilot had intercoms. The radio operator and the loader did not have any.
T-34/76 was assembled with 4 kinds of turrets: a welded turret (1940-1942), a cast turret (1941-1942), a stamped hexagonal turret (1942-1944) and a cast hexagonal turret (1942-1944). The turret accommodated the commander in its left part and the loader in its right part. Because of its narrowness, it could not accommodate a third man as on the German tanks. On those, the pointing of the gun was acted by the gunner, but this station did not exist on T-34 and it was the commander who was charged to carry out this task in more of that with command, which could pose problem.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 134
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/30/2018 5:25:47 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The T-34 M43 was introduced in May 1942, whit more ammunition and fuel, and some armor increased. The addition of a roomier hexagonal-shaped turret, nicknamed "Mickey Mouse" by the Germans because of its appearance with the twin, round turret-roof hatches open (later production had a new commander's cupola) and significant improvements in automotive reliability characterized. The T-34 Model 1943, which, was the most numerous version of the T-34/76 series. When production ceased in 1944, more than 35,000 T-34/76 had been built.
Indeed, during the fall of 1943, all vehicles received a new commander cupola, which greatly improved his visibility on the battlefield. However, production standards were poor and many tanks were lost due to mechanical breakdowns. External equipment included spare tracks, tools boxes, fuel tanks and improvised protection of all kinds. Of these, for example, were entire pruned trunks, rails, scrap metal and, during the battle of Germany and especially in Berlin, an improvised Panzerfaust defense made of spring beds or various metal frames.
The original turret (welded) was placed above the combat compartment very forward of the tank (rendering impossible installation of hatches for the driver and the machine gunner) on a turret ring rather narrow of 1.42 m of diameter. All the turrets of the T-34/76 pivoted thanks to an electric motor (a complete turn was carried out in 14 seconds) or manually through a hand-wheel (used by the commander). The rounded front of the turret welcomed the openings of the gun of 76.2 mm, machine gun DT of 7.62 mm coaxial, and sight. The hexagonal turrets disposed of a flat inclined front plate. Of every side of the turret was located an opening for the lateral vision and a pistol shooting aboard. On the hexagonal turrets these openings not some did that two simple slits and on the hexagonal stamped turret, the aboard are absent.
To the back one found a bolted hatch that was on the other hand leaves on the hexagonal turrets. This hatch served to the dismantling of the gun when this one had to undergo an important maintenance or to be replaced. Note that the tanks made by the factory "Krasnoye Sormovo" did not possess any hatches to the back of the turret. On the hexagonal turrets the hatch is replaced by a pistol shooting aboard.
The original turret was equipped to the back of the roof of a big accesses trapezoid hatch, mounted on hinge. This hatch was heavy and prevented the commander to see in front of him according her was opened. This hatch was equipped of a periscope of observation MK-4, that was eliminated from the fall 1941. On the hexagonal turrets, this hatch not very popular with the crews was replaced by two round hatches mounted on hinge for the commander and the loader. On certain hexagonal turrets, the hatch of the commander was replaced by a commander's cupola of type drum. In front of the hatch one found to the left an observation periscope (type PT-4-7 or PTK-5) and to right air-intake (with armored lid) for the fan of turret. On the hexagonal turret, the air-intake of the fan was moved to the back of the roof of the turret. The hexagonal stamped turret had two observation periscopes in front. The first ones T-34 had an antenna to the back of the turret but this one was quickly eliminated because the radio was replaced inside the hull.
Production cost was halved and production time reduced by 50% despite the fact that most of the male workers left for the battlefield by that point, and were replaced by women, children, disabled, or the elderly. In 1943 T-34 production rate was about 1300 per month. Quality standards were poor and they were roughly finished, even by US mass production standards. The last model was the T-34/76 model 1944, with the simplified ZiS S-53 gun, turret radio and improved commander sights. However, production was gradually decreased to make way for the significantly better T-34/85.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 135
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 3/31/2018 6:35:41 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		By mid 1943 the Soviet Union found its tanks to be under-gunned when confronting the new generation of German Panthers and Tigers. The resolution of this problem was the T-34/85, with a more powerful gun mounted in a new three-man turret. It first saw combat with the 1st Guards Tank Army. About 29,430 were built during WWII.
A meeting was organized, late August 1943 to the factory 112 with V.A. Marlyshev (Commissioner for the production of tanks), Ya. N. Fedorenko (commander in chief of the mechanized Troops) and other personages of high rank. V.A. Marlyshev declared that if the battle of Koursk had been an important victory for the red army, it was to the price of very high losses. Losses largely due to the fact that the canons of the tanks Panthers and Tiger could destroy a T-34/76 to 1500 m while the latter could not reasonably to hope a victory shoot that 500-600 m. As early as the beginning of 1943, the GOKO had reacted in comparison with the appearance of the tank Tiger and its terrible gun of 88 mm and recommended an urgent improvement of the Russian anti-tank weapons. In fact, the Russians noticed after having captured a tank Tiger, that the gun of 76.2 mm F-34 could not pierce frontal armor (100-110 mm) of the Tiger more far than 200 m. The weapon more effective to this era to reestablish the position, was the antiaircraft canon of 85 mm K-53 M1939, able to pierce 100 mm of armor to 1000 m. May 27 1943, the study of an anti-tank version of this gun, named D-5T-85 was finished at the factory n°9. This canon was remarkable by its weak weight and its light recoil. The first production copy goes out of the mounting chains in June 1943.
The tank T34/85 had to be produced to the factory 112. The front part of the turret was modified (the gun was moved of 200 millimeters towards before). The principal defect of this mounting was that two men in a so narrow turret could not maneuver efficiently the gun. This mounting was therefore abandoned. To complicate the things, the gun S-53 that was the better model of the 4 prototypes of 85 mm guns could not to be mounted on the turret conceived by Sormovo ( elevation too limited on this turret). The turret Sormovo had to be modified or another gun, for example the D-5T, had to be installed.
Previously, it was decided that the factory "Krasnoye Sormovo" had to produce a first batch of 100 T-34s armed of the canon of 85 mm D-5T before the end of 1943. The first copy left nevertheless factory that only at the beginning of January 1944. This delay explains by the fact that the GOKO accepted officially the T-34/85 only that January 23 1944. The production of the T-34/85 continued officially to 1946 but certain sources claim that a production at low rate continued at the factory "Krasnoye Sormovo" to 1950.
The T-34 was endowed with an electric circuit to simple wire of a voltage of 24V and 12V. It was supplied by the generator GT-4563A (1 kilowatt), 4 accumulators 6-STE-128 (128 Ah each). It supplied the electric starter ST-700 of the engine, the electric turret traverse engine, the fan, the control and monitoring devices and the radio.
The suspension of the T-34 was composed from 5 doubles road wheels of a diameter of 830 mm, a front idler and a rear sprocket-wheel. To the origin, the road wheels (cast or stamped) had rubber tires. Because of the German advance and rubber scarcities, road wheels completely in steel will be used (exclusively or with road wheels with rubber tires). Three types of steel road wheels were used: cast road wheels with internal shock absorption, stamped road wheels with internal shock absorption, stamped road wheels without internal shock absorption (factory STZ). All the road wheels were independent and mounted on a suspension with vertical helical spring. The idler (double) was cast and endowed with a rubber tire. The rear sprocket-wheel was double and no toothed, the guides of the tracks came to insert themselves between the crossings linking up the two parties of the sprocket-wheel. This one was equally cast. The T-34 was equipped constituted of tracks of 74 links of 550 mm of wide, cast or stamped. From 1942, they were replaced by tracks of 500 mm of wide constituted of 72 links.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 136
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/1/2018 6:30:13 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The gun of 85 mm S-53 was accepted by the red army the 1st January 1944 and the production started in March. Always in March, started the production of T-34/85 armed of this gun with the turret of Nizhnij Tagil (factory 183). This factory was assisted after by the factory 174 of Omsk and the factory 112 "Krasnoye Sormovo". During this time the essays continued, and shown several defects on the recoil mechanism. The factory 92 of Gorki was in charge to resolve this problem and in November December 1944 started the production of a new gun named ZIS-S-53. Altogether 11518 S-53 and 14265 ZIS-S-53 were produced during 1944-1945. The ZIS-S-53 was equally installed on the T-44.
The T-34/85 with the S-53 or the ZIS-S-53, was endowed with a turret for three crewmen with this time a cupola mounted more towards the back. It was endowed also of a rotary periscope MK-4 but the panoramic telescope PTK-5 of the commander was withdrawn. The engine was endowed with new air-filters "Multi-Cyclone". To the otherwise the remainder of the components was unchanged wholesale. As for the T-34, differences appeared between the productions of the different factories at the level of the cupolas of the commander, road wheels (stamped road wheels or cast road wheels with internal absorption of shock), and placement of the joints of built. In January 1945, a new cupola with an alone shutter was introduced and on the copies of the factory "Krasnoye Sormovo", one of the fans of turret was moved towards the center of the roof to furnish a better ventilation.
Many model 1944s were also equipped with MDSh smoke emitters, placed at the rear of the hull near the exhausts. Trials also showed the tank had a tendency to pitch forward due to the increased weight of the turret. The first four vertical coil springs were reinforced accordingly. The model 1944 turret was made up of two massive cast pieces (top and bottom) welded together, with any other external and internal features barely changed. Only the length of the barrel and mounting could help distinguish them, as well as the turret top configuration.
The front hull was protected by 60 mm armor, sloped at a 30° angle, giving an effective frontal thickness of 90 mm, while the sides had 45 mm at 90°, and the rear 45 mm at 45°. The turret face and mantlet were 90 mm thick, with 75 mm sides and 52 mm at the rear. The turret top and bottom were just 20 mm thick. The drive-train comprised a double rear drive sprocket, a front double idler and five double road-wheels of various types. The early production vehicles were given rubberized ones, but because of shortages the model 1944 had metal-trimmed spoked models, which became the norm. These gave a rough ride, despite the Christie type huge vertical coil springs, which probably reached the very limits of their potential.
The engine was almost unchanged since the first T-34, still the reliable and very sturdy 38-liters water-cooled V-2-34 V12 diesel, which developed 520 hp @2000/2600 rpm, giving a 16.25 hp/ton ratio. It was coupled with the same old constant mesh all spur gear transmission (nearly obsolete), with 4 forward and 1 reverse gears and steering by clutch brakes, which were a driver’s nightmare. The best average speed obtained in tests was 55 km/h, but the usual cruise speed was around 47-50 km/h and the best possible off-road speed was around 30 km/h. The T-34/85 was still quite mobile and agile, having a turning radius of about 7.7 m. The starter was electric as well as the turret traverse, served by 24 or 12-volts electrical systems.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 137
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/2/2018 6:38:03 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The KV-1 was criticized by its crews for its poor mobility and the lack of a larger caliber gun than the T-34 medium tank. It was much more expensive than the T-34, without having greater combat performance. Moscow ordered some KV-1 assembly lines to shift to T-34 production, leading to fears that KV-1 production would be halted and the SKB-2 design bureau, led by Kotin, closed. In 1942, this problem was partially addressed by the KV-1S tank, which had thinner armor than the original, making it lighter and faster. It was competitive with the T-34 but at the cost of no longer having the heavier armor. Production of the KV-1S was gradually replaced by the SU-152 and ended in April 1943.
The capture of a German Tiger tank in January 1943 led to a decision to develop a new heavy tank, which was given the codename Object 237. Before the Object 237 had time to mature, intense tank fighting in the summer of 1943 demanded a response. Dukhov's team was instructed to create a stopgap KV tank, the KV-85, which was armed with the 52-K-derivative gun of the SU-85, the 85 mm D-5T, that proved capable of penetrating the Tiger I from 500 m. The KV-85 was created by mounting an Object 237 turret on a KV-1S hull. To accommodate the Object 237 turret, the KV-1S hull was modified, increasing the diameter of the turret ring with fillets on the sides of the hull. The radio operator was replaced with an ammunition rack for the larger 85 mm ammunition. The hull MG was then moved to the opposite side of the driver and fixed in place to be operated by the driver. The Object 237 prototype, a version of the cancelled KV-13, was accepted for production as the IS-85 heavy tank. First deliveries were made in October 1943, and the tanks went immediately into service. Production ended in January 1944. Its designation was simplified to IS-1 after the introduction of the IS-122, later renamed as IS-2 for security purposes. From September to October 1943, a total of 130 KV-85s were produced, before the assembly lines began to shift over. Like the KV-1S, the KV-85 served in dwindling numbers and was quickly overshadowed by the superior IS Stalin series.
By 1942, the 76.2mm F-34 tank gun of the T-34 medium tank was found to be lacking in range and penetration compared to the German 75 mm Pak 40 anti-tank gun, new mounted on the Stug III and Panzer IV, and markedly inferior to the 88-mm gun of the Tiger I. Military planners directed the design bureaus of both Gen. Vasiliy Grabin and Gen. Fyodor Petrov to modify the 85mm anti-aircraft gun for use as an anti-tank weapon. Petrov's bureau developed the D-5 85mm gun. Though much too large for the T-34 turret, it could be mounted in the chassis of the SU-122 self-propelled gun to create a tank destroyer. This was done, and the SU-85 tank destroyer went into production. Meanwhile, efforts were underway to redesign the T-34 turret to make it large enough to accommodate the newly developed gun.
Grabin, who had been working on a second 85mm gun, the ZiS-53, at Joseph Stalin Factory No. 92 in Gorky near Moscow, was reassigned to the Central Artillery Design Bureau (TsAKB) in Moscow. His project was turned over to 23-year-old A. Savin. A third team led by K. Siderenko was assigned to yet another 85mm gun project, and developed the S-18, to be used in the modified T-34 turret. The resulting guns were tested at Gorokhoviesky Proving Grounds near Gorky, with Grabin's ZiS-53 winning the competition. However, the new T-34/85's turret had been designed to accommodate the already-available D-5 gun, and did not mate properly with Grabin's gun. The T-34/85 tank went into production making use of the D-5 gun (designated D-5T, for "tank"). Savin was put to work modifying Grabin's gun to fit the new turret and incorporate other improvements. His initial was added to his gun's designation in recognition of his contribution: the ZiS-S-53. From T-34/85 Model 1944 onwards, all T-34/85s used Savin's ZiS-S-53. It went into production in the spring of 1944. A new antitank gun was then developed, the 100 mm field gun M1944 (BS-3).





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 138
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/3/2018 6:03:27 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		Initially the IS2 (Josef Stalin) heavy tank incorporated a re-designed KV hull and chassis combined with a new three-man turret. The first prototypes were built with an 85 mm gun and then with a new 100 mm gun, but the production versions had a 122 mm gun chosen for its better HE capability and ease of production. With a partly sloped frontal armor of 120 mm thick and, moreover, a new massive 122 mm main gun, the new heavy tank seemed to be just the trump card Stalin. 3,854 units of IS-2 types were built between late 1943 and mid 1945. The main tactical drawbacks of the IS series were their slow rate of fire and their stowage of only 28 rounds.
The choice of a new 122 mm gun was studied by Kotin’s team at Zavod Nr.9. As was shown at Kursk, the 122 and 152 mm guns were better suited to take on the new German tanks, the Tiger, Panther and Elefant. It was obvious that a 122 mm would be most recommended to be fitted on the new heavy tank. The adapted field gun A19 model 1937, designed by General A. A. Petrov, had a single chamber muzzle brake, was fitted with a recoil cradle and loading/lifting mechanism from the experimental U-11 and hybridized with a M-30 howitzer mount.
Initial proposals for the turret included a fully revolving commander cupola also serving a DSHT heavy machine gun. The latter was intended for AA defense and was finally accepted in the definitive production design. The second great innovative figure of the IS-2 was its new frontal armor, still stepped, but uniformly “blended” with 120 mm, offering better resistance while still saving weight. Thanks to this, the glacis could now withstand a 88 mm AP shell at 1000 m. It was believed the frontal armor would protect the tank until the target was within a 460 m range, where the heavy round could have its maximum impact.
The production started in November 1943 at the Chelyabinsk factory. Around 102 to 107 IS-122s were delivered between December 1943 and February 1944, but the bulk of the production started in February 1944, with around 2,252 delivered until the end of the year, perhaps 50% being of the new IS-2 1944 model. As soon as they were put into service, alarming reports claimed that the limited ammo provision always meant supply had to be carried by following trucks, and the low rate of fire was almost half that of the T-34/85, while the latter had greater muzzle velocity.
By 1944, a new version of the 122 mm gun, the D-25T, already tested in January on a single IS-122, was accepted in service to replace the A19. It could penetrate 140 mm of armor at 500 m. But, most important, the breech mechanism, although still semi-automatic, was geared to sustain a reduced loading time. The drawing of the glacis is to modify to make it more effective and the driver's hatch is removed, thus improving structural resistance of the front part of the hull while simplifying the production. The turret accommodates from now a gun of 122 mm D-25T equipped with a different muzzle brake and especially a semi-automatic system of loading. This new model will be baptized IS-2 model 1944 or IS-2M. The tank receives also new optics, positioned differently and that the hatches of observation are removed.
Tactically, the IS-2s were deployed with the elite Guards Battalions, which acted on request wherever a strongpoint was encountered. Its capacity to destroy Panthers and Tigers, as well as fortifications with HE rounds, made it irreplaceable. A typical Guard Tank Brigade had 3 regiments of 65 IS-2s each. Independent Guard units also existed with fewer vehicles and with their supply train. Their first action was in February 1944 at Korsun Chevchenkovski, Ukraine. Later, a single unit of 10 IS-2s from the 72nd Regiment engaged and claimed to have destroyed no less than 41 Tigers and “Ferdinands” in several engagements between April and May 1944, claiming the loss of eight tanks. The frontal armor proved impervious to the 88 mm at usual German firing distances of 1000 m and more. Any attempts by a single “Tiger” to fight a “Stalin” one-on-one can only result in the loss of a priceless war machine.” Soon, new tactical rules were devised to flank and surround IS-2s and get shots in its vulnerable sides, rear and the sensitive “shot trap” rear turret basket, and only at short range. The Battle of Berlin saw more than 67 IS-2s destroyed in action, mostly by the “Faustniks” (panzerfausts).





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 139
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/4/2018 6:02:13 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		During the summer 1944, the Russians launched a program of heavy tanks, Kirovets-1 because of the heavy losses undergone because of the German anti-tank weapons. The first project was to be equipped with a glacis composed of two plates welded enters of which the edge was laid out in longitude (pike nose). This provision made it possible to reduce the weight of the tank and the engineers hoped that this type of nose would offer more resistance to the enemy's fire. This version did not have an radio-operator and the driver had sat in the center of the cockpit. The hull was welded because much foundries were occupied by the production of the turrets of the IS-2 and T-34 and that the Russians had made large progress in the welding assembly. The second project was equipped with a revolutionary turret in the shape of a flat roller of river and was armed with 122 mm D-25T, which strongly resembles that of the modern Russian tanks. It had as a characteristic to deviate the enemy's piercing rounds more easily. Important fact, the good provision of the elements allowed without increasing dimensions to install a shielding definitely thicker (250 mm max. in the place of 100 mm for the IS-2). The two prototypes were shown to the Minister of Industry of the armored tanks, V.A. Malyshev. This last decided to mix the interesting elements of the two projects to constitute only one model: the turret of the n°2 project was to be assembled on the hull of the n°1 project. The first prototype of this breakthrough tank IS-3 (Shchuka) called project 703 was finalized in October 1944. Its low, round, and extremely sloped turret was a revolutionary design, and its pointed hull front gave rise to its being nicknamed the "Pike". Stalin accepted little after the new tank for the production.
The IS-3 had of an excellent hull and an excellent turret, equipped with a tilted shielding which provided the tank an excellent protection. In front of the driver had a small trap door with a rotary episcope (flanked on the left of the single front headlight), just on the top of the "nose of pike" glacis typical type. Let us note that the periscope was to be removed to open the trap door. The back plate of the hull leaned backwards. The sides of the superstructure were also sloping and overhung the tracks.
The gun of 122 mm D-25T semi-automatic was equipped with a muzzle brake and had a rate of shooting of 2-3 shootings per minute. The IS-3 carried like the IS-2 28 ammunition of 122 mm: 18 high-explosive rounds with fragmentation and 10 piercing rounds. One can deduce from it, that the enemy infantry and the light targets were the principal objectives of this tank. Optics was of type TSh-17 and POP. The armament was supplemented by a machine-gun DT of 7.62mm assembled in front of the turret with the gun and by an anti-aircraft heavy machine gun DShK of 12.7mm assembled on a circular mounting on the roof of the turret. The turret did not have a cupola of commander but two trap doors assembled on hinges. It was also equipped with three episcopes rotary. The crew of the IS-3 was composed of 4 men: the pilot, the commander, the gunner and the loader.
The IS-3 was equipped with 4 inboard tanks (520 L on the whole) laid out by pars on the two sides of the engine. One could add to it 4 cylindrical external tanks (90 L each one) laid out by pars on each sides of the rear deck. These external tanks could be ejected easily in the event of sudden attack of the enemy. The IS-3 was also equipped with the same engine as the IS- 2 (V-12 diesel V-2-IS of 600 hp) and with the same transmission (4 forward speeds and a reverse speed) and the same suspension. The performances of the two tanks were extremely similar. Let us note that if the two tanks had about the same weight, the IS-3 were protected better especially on the level from the turret.
The IS-3 was first issued at the time of the battle of Berlin. It is not definitely known if IS3 was participate in any combat; the Soviets claim they did. It is possible that IS-3 were used on the Far East front against the Japanese in August 1945. In all 350 IS-3 were produced during 1945. When was displayed in September 1945 they caused great concern to Western observers and significantly influenced post-war Western designs.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 140
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/5/2018 6:28:56 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		HaL Soviet Availability Vehicles Part 1




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 141
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/6/2018 4:55:45 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The Suka (SU-76M) was designed as a combination assault gun/tank destroyer on a much modified T-70 hull and chassis. The increasing effectiveness of German armor and guns soon relegated it to the infantry support role, however, where it saw widespread use. Despite all, some of the projectiles embarked by the SU-76, were anti-tank rounds in case of impromptu encounter.
Because of the few reliability of the parallel engines used on the SU-76 of which the synchronization was almost impossible, the production of the SU-76 was stopped March 21 1943 while only 350 copies had been produced. In anticipation of his offensive of summer, the GKO had little time to resolve this problem. May 17 1942, an improved version was proposed, the SU-12M or SU-76M (M = modernized) was tested and entered in production finally in June. The SU-76M was endowed with a transmission and two modernized engines installed on the hull of the SU-76. The modifications didn't correct totally the malfunctions of the SU-76. N. A. Astrov and A. A. Lipgart, GAZ plant chief engineers, chose to place the two engines in tandem on the right hand side, so to mate them more easily on a common transmission. The initial casemate roof was eliminated, replaced by a simple canvas. Mass-production of the SU-76M started as soon as February-March 1943. The production of the SU-76M started in May 1943 and ended in 1945 with a total of 11300 vehicles produced.
It was initially used in conjunction with the SU-122 on the Volkhov Front in the attempt to relieve Leningrad. To ease logistics, in mid 1943 the SU-76 were placed in their own light SPA regiments of 21 vehicles each (with each battery comprised of four vehicles). 12,671 SU-76 and ZSU-37 AA vehicles were built between 1942 and mid 1945. The SU-76 was not well-liked by its crews, as evidenced by its nickname, "Bitch".
The biggest advantages of the SU-76 were its low outline, its big mobility and its weak ground pressure that allowed to operate in the forest and marshy zones with the support of the infantry destroying all the strengthened points met.
As the first Soviet SPG, the SU-76 filled three roles in the Red Army: light assault gun, mobile anti-tank weapon and mobile gun for indirect fire. In the first case the open compartment eased communications between ground troops and battlefield awareness. It had greater firepower compared to previous infantry tanks, and was hugely popular in its close support role. However, it needed to be well defended by infantry in an urban theater, since its open compartment made it highly vulnerable to grenades and improvises explosives like Molotov cocktails, not to mention the Panzerfaust.
It could fire a large variety of ammo, ranging from the usual armor-piercing rounds, hollow charge, high explosive, fragmentation, shrapnel and incendiary rounds. As a tank-hunter, the high velocity of the gun, reinforced by APCR ammunition, could easily destroy any German tank up to the Panther (shot in the flank of rear), but instructions were given to aim at the Tiger’s tracks or gun barrel. It was also well suited for ambushes, having a low profile easy to camouflage and low noise level. It was also fast in reverse if needed. Another advantage procured by the large tracks and low ground pressure was its ability to sneak out through swamps, as it showed during the Belarus liberation campaign in 1944.
In 1943, a light artillery self-propelled regiment had 21 SU-76M. At the End of 1944 - beginning 1945, 17 self-propelled artillery batteries of 16 vehicles each were constituted and attached to the riffles divisions. In the first half of 1944, the light self-propelled artillery brigades of the reserve of the High Command (RGK) were created with each 16 SU-76M and 5 T-70.
At the end of the second World War, the Red army had 119 light self-propelled artillery regiments and 7 self-propelled artillery brigades.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 142
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/7/2018 8:17:35 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The German met a lot of successes with their assault guns StuG III very effective and not very costly. The Russians that lacked this vehicle kind endow with a fight compartment more spacious, a frontal armor thicker and a more powerful armament than a classical tank. In April 1942, the GAU invited several design offices to develop an assault gun armed of a gun of 122 mm or more. All these works were coordinated by the Ministry of the tank industry (NKTP). Two of these projects were realized in metal. The first model, was the U-35 of Uralmash and the second, the SG-122(A) of factory n°592. The U-35 was a T-34 endow with a wide armored superstructure installed to the place of the fight compartment and turret. This superstructure welcomed the howitzer M-30 of 122 mm. The SG-122(A) was for its part a former German StuG III modified and equipped of the same armament that the U-35. In July 1942, the SG-122 was accepted for the service, but the experience helping was quickly considered as a failure and the lack of replacement pieces available returned its maintenance random. In December 1942, after several tests, the U-35 was accepted for the service and the GKO ordered immediately the production of the new assault gun renamed SU-122.
The SU-122 was an assault gun consisting of an M-30S field howitzer mounted on the hull and chassis of the T-34. At the end of 1942, 25 copies had been produced. From this date 1123 other specimens were made by Uralmash. In total, 1,148 were built between 1942-44.
The SU-122 had a frontal armor of 45 mm. The howitzer of 122 mm M-30 possessed an elevation from -3° to + 26° and a limited traverse on 10° of every side. If at first the SU-122 used exclusively high explosive ammo, from May 1943, it was equally endowed with anti-tank high explosive ammo (HEAT) BP-460A that noticeably improved its anti-tank capacities on longer distances. No secondary armament did not be available except the light weapons of the crew. The access to the combat compartment was done through an alone opening presents on the roof of the superstructure.
The crew was composed from five men: the driver (to the left), the gunner (to the left behind the driver, the commander (to the right) and two loaders (behind the breech). The SU-122 being based on the T-34, it preserved a lot of equipment and of mechanisms of the latter as the chassis, the suspension, the transmission-engine group,... in order to increase the production capacities and diminish the costs. It disposed equally of almost them same performances level mobility.
In December 1942, the first mixed regiment was constituted. This unity was constituted of 4 batteries of SU-76 (16+1 vehicle) and two batteries of SU-122 (8 vehicles). At the end of January 1943, two SU-122 regiments were constituted and sent in battle close to Leningrad. In March 1943, two new SU-122 regiment were sent to the front. The mixed composition SU-76-SU-122 was not very popular because of the few reliability of the SU-76 while the SU-122 was very appreciated. After, the SU-76 were reorganized in separated light self-propelled artillery regiments and the SU-122 in medium self-propelled artillery regiments. The SU-122 regiments were constituted of 4 batteries (16 SU-122 in total) and a Command T-34. Thanks to its fire power and its good protection, the SU-122 was well welcomed by the crews. The SU-122 could destroy any German tank even the Tigers to reasonable distances.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 143
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/8/2018 4:42:13 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		The ISU-122 & ISU-152 were continuations of the SU-152 concept, but using the IS chassis. In action, the greater armor piercing capability and longer range of the 122mm gun were complemented by the 152mm's better HE performance. They were used almost exclusively for direct fire, in the second wave of tank attacks. Their greatest liability was their ammunition capacity, which was only 30 and 20 rounds respectively. The ISU-122 and 152 were used in heavy SPA regiments (as per the SU-152), and after 1944 also in Guards heavy SPA brigades (as per the SU-100). From the end of 1943 and during 1944, the factory n°100 (ChKZ) produced 645 ISU-122, and in 1944-1945, 1400 ISU-122S.
When the Russian engineers was developing the ISU-152 on the basis of the chassis of the tank IS, it was to suggest to mount equally on the new self-propelled gun the gun of 122 mm A-19 L/46.3 to solve the lack of howitzers of 152 mm available. During the summer 1943, the design office of Chelyabinsk (SKB-2) received the order to mount this gun to the place of the ML-20S. The gun of 122 mm had the advantage to have the same mount that the howitzer of 152.4 mm. At the end of 1942, the first prototype (Obeyt 242) was finalized and tested. It was accepted for the service under the name of ISU-122.
During its service it ISU-122 was modified to improve its firepower. The gun of 122 mm A-19 was modernized first of all on the tanks IS then on the ISU-122. The gun was equipped of a new semi-automatic breech and renamed D-25S. This modernization permit to double the fire rate of the weapon this that is strong noticeable. The models equipped of this gun were baptized ISU-122S or ISU-122-2 (Obeyt 249 for the prototype). The ISU-122S was equally endowed with a new thicker mantlet.
The ISU-122 being based on the IS-2 chassis, it preserved of the latter many equipment and mechanisms. The suspension and the engine-transmission group remained unchanged even if new fuel tanks were installed. The gun of 122 mm installed in the superstructure was at the origin the A-19 model 1931/43 L/46.3 supplied with 20-30 projectiles of 122 mm. It was protected by the same mantlet that the howitzer of 152.4 mm ISU-152. This gun had a range of 13000 m and a fire rate of 2-3 rounds/minute. It was coupled with a ST-18 sight. This gun put to fire 2 -pieces rounds, semi-armor piercing and explosive or to fragmentation. The A-19 could pierce 150 mm of armor to 1000 m. The armament was completed by a heavy machine gun of 12.7 mm DShK mounted on the roof of the superstructure, supplied with 500 projectiles. This gun will be replaced by the D-25S of same caliber endowed with a semi-automatic breech that allowed a better fire rate. The D-25S was equipped equally of a new thicker mantlet and a muzzle brake. This gun had a better penetration capacity than the preceding one. It was coupled with a TSh-17 sight. It put to fire same ammo that the A-19. The crew disposed again for its defense of PPS or PPSh submachine-guns and of grenades F-1.
The access to the vehicle was done through two circular hatches with two shutters situated in the front of the roof or through a rectangular hatch with two shutters between the roof and the rear plate of the superstructure. All these hatches where mounted on hinges and had a rotary episcope. The driver had for his vision a aboard situated on the frontal plate of the superstructure.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 144
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/9/2018 6:12:53 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		To the look of the success of the SU-152, the Russian engineers decided to conceive a similar vehicle on the basis of the chassis of the IS tank of which the production had just been launched to the ChKZ. Shortly after the SU-152’s deployment, the NKTP ordered design teams in Chelyabinsk, in cooperation with the Mechanized Artillery Bureau, and General F. Petrov, to design two new heavy assault guns based on the IS-2 hull on May 25th, 1943. The development for this tank was undertaken by the famous Joseph Kotin, and G.N. Moskvin as the main designer – the first prototype was ready in only a month.
The ISU-152 was an absolute nightmare for the Wehrmacht. Much like the SU-152, it was capable of blowing Tiger, Ferdinand, and Panther turrets/casemates open. However, what made the ISU-152 inherently better than the SU-152 was its superior armor and towing power. It had three major roles – assault gun, tank destroyer and mobile artillery, which made it one of the most versatile heavy vehicles of the war.
The ISU-152 was endowed with a combat compartment more spacious than the one of the SU-152, wiht a higher superstructure, more rectangular, and also featured less sloped side armor. Thicker frontal and side armor (90 mm instead of 60 mm) did not make the crew compartment any smaller, so there was still space for 20 shells of 152.4 mm for the ML-20S gun. The other main differences between the SU-152 and the IS-152 were that the suspension was lower, and a heavy, two-piece gun mantlet was bolted onto the right of the hull. It underwent factory trials in September, 1943, but a large number of problems with the design was encountered, so the design was reworked. By November 6th, 1943, an order was issued for this tank to be mass produced and it was now known as the ISU-152. Production started in December and replaced production of the SU-152 at the Chelyabinsk Kirovsk Plant. Between December 1943 and May 1945, 1885 ISU-152s were made. When production finally ended in 1947, 3242 vehicles had been produced.
The ISU-152 was hardly a different concept to other Soviet self-propelled guns. It still featured two compartments – the fighting compartment and ammo storage in the front, and engine and transmission at the back. The gun was mounted slightly off-center and could traverse 12 degrees left and right. It had 12 torsion bars, 6 road wheels, rear drive sprockets, and front idlers identical to road wheels, thus making maintenance easier. There were three internal fuel tanks – one in the rear compartment, and two in the fighting compartment. Like most late-war Soviet tanks, there were also up to four external fuel tanks that were not connected to the engine. The howitzer of 152.4 mm ML-20S installed in the superstructure was supplied with 20 projectiles of 152.4 mm. It was protected by the same mantlet that the gun of 122 mm (A-19) of ISU-122. This gun had a range of 8960 m and was coupled with KT-5 sight. This howitzer put to fire 2-pieces rounds, semi-armor piercing and high explosive or to fragmentation. The ML-20S could pierce 120 mm of armor to 1000 m. The armament was completed by a heavy machine gun of 12.7 mm DShK mounted on the roof of the superstructure, supplied with 1000 projectiles. The crew disposed again for its defense of PPS or PPSh submachine-guns and of grenades F-1.
During the production one tried to rearm the ISU-152 while using different pieces as the 152 mm BR-8 with long barrel, the 152 mm BL-10 and the 130 mm S-26. All these attempts not out passed never the stage of the prototype.
All roof hatches were fitted with periscopes, as well as there being two gun sights – a telescopic, and a panoramic ST-10. An intercom was also fitted, and each vehicle had a standard 10R or 10RK radio set. The crew was also given a pair of PPSh-41 sub-machine guns with up to 1491 rounds, as well as 20 F-1 grenades in case they needed to abandon the vehicle in combat. Giving the crew weapons was not at all an uncommon practice. Whilst at first, the ISU was based on the IS-1 hull, it was later based on the IS-2 hull in 1944, which meant that the vehicle had extra fuel capacity, a newer radio, a slightly modernized main gun, mantlet armor was increased, and finally, an AA machine gun was installed in an AA mount. Also, a fourth, round hatch was fitted at the top right of the roof, next to the rectangular hatch on the left-hand side. The later ISU-152 modifications, with newer gun and slightly longer barrel, (4.9 meters), had a maximum range of fire of up to 13,000 meters.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 145
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/10/2018 6:03:00 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		After the failure of the SMK and T-100 multi-turreted heavy tanks, the Russians decided to develop a more conventional heavy tank, the KV (Klementi Vorochilov - commisar of the people for the defense) that was realized with only one turret, armed of two coaxial guns, one of 76.2 mm and the other of 45 mm. The armament was supplemented by a machine-gun of 7.62 mm DT assembled on the hull. It kept of SMK, the hull, the transmission, the equipment of optics. It was propelled by powerful diesel V-12 V-2K. September 5, 1939, it was sent in Moscow and was presented at the Soviet government the 25 of the same month. October 8 it was returned to Leningrad to be tested there. When the Winter War, KV was sent to the front with the SMK (91st Bataillon of tank and 20th Brigade of heavy tanks). KV showed its superiority on the SMK. On the ground, changes were made to KV. Indeed the gun of 45 mm was removed and replaced by a machine-gun of 7.62 mm DT and another machine-gun was placed at the rear of the turret. December 19, 1939, KV was officially baptized KV-1 and accepted for the service in the Red Army.
The KV-1 was produced only by one factory, the factory n°100 Kirovsky of Leningrad (LKZ). This factory in 1941, will amalgamate with other factories and will be relocated behind the Ural to Chelyabinsk (ChKZ or Tankograd). The first model called KV-1 model 1939 was produced with approximately 100 specimens in 1940 by the LKZ. The second model called KV-1E model 1940 was produced to several thousands of specimens by the LKZ during spring and the summer 1941, the third model called KV-1 model 1941 was it also produced to several thousands of specimens in 1941-1942 by the LKZ then by ChKZ. The only precise figures of were provided for KV-1S model 1942 which was produced to 1370 specimens from August 1942 to April 1943 by ChKZ.
In May 1940, a first production plan envisaging 200 units was accepted but the tests on the tank had however not been finished and of defects still remained. The tests will begin again in May 1940 in Kubinka and in the area of Leningrad. After the KV-1 was tested on 2648 km, many technical problems in particular to the level of the transmission, gear box and chassis were discovered. However the production was launched and was not stopped, although the engineers of the SKB proposed to make it to correct these defects.
The KV-1 was produced until 1942 and was modified little. These modifications however will give rise to 4 models of KV-1. In February 1940, the KV-1 was used for the very first time at the combat in Finland. At the time of the beginning of Barbarossa, the Russians had 635 specimens and at the time of the battle of Moscow 1364. At the beginning of 1943, because of the performances of the German anti-tank weapons, the production of the KV-1 was stopped and the it-last was replaced by the KV-85 on the assembly lines.
The KV caused great consternation amongst the Germans when they first en-countered it. Barring a lucky track hit, it was almost totally invulnerable to all German guns save the 88s and large caliber artillery pieces. Its chief drawbacks were a poor turret layout and the fact that it was both extremely tiring to drive and unwieldy in action (the KV's turret had a three-man crew, but its turret configuration precluded the commander's being Open Topped while the MA was being used). 508 KV were in service on June 22. 3,015 KV-1 types were built. Most Soviet independent tank battalions and brigades in the 1941-42 period contained a mixture of KV, T-34, and recon tanks. Soviet heavy tank platoons consisted of only two tanks each, with five tanks per company. 'The KVs' first major combat came with the German invasion, although a few KV-1 Model 1939 prototypes saw action near Summa, Finland, as early as 12/39.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 146
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/11/2018 4:59:24 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		In 1941 came a new model equipped with the very new gun of 76.2 mm ZIS-5 (sometimes F-34). Separately the gun and a weight of 45000 kg, it had there so to speak no difference if not the machine-gun of hull, between the model 1939 and the model 1941.
In July 1941, F-32 itself was replaced by the new gun of 76.2 mm ZIS-5 similar to F-34 which equipped T-34/76 (and some KV-1). This new gun was installed in a new cast turret (the preceding one was welded) with a thicker shielding. This gun equipped KV-1 model 1941 and KV-1s model 1942. KV-1S accepted a new cast turret with cupola of commander
The armament of the turret was supplemented by two machine-guns of 7.62 mm DT. The first was assembled coaxially to the gun of 76.2 mm, whereas the second was assembled on ball mount to the back of the turret. The turrets of various versions of the KV-1 were angular except for that of KV-1s which was of round form.
The standard engine of the KV-1 is diesel V-12 V-2K (water-cooled) developing 600 hp to 2000 rpm. This engine was installed in the back compartment with the transmission. The KV-1 transported 600 L of diesel in its inboard fuel tanks but could be also equipped with external fuel tanks. The 600 L allowed him an autonomy on road of 250 km. The diesel engine was not very greedy and consumed only 240L/100 km. Because of its weight, the KV-1 could only reach the 35 km/h on road. To make of KV-1 a more faster tank, the engineers created a new model, KV-1s equipped with a shielding less important and equipped with the new diesel V12 V-2Ks engine. This engine always developed 600 hp but to only 1900 rpm. Thanks to these changes, KV-1s could from now reach the 43 km/h on road.
The suspension of the KV-1 was with torsion bars. There was each side 6 small double road wheels with steel bindings, a front double idler and a rear double sprocket-wheel like three double return rollers. It is interessant to note that the road wheels were laid out in an unequal way throughout lower hull.
The KV-1 was equipped with steel tracks 650 mm broad with center guides. These tracks included each one 87 sections. The tracks were in contact with the ground on 4.33 m. The tracks of 650 mm offered a pressure on the ground of 0.77 kg/cm2. KV-1s was equipped with tracks 670 mm broad offering a pressure on the ground less: 0.73 kg/cm2.
By afterwards with the increase in the effectiveness and the fire power in the German anti-tank guns, the KV-1 lost a part of its invincibility but however kept throughout its career an excellent protection global. Still let us note that the armor-plates were welded enters for the hull, just as for the turret. However, the KV-1 1941 and KV-1S will be equipped with cast turrets.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 147
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/12/2018 5:46:24 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		In December 1941, the factory n°200 proposed a new cast turret similar to that of the KV-1 model 1941, but reinforced with a shielding reaching from now 120 mm. However thanks to a good distribution of the shielding the mass is not increased for the turret. The new turret was protected by a broader ring and the back machine-gun had a collar of shielding. The rear deck was replaced by an armor plate easier to manufacture, and the maximum shielding of the hull passes to 110 mm. This increase of the shielding overloads the road-wheels and a new cast model with "wings", more resistant (but also more economic) was thus designed to compensate.
The model 1942 was essentially a late up-armored model (10-15 mm), either with a cast or welded turret. This was also the biggest production of the type, with around 1700 units. They were also all armed with the 76.2 mm ZiS-5 and sometimes equipped with AA mounts. However, criticism about the series prompted parallel studies to improve the KV-1 as a whole. These reports stated that its only asset was excellent protection, however, speed and agility were poor, the transmission proved often prone to break downs, the suspensions, crumbling under the raising weight also showed critical stress failures, as well as the overwhelmed engine (the V12 V-2K, a modified version of the T-34 diesel). Final weight of this 1942 version was around 48 tons. Only the German Tiger was equivalent in weight, but was equipped with better optics and a gun which far outclassed anything on the field. This led to the two last improved versions of the type, before the production really stopped in favor of better designs.
The engine of the KV-1 was surmounted by a rear deck (which made a projection over the rear of lower hull) made up of two plates. The plate just behind the turret was provided with two grids of ventilation, a trap door bolted between the grids (with a broad lid in the shape of dome protecting the air intake of the ventilator) and two small pipes of ventilation. The other plate, bolted, was equipped with two small trap doors of maintenance. The back plate of the lower hull was equipped only with two loops of towing.
The shielding of the KV-1 was very heavy for a tank of this time. Let us recall that the KV-1 were conceived at the beginning of the war. With a shielding frontal (and side) of 75 mm, it was quasi indestructible for the German anti-tank weapons of this time. Indeed the guns of 37 mm and 75 mm (with short barrel) of Panzers III and IV could not bore the frontal plates of the KV-1. The situation was still worse with the KV-1E which was equipped with a appliqué armor (additional plates) of 35 mm, which made a shielding frontal of 110 mm (like the Tiger). Of course the price to be paid was at the level of mobility and the KV-1 could not support the comparison with T-34 on this level. To solve this problem, the Russian engineers will reduce (on KV-1s) the thickness of the shielding to the level of the lower hull mainly, allowing to recover some km/h.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 148
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/13/2018 5:35:14 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		Up-armoring of the KV was started even before Operation Barbarossa, based on faulty intelligence reports that the Germans were massively up-gunning their tanks. Moreover, as new German weapons and ammunition were encountered, the Soviets introduced further modifications and retrofitted many of the surviving older KV with various types of applique armor. Each successive addition to their weight engendered a further loss of mobility however—and although the front lines were calling for faster tanks with thicker armor, the critical shortage of heavy tanks meant that the current models had to remain in production and could only be improved through expediencies. Due to their hampering of operations when used with the faster T-34, from 7/42 KV were placed in separate independent heavy tank regiments of 21 KV each.
In 1940 came a new model equipped with additional armor-plates and with a new 76.2 mm gun, the KV-1E (E for "s ekranami" = shielding applied). These 35mm thickness plates were bolted on the frontal plate of the lower hull, the frontal plate of the superstructure, the sides of the superstructure and the turret. This new model was armed with the gun of 76.2 mm F-32 (improved ammunition) in a new cast turret. The increase in the shielding made pass the weight of the tank to 47500 kg, which reduced its maximum speed (30 km/h in the place of 35 km/h). To supplement the armament a machine-gun of hull on ball mount was installed on the frontal plate of the superstructure, on the right.
The crew of the KV-1 was composed of 5 men of which three had sat in the compartment of combat: the driver (mechanic), the copilot and the radio operator. The driver had sat in the center, in front and one can see his armored port of vision on the frontal plate of the superstructure. For its vision, he had in addition one periscope on the front deck, slightly shifted towards the right. The single headlight of the KV-1 was located on the right of the port of vision. On the KV-1 1939, there was no bow machine-gun, but on the other models a machine-gun DT of 7.62 mm was installed on ball mount, to the left of the port of vision. To reach the inside of the hull, a round hatch was present on the front deck. The KV-1 had a gear box comprising 5 forward speeds and 1 reverse, this box was of bad quality, which strongly handicapped the KV-1 during all its service. The steering was given while slowing down on one of the two tracks or by modifying the power transmitted to the one of the back sprocket-wheels.
The remainder of the front compartment was devoted to the station of combat. The KV-1 did not have a well of turret, which wants to say that the commander-loader and the gunner were upright on the floor of the station of combat at the time of engagements. They thus followed the rotation of the turret while going on this floor which was encumbered by various equipment such as for example the ammunition stowage. The KV-1 transported in its ammunition stowage, 111 rounds of 76.2mm (guns L-11 and F-32) or 114 rounds of 76.2 mm (F-34 guns and ZIS-5). On KV-1s armed with the ZIS-5, there were only 102 projectiles of 76.2 mm. For its machine-guns of 7.62 mm DT, the KV-1 had 3024 cartridges. The station of combat was separated from the engine compartment by a wall fire protection. At the external level, the nose of the hull was of form pointed and equipped with two loops of towing. The first KV-1 were armed with the gun of 76.2 mm L-11 L/30.5 Model 1938/39. From the end of 1940, it was replaced by the gun of 76.2 mm more modern F-32 (KV-1E 1940.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 149
RE: Heroes and Leaders mod - 4/14/2018 5:51:07 PM   
asl3d


Posts: 6531
Joined: 2/6/2017
Status: offline 		By mid 1942 the number of Soviet tanks was again on the increase, and this luxury allowed the KV-1S to be introduced in order to increase the mobility of the heavy tank. In some ways it was a retrograde step, since its armor had to be drastically thinned; however, its new three-man turret freed the commander of his distracting need to also be the loader. During the summer 1942, the prototype was tested and in August 20, 1942, the production began. However at the time of its appearance, the Red Army had an urgent need for better protected tanks! Its production was removed in April 1943. 1,232 KV-1S were built.
This version was equipped with a turret slightly smaller (with cupola of commander) as well as lighter shielding on certain parts. The gun was as on the model of 1941, 76.2 mm ZIS-5. This new model also was equipped with a version improved of the diesel engine V12 V-2K, V-2K-s (from where the "S" (skorostnoy or speed) of KV-1S). This engine always developed 600 hp but with only 1900 rpm with the place of 2000 for the V-2K. The road wheels were to replace by lighter and new 670 mm broad tracks were installed. The gear box was also replaced. All these changes made it possible to KV-1s to reach the 43 km/h on road.
L-11 and F-32 were equipped with telescopic sight TOD-6 and two panoramic periscopes PT-6 whereas F-34 and the ZIS-5 were equipped with telescopic sight TMFD and two panoramic periscopes PTK. On the roof of the turret came to be added 4 fixed episcopes and on each side a slit of vision. The access to the turret was done via the hatch of the commander on the roof. Let us note that on KV-1s, there were two hatches of access (cupola of commander (with 6 fixed episcopes) and hatch of the gunner).
The KV-1 with its gun of 76.2 mm and its maximum shielding of 75 mm was quite unpleasant surprise for the Germans who discovered it at the same time as T-34. Indeed no German gun with share the anti-aircraft gun of 88 mm, was able to bore the shielding of the KV-1 and especially not the too insufficient guns of 37 mm and 50 mm of Panzer III and even the short tube court of the 75 mm gun of Panzer IV. With its advantage, in more of a thick shielding, broad tracks, a good armament, a good diesel engine and an excellent suspension. The situation was such as only one KV-1 stopped all Panzertruppe during a whole day close to Ostrov (Baltic states). It was destroyed the following day by an anti-aircraft gun of 88 mm (only weapon able to bore its shielding) but after having destroyed 7 German tanks, an anti-tank battery, 1 anti-aircraft gun of 88 mm, 4 half-tracked Sd.Kfz.251 and 12 trucks. At this time 508 KV-1 were available and they were only used to support units of lighter armored tanks. The KV-1 were finally neutralized by the Germans because of the lack of coordination (only the tanks of command had a radio station!) who allowed to the Germans to employ despaired solutions as the installation of mines behind the turret or the introduction of hand grenades into the tubes of the guns whereas the breakdowns and other engine trouble made the remainder (the KV-1 will suffer during all its career from brittleness of its gear box and from the double role of the commander). In fact the Russians lost more KV-1 because of engine trouble than by the action of the enemy.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Semper fidelis

(in reply to asl3d)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Lock ‘n Load: Heroes of Stalingrad >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Heroes and Leaders mod Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.016