Medium German tank Tiger Panzerkampfwagen IV. History and detailed description. Medium tank T-IV Panzerkampfwagen IV (PzKpfw IV, also Pz. IV), Sd.Kfz.161 Vehicles based on Pz. IV

Apparently, we should start with a rather unexpected statement that with the creation of the Pz.IV tank in 1937, the Germans determined a promising path for the development of world tank building. This thesis is quite capable of shocking our reader, since we are accustomed to believe that this place in history is reserved for the Soviet T-34 tank. Nothing can be done, you will have to make room and share laurels with the enemy, albeit a defeated one. Well, so that this statement does not look unfounded, we will provide some evidence.

For this purpose, we will try to compare the “four” with the Soviet, British and American tanks that opposed it in different periods of World War II. Let's start with the first period - 1940-1941; At the same time, we will not focus on the then German classification of tanks by gun caliber, which classified the medium Pz.IV as heavy. Since the British did not have a medium tank as such, they would have to consider two vehicles at once: one infantry, the other cruising. In this case, only “pure” declared characteristics are compared, without taking into account the quality of workmanship, operational reliability, level of crew training, etc.

As can be seen from Table 1, in 1940 - 1941 in Europe there were only two full-fledged medium tanks - T-34 and Pz.IV. The British Matilda was superior to the German and Soviet tanks in armor protection to the same extent that the Mk IV was inferior to them. The French S35 was a tank brought to perfection that met the requirements of the First World War. As for the T-34, while inferior to the German vehicle in a number of important positions (separation of functions of crew members, quantity and quality of surveillance devices), it had armor equivalent to the Pz.IV, slightly better mobility and significantly more powerful weapons. This lag of the German vehicle is easily explained - the Pz.IV was conceived and created as an assault tank, designed to fight enemy firing points, but not his tanks. In this regard, the T-34 was more versatile and, as a result, according to its stated characteristics, the best medium tank in the world for 1941. After just six months, the situation changed, as can be judged by the characteristics of tanks from the period 1942 - 1943.

Table 1

* The commander's cupola counts as one observation device

table 2

* For the Grant I tank, only the 75 mm cannon is taken into account.

Table 3

Table 2 shows how dramatically the combat characteristics of the Pz.IV increased after the installation of a long-barreled gun. Not inferior to enemy tanks in all other respects, the “four” turned out to be capable of hitting Soviet and American tanks out of range of their guns. We are not talking about English cars - for four years of the war the British were marking time. Until the end of 1943, the combat characteristics of the T-34 remained virtually unchanged, with the Pz.IV taking first place among medium tanks. The answer - both Soviet and American - was not long in coming.

Comparing tables 2 and 3, one can see that since 1942 performance characteristics Pz.IV did not change (except for the thickness of the armor) and during two years of the war remained unsurpassed by anyone! Only in 1944, having installed a 76-mm long-barreled gun on the Sherman, did the Americans catch up with the Pz.IV, and we, having launched the T-34-85 into production, overtook it. The Germans no longer had the time or opportunity to give a worthy answer.

Analyzing the data from all three tables, we can conclude that the Germans, earlier than others, began to consider the tank as the main and most effective anti-tank weapon, and this is the main trend in post-war tank building.

In general, it can be argued that of all the German tanks of the Second World War, the Pz.IV was the most balanced and versatile. In this car various characteristics harmoniously combined and complemented each other. The "Tiger" and "Panther", for example, had a clear bias towards protection, which led to their overweight and deterioration in dynamic characteristics. The Pz.III, with many other characteristics being equal to the Pz.IV, did not match it in armament and, having no reserves for modernization, left the stage.

The Pz.IV, with a similar Pz.III, but slightly more thoughtful layout, had such reserves to the fullest. This is the only wartime tank with a 75 mm cannon, whose main armament was significantly strengthened without changing the turret. The turret of the T-34-85 and Sherman had to be replaced, and, by and large, these were almost new vehicles. The British went their own way and, like a fashionista, changed not the towers, but the tanks! But “Cromwell,” which appeared in 1944, never reached the “four,” as did “Comet,” released in 1945. Bypass german tank, created in 1937, only the post-war Centurion could.

From the above, of course, it does not follow that the Pz.IV was an ideal tank. Let's say it had insufficient engine power and a rather rigid and outdated suspension, which negatively affected its maneuverability. To some extent, the latter was compensated for by the lowest L/B ratio of 1.43 among all medium tanks.

The equipping of the Pz.lV (as well as other tanks) with anti-cumulative screens cannot be considered a successful move by German designers. HEAT ammunition was rarely used en masse, but the screens increased the dimensions of the vehicle, making it difficult to move in narrow passages, blocked most surveillance devices, and made it difficult for the crew to board and disembark. However, an even more pointless and rather expensive measure was coating the tanks with Zimmerit.

Specific power values ​​for medium tanks

But perhaps the biggest mistake the Germans made was trying to switch to a new type of medium tank - the Panther. As the latter, it did not take place (for more details, see "Armor Collection" No. 2, 1997), joining the "Tiger" in the class of heavy vehicles, but it played a fatal role in the fate of the Pz.lV.

Having concentrated all their efforts on creating new tanks in 1942, the Germans stopped seriously modernizing the old ones. Let's try to imagine what would have happened if not for the Panther? The project of installing a “Panther” turret on the Pz.lV is well known, both standard and “close” (Schmall-turm). The project is quite realistic in size - the clear diameter of the turret ring for the Panther is 1650 mm, for the Pz.lV it is 1600 mm. The tower stood up without expanding the turret box. The situation with the weight characteristics was somewhat worse - due to the long reach of the gun barrel, the center of gravity shifted forward and the load on the front road wheels increased by 1.5 tons. However, it could be compensated for by strengthening their suspension. In addition, it must be taken into account that the KwK 42 cannon was created for the Panther, and not for the Pz.IV. For the "four" it was possible to limit ourselves to a gun with smaller weight and dimensions, with a barrel length of, say, not 70, but 55 or 60 calibers. Even if such a weapon would require replacing the turret, it would still make it possible to get by with a lighter design than the Panther one.

The inevitably increasing (by the way, even without such a hypothetical rearmament) weight of the tank required replacing the Engine. For comparison: the dimensions of the HL 120TKRM engine installed on the Pz.IV were 1220x680x830 mm, and the Panther HL 230P30 - 1280x960x1090 mm. The clear dimensions of the engine compartments were almost identical for these two tanks. The Panther's was 480 mm longer, mainly due to the inclination of the rear hull plate. Consequently, equipping the Pz.lV with a higher power engine was not an insurmountable design task.

The results of this, of course, far from complete, list of possible modernization measures would be very sad, since they would nullify the work on creating the T-34-85 for us and the Sherman with a 76-mm cannon for the Americans. In 1943-1945, the industry of the Third Reich produced about 6 thousand “Panthers” and almost 7 thousand Pz.IV. If we take into account that the labor intensity of manufacturing the "Panther" was almost twice as much as that of the Pz.lV, then we can assume that during the same time German factories could produce an additional 10-12 thousand modernized "fours", which would be delivered to the soldiers of the anti-Hitler coalition much more trouble than the Panthers.

Attempts to improve the tank's protection led to the appearance of the "Ausfuhrung G" modification at the end of 1942. The designers knew that the limit of mass that could be withstood chassis, had already been selected, so we had to make a compromise solution - dismantle the 20-mm side screens that were installed on all “fours”, starting with the “E” model, while simultaneously increasing the base armor of the hull to 30 mm, and using the saved weight, install it in the front parts are overhead screens 30 mm thick.

Another measure to increase the tank's security was the installation of removable anti-cumulative screens ("schurzen") 5 mm thick on the sides of the hull and turret; adding screens increased the weight of the vehicle by about 500 kg. In addition, single-chamber muzzle brake the guns were replaced with a more effective two-chamber one. Appearance The vehicle also underwent a number of other changes: instead of a rear smoke launcher, built-in blocks of smoke grenade launchers began to be mounted in the corners of the turret, and the holes for launching signal flares in the driver and gunner hatches were eliminated.

By the end serial production tanks PzKpfw IV "Ausfuhrung G" their standard main weapon became a 75-mm gun with a barrel length of 48 calibers, the commander's cupola hatch became single-leaf. The PzKpfw IV Ausf.G tanks of later production are almost identical in appearance to the early vehicles of the Ausf.N modification. From May 1942 to June 1943, 1687 tanks of the Ausf.G model were manufactured, an impressive figure considering that in five years, from the end of 1937 to the summer of 1942, 1300 PzKpfw IV of all modifications were built (Ausf.A -F2), chassis No. - 82701-84400.

In 1944 it was manufactured tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.G with hydrostatic drive of the drive wheels. The drive design was developed by specialists from the Tsanradfabrik company in Augsburg. The main Maybach engine drove two oil pumps, which in turn activated two hydraulic motors connected by output shafts to the drive wheels. All power point was located in the rear part of the hull, respectively, and the drive wheels had a rear location, rather than the front one that is usual for the PzKpfw IV. The speed of the tank was controlled by the driver, controlling the oil pressure created by the pumps.

After the war experimental machine came to the USA and was tested by specialists from the Vickers company from Detroit, this company at that time was engaged in work in the field of hydrostatic drives. The tests had to be interrupted due to material failures and a lack of spare parts. Currently, the PzKpfw IV Ausf.G tank with hydrostatic drive wheels is on display in the US Army Tank Museum, Aberdeen, USA. Maryland.

Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.H (Sd.Kfz. 161/2)

The installation of a long-barreled 75 mm gun turned out to be a rather controversial measure. The gun led to excessive overload of the front part of the tank, the front springs were under constant pressure, and the tank acquired a tendency to sway even when moving on a flat surface. It was possible to get rid of the unpleasant effect with the “Ausfuhrung H” modification, which was put into production in March 1943.

On tanks of this model, the integral armor of the frontal part of the hull, superstructure and turret was strengthened to 80 mm. The PzKpfw IV Ausf.H tank weighed 26 tons and even despite the use of the new SSG-77 transmission, its characteristics turned out to be lower than those of the “fours” of previous models, so the speed of movement over rough terrain decreased by no less than 15 km, the specific pressure on the ground, the acceleration characteristics of the vehicle dropped. On the experimental tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.H hydrostatic transmission was tested, but in mass production tanks with such a transmission did not work.

During the production process, many minor modifications were introduced to the Ausf.H model tanks, in particular, they began to install all-steel rollers without rubber, the shape of the drive wheels and idlers changed, a turret for the MG-34 anti-aircraft machine gun appeared on the commander's cupola ("Fligerbeschussgerat 42" - installation anti-aircraft machine gun), the tower embrasures for firing pistols and the hole in the roof of the tower for launching signal flares were eliminated.

Ausf.H tanks were the first "fours" to use Zimmerit antimagnetic coating; Only the vertical surfaces of the tank were supposed to be covered with zimmerit, but in practice the coating was applied to all surfaces that could be reached by an infantryman standing on the ground; on the other hand, there were also tanks on which only the forehead of the hull and superstructure were covered with zimmerit. Zimmerit was applied both in factories and in the field.

Tanks of the Ausf.H modification became the most popular among all PzKpfw IV models, 3,774 of them were built, production ceased in the summer of 1944. Factory chassis numbers - 84401-89600, some of these chassis served as the basis for the construction of assault guns.

Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.J (Sd.Kfz.161/2)

The last model launched into the series was the modification "Ausfuhrung J". Vehicles of this variant began to enter service in June 1944. From a design point of view, the PzKpfw IV Ausf.J represented a step back.

Instead of an electric drive for turning the turret, a manual one was installed, but it became possible to install an additional fuel tank with a capacity of 200 liters. Increasing the cruising range on the highway from 220 km to 300 km (off-road - from 130 km to 180 km) by placing additional fuel seemed to be an extremely important decision, since panzer divisions increasingly played the role of “fire brigades”, which were transferred from one sector of the Eastern Front another.

An attempt to somewhat reduce the weight of the tank was the installation of welded wire anti-cumulative screens; such screens were called “Tom screens”, after the surname of General Tom). Such screens were installed only on the sides of the hull, and remained on the towers old screens made of sheet steel. On tanks of late production, three rollers were installed instead of four, and vehicles were also produced with steel road wheels without rubber.

Almost all modifications were aimed at reducing the labor intensity of manufacturing tanks, including: the elimination of all embrasures on the tank for firing pistols and extra viewing slots (only the driver's, in the commander's cupola and in the frontal armor plate of the tower remained), installation of simplified towing loops , replacing the muffler with an exhaust system with two simple pipes. Another attempt to improve the vehicle's security was to increase the armor of the turret roof by 18 mm and the rear armor by 26 mm.

Production of PzKpfw IV Ausf.J tanks ceased in March 1945; a total of 1,758 vehicles were built.

By 1944, it became clear that the design of the tank had exhausted all reserves for modernization; a revolutionary attempt to increase the combat effectiveness of the PzKpfw IV by installing a turret from the Panther tank, armed with a 75-mm gun with a barrel length of 70 calibers, was not crowned with success - the chassis turned out to be too overloaded. Before installing the Panther turret, the designers tried to squeeze the Panther cannon into the turret of the PzKpfw IV tank. The installation of a wooden model of the gun showed the complete impossibility of crew members working in the turret due to the tightness created by the breech of the gun. As a consequence of this failure, the idea was born to mount the entire turret from the Panther on the Pz.IV hull.

Due to the constant modernization of tanks during factory repairs, it is not possible to accurately determine how many tanks of one modification or another were built. Very often there were various hybrid options, for example, turrets from Ausf.G were installed on the hulls of the Ausf.D model.

According to the provisions Treaty of Versailles, Germany was prohibited from building tanks and creating armor tank forces. However, the Germans did not at all strive to thoroughly implement the points of the agreement, which they considered humiliating for themselves. Therefore, long before the Nazis came to power, the German military began to actively develop a doctrine for the use of tank units V modern warfare. It was more difficult to implement theoretical developments in practice, but the Germans succeeded in this: it is widely known that during exercises and maneuvers, mock-ups built on the basis of cars or even bicycles were used as tanks. And the tanks themselves were developed under the guise of agricultural tractors and tested abroad.

After power passed to the Nazis, Germany refused to comply with the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. By this time, the country’s armored doctrine had already taken shape quite clearly, and it was, figuratively speaking, a matter of translating the Panzerwaffe into metal.

The first German production tanks: Pz.Kpfw I and Pz.Kpfw II were vehicles that even the Germans themselves perceived as more of a transition to “real” tanks. The Pz.Kpfw I was generally considered a training vehicle, even though it took part in hostilities in Spain, Poland, France, North Africa and the USSR.

In 1936, the first copies of the Pz.Kpfw medium tank entered service with the troops. III, armed with 37 mm anti-tank gun and protected in the frontal and side projections by armor 15 mm thick. This combat vehicle was already a fully-fledged tank that met the requirements of the time. However, due to the small caliber of the gun, it could not fight against fortified firing points and engineering structures enemy.

In 1934, the army issued a task to industry to develop a fire support tank, which was to be armed with a 75-mm cannon containing high-explosive shells. This tank was originally developed as a battalion commander's vehicle, which is where its first designation came from - BW (Batallionführerwagen). Work on the tank was carried out by three competing companies: Rheinmetall-Borsig, MAN and Krupp AG. The Krupp project VK 20.01 was recognized as the best, but it was not allowed into mass production due to the fact that the design of the tank used a chassis with spring suspension. The military demanded the use of a torsion bar suspension, which provided smoother movement and better maneuverability of the combat vehicle. Krupp engineers managed to reach a compromise with the Armament Directorate, proposing to use a version of the spring suspension with eight dual road wheels, almost completely borrowed from the experienced multi-turreted Nb.Fz tank.

An order for the production of a new tank, designated Vs.Kfz. 618, received by Krupp in 1935. In April 1936, the vehicle was renamed Pz.Kpfw IV. The first samples of the “zero” series were produced at Krupp factories in Essen, and in the fall of 1937 production was moved to Magdeburg, where production of the Ausf modification began. A.

Pz.Kpfw. IV was a classically designed vehicle with an engine compartment at the rear of the hull. The transmission was located in front, between the driver’s and radio operator’s workstations. Due to the design of the rotating mechanism, the tank's turret was shifted slightly to the left relative to the longitudinal axis. The chassis on each side consisted of four sprung bogies with four rollers on each of them. The drive wheel was at the front. Note that throughout the entire history of the Pz.Kpfw IV, no significant changes were made to the design of the chassis.

The first modification of the vehicle, Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.A, was equipped with a Maybach HL108TR carburetor engine with a power of 250 hp. s., located closer to the right side of the body.

The armor of the "A" modification hull was 20 mm in the frontal projection and 15 mm in the side and rear projections. The thickness of the turret armor was 30 mm at the front, 20 mm at the side and 10 mm at the rear. The commander's cupola of a characteristic cylindrical shape was located in the rear of the tower in the middle. For observation, it was equipped with six viewing slits covered with armored glass.

Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.A was armed with a 75-mm short-barreled KwK 37 L|24 cannon and two MG34 machine guns of 7.92 mm caliber: coaxial with the cannon and a course gun, located in a ball mount in the frontal armor plate of the hull. The armor plate itself had a broken shape. The presence of this machine gun, along with a cylindrical commander's cupola, — distinguishing feature first modification of the Pz.Kpfw. IV. In total, until June 1938, 35 A-series vehicles were produced.

Pz.Kpfw. IV was destined to become the main vehicle of the German armored forces. Its last modification was produced from June 1944 to March 1945. The scope of the article does not allow us to dwell in detail on each design change of this tank, so let’s briefly look at the main upgrades and improvements that were carried out by German engineers throughout the long journey of the Quartet.

In May 1938, production of the Pz.Kpfw version began. IV Ausf.B. Its main difference from the previous version was the use of a direct armor plate in the frontal part of the hull and the elimination of the forward machine gun. Instead, an additional viewing slot for the radio operator and an embrasure through which he could fire from personal weapons appeared in the body. The viewing slots of the commander's cupola received armored shutters. Instead of a 5-speed gearbox, a 6-speed one was used. The engine has also changed: now to the Pz.Kpfw. IV began installing a Maybach HL120TR engine with a power of 300 hp. With. The hull armor was strengthened, and now the “four” was protected by 30 millimeters of steel in the frontal projection of the hull and turret. The frontal armor of the turret was somewhat thinner, its thickness was 25 mm. By October 1938, 42 vehicles of this modification had been built.

Pz.Kpfw series. IV Ausf.C received a new Maybach HL120TRM engine. This engine, like the previous one, had a power of 300 hp. With. and was installed on all subsequent modifications of the Pz IV. Modification “C” was produced from April 1938 to August 1939. Following it, the “D” series entered the production lines, on which they again began to use a broken-shaped frontal armor plate with a frontal machine gun. Since 1940, the Ausf.D's frontal armor has been reinforced with an additional 30 mm plate. In 1941, some vehicles of this series were equipped with a 50 mm cannon. Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.D was also built in a tropical modification.

In the E series tanks, produced from April 1940 to April 1941, the designers continued to increase the armor. The 30-mm frontal armor of the hull was additionally reinforced with a plate of the same thickness. The course machine gun was now mounted in a ball mount. The shape of the tower also underwent minor changes.

The latest modification of the “four” with a short-barreled 75-mm cannon was the “F” version. Now the frontal armor of the vehicle reached 50 mm on the hull and 30 mm on the turret. Since 1942, tanks of the Ausf.F series began to be equipped with a long-barreled KwK 40 L/43 cannon of 75 mm caliber. In this version the vehicle received the designation Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.F2.

In March 1942, production of the Pz.Kpfw modification began. IV Ausf.G. It did not differ much from the previous version of the tank. Later vehicles in this series used wider “eastern” tracks, additional frontal armor and side screens. About 400 of the last "fours" of the "G" series were armed with a 75 mm KwK 40 L/43 cannon, and from February 1943 they began to be equipped with a 75 mm KwK 40 L/48 cannon. Based on Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.G prototype was developed self-propelled gun Hummel.

In June 1942, work began on the Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.H. The frontal armor of this tank reached 80 mm. Armored screens 5 mm thick were installed on the sides. The commander's cupola housed an anti-aircraft turret for a 7.92 mm machine gun. The tank was coated with zimmerit, a material that made it difficult to attach magnetic mines to the hull. As the main weapon on the Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.H used a 75 mm KwK 40 L/48 gun.

In February 1944, production began of the latest modification of the “four” - Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.J. This tank did not have a turret rotation motor, and the turning mechanism was operated manually. The design of the support and support rollers has been simplified. Due to the installation of screens, the side viewing slots were removed, rendering them useless. Cars of different series had minor differences in internal equipment.

In general, researchers deservedly consider the Pz.Kpfw. IV was the most versatile German tank of World War II. The designers included in it a modernization potential sufficient for the tank to remain a full-fledged combat unit throughout the entire period of its existence. This is evidenced, among other things, by the fact that this tank was in service with a number of countries until the 60s of the 20th century.

(Pz.III), the power plant is located at the rear, and the power transmission and drive wheels are located at the front. The control compartment housed the driver and gunner-radio operator, firing from a machine gun mounted in a ball joint. The fighting compartment was located in the middle of the hull. A multifaceted welded turret was mounted here, which housed three crew members and installed weapons.

T-IV tanks were produced with the following weapons:

• modifications A-F, assault tank with 75 mm howitzer;
• modification G, tank with a 75-mm cannon with a 43-caliber barrel;
• modifications N-K, a tank with a 75 mm cannon with a barrel length of 48 calibers.

Due to constant increase armor thickness, the weight of the vehicle during production increased from 17.1 tons (modification A) to 24.6 tons (modification NK). Since 1943, to enhance armor protection, armor screens were installed on tanks for the sides of the hull and turret. The long-barreled gun introduced on modifications G, NK allowed the T-IV to withstand enemy tanks of equal weight (a 75-mm sub-caliber projectile at a range of 1000 meters penetrated armor 110 mm thick), but its maneuverability, especially the overweight latest modifications, was unsatisfactory. In total, about 9,500 T-IV tanks of all modifications were produced during the war.

Tank PzKpfw IV. History of creation.

In the 20s and early 30s, the theory of the use of mechanized troops, in particular tanks, developed through trial and error; the views of theorists changed very often. A number of supporters of tanks believed that the appearance of armored vehicles would make positional warfare in the style of battles of 1914-1917 tactically impossible. In turn, the French relied on the construction of well-fortified long-term defensive positions, such as the Maginot Line. A number of experts believed that the main armament of a tank should be a machine gun, and the main task of armored vehicles is to fight enemy infantry and artillery; the most radically thinking representatives of this school considered a battle between tanks pointless, since, supposedly, neither side would be able to cause damage to the other. There was an opinion that the victory in the battle would be won by the side that could destroy the largest number of enemy tanks. Special guns with special shells - anti-tank guns with armor-piercing shells - were considered as the main means of fighting tanks. In fact, no one knew what the nature of hostilities would be in a future war. Experience civil war in Spain also did not clarify the situation.

The Treaty of Versailles prohibited Germany from having tracked combat vehicles, but could not prevent German specialists from working on studying various theories of using armored vehicles, and the creation of tanks was carried out by the Germans in secrecy. When Hitler threw away the restrictions of Versailles in March 1935, the young Panzerwaffe already had all the theoretical developments in the field of application and organizational structure tank regiments.

In mass production under the guise of "agricultural tractors" there were two types of light armed tanks, PzKpfw I and PzKpfw II.
The PzKpfw I tank was considered a training vehicle, while the PzKpfw II was intended for reconnaissance, but it turned out that the "deuce" remained the most mass tank panzer divisions until they were replaced by medium tanks PzKpfw III, armed with a 37 mm cannon and three machine guns.

The development of the PzKpfw IV tank dates back to January 1934, when the army issued a specification to industry new tank fire support weighing no more than 24 tons, the future vehicle received the official designation Gesch.Kpfw. (75 mm)(Vskfz.618). Over the next 18 months, specialists from Rheinmetall-Borzing, Krupp and MAN worked on three competing designs for the battalion commander's vehicle (Battalionführerswagnen, abbreviated BW). The VK 2001/K project, presented by the Krupp company, was recognized as the best, with a turret and hull shape similar to the PzKpfw III tank.

However, the VK 2001/K did not go into production, since the military was not satisfied with the six-wheel chassis with medium-diameter wheels on a spring suspension; it needed to be replaced with a torsion bar. The torsion bar suspension, compared to the spring one, ensured smoother movement of the tank and had a greater vertical travel of the road wheels. Krupp engineers, together with representatives of the Arms Procurement Directorate, agreed on the possibility of using an improved design of spring suspension on the tank with eight small-diameter road wheels on board. However, the Krupp company largely had to revise the proposed original design. In the final version, the PzKpfw IV was a combination of the hull and turret of the VK 2001/K with a chassis newly developed by Krupp.

The PzKpfw IV tank is designed according to the classic layout with a rear engine. The commander's position was located along the axis of the tower directly under the commander's cupola, the gunner was located to the left of the breech of the gun, and the loader was to the right. In the control compartment, located in the front part of the tank hull, there were workstations for the driver (to the left of the vehicle axis) and the radio operator (to the right). Between the driver's and gunner's seats there was a transmission. Interesting feature The design of the tank was to shift the turret approximately 8 cm to the left of the longitudinal axis of the vehicle, and the engine - 15 cm to the right to allow passage of the shaft connecting the engine and transmission. This design decision made it possible to increase the internal reserved volume on the right side of the hull to accommodate the first shots, which could be most easily reached by the loader. The turret rotation drive is electric.

Click on the tank picture to enlarge

The suspension and chassis consisted of eight small-diameter road wheels grouped into two-wheeled bogies suspended on leaf springs, drive wheels, sloths installed in the rear of the tank, and four rollers supporting the track. Throughout the entire history of operation of the PzKpfw IV tanks, their chassis remained unchanged, only minor improvements were introduced. The prototype of the tank was manufactured at the Krupp plant in Essen and was tested in 1935-36.

Description of the PzKpfw IV tank

Armor protection.
In 1942, consulting engineers Merz and McLillan carried out a detailed survey captured tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.E, in particular, they carefully studied its armor.

Several armor plates were tested for hardness, all of them were machined. The hardness of the machined armor plates on the outside and inside was 300-460 Brinell.
- The 20 mm thick applied armor plates, which enhance the armor of the hull sides, are made of homogeneous steel and have a hardness of about 370 Brinell. The reinforced side armor is not capable of "holding" 2 pound shells fired from 1000 yards.

On the other hand, shelling of a tank carried out in the Middle East in June 1941 showed that a distance of 500 yards (457 m) can be considered as the limit for effectively hitting a PzKpfw IV in the frontal area with fire from a 2-pounder gun. A report on the armor protection of a German tank, prepared in Woolwich, notes that “the armor is 10% better than similar treated mechanically English, and in some respects even better homogeneous."

At the same time, the method of connecting armor plates was criticized; a specialist from Leyland Motors commented on his research: “The welding quality is poor, the welds of two of the three armor plates in the area where the projectile hit came apart.”

Changing the design of the frontal part of the tank hull

Power point.
The Maybach engine is designed to operate in moderate climatic conditions, where its characteristics are satisfactory. At the same time, in tropical or highly dusty conditions, it breaks down and is prone to overheating. British intelligence, after studying the PzKpfw IV tank captured in 1942, concluded that engine failures were caused by sand getting into the oil system, distributor, dynamo and starter; air filters are inadequate. There have been frequent cases of sand getting into the carburetor.

The Maybach engine operating manual requires the use of only 74 octane gasoline with a complete lubricant change after 200, 500, 1000 and 2000 km. Recommended engine speed at normal conditions operation - 2600 rpm, but in hot climates (southern regions of the USSR and North Africa) this number of revolutions does not provide normal cooling. Using the engine as a brake is permissible at 2200-2400 rpm; at a speed of 2600-3000 this mode should be avoided.

The main components of the cooling system were two radiators installed at an angle of 25 degrees to the horizontal. The radiators were cooled by an air flow forced by two fans; The fans are driven by a belt from the main engine shaft. Water circulation in the cooling system was ensured by a centrifuge pump. Air entered the engine compartment through an opening on the right side of the hull, covered by an armored damper, and was exhausted out through a similar opening on the left side.

The synchro-mechanical transmission proved efficient, although pulling force in high gears was low, so 6th gear was used only for highway driving. The output shafts are combined with the braking and turning mechanism into a single device. To cool this device, a fan was installed to the left of the clutch box. The simultaneous release of the steering control levers could be used as an effective parking brake.

On tanks of later versions, the spring suspension of the road wheels was heavily overloaded, but replacing the damaged two-wheeled bogie seemed to be a fairly simple operation. The track tension was regulated by the position of the idler mounted on the eccentric. On the Eastern Front, special track extenders, known as "Ostketten", were used, which improved the maneuverability of tanks in the winter months of the year.

An extremely simple but effective device for putting on a slipped track was tested on an experimental PzKpfw IV tank. It was a factory-made tape that had the same width as the tracks and was perforated to engage with the drive wheel ring gear. One end of the tape was attached to the slipped track, and the other, after it was passed over the rollers, to the drive wheel. The motor turned on, the drive wheel began to rotate, pulling the tape and the tracks attached to it until the rims of the drive wheel entered the slots on the tracks. The whole operation took a few minutes.

The engine was started by a 24-volt electric starter. Since the auxiliary electric generator saved battery power, it was possible to try to start the engine more times on the “four” than on the PzKpfw III tank. In the event of a starter failure, or when severe frost Once the lubricant thickened, an inertial starter was used, the handle of which was connected to the engine shaft through a hole in the rear armor plate. The handle was turned by two people at the same time; the minimum number of turns of the handle required to start the engine was 60 rpm. Starting the engine from an inertia starter has become commonplace in the Russian winter. Minimum temperature engine, at which it began to work normally was t = 50 deg. C with a shaft rotation of 2000 rpm.

To make engine starting easier in the cold climate of the Eastern Front, a special system was developed known as a "Kuhlwasserubertragung" - a cold water heat exchanger. After starting and warming up to normal temperature engine of one tank, warm water from it was pumped into the cooling system of the next tank, and cold water came to an already running motor - an exchange of coolants between the running and non-running motors took place. After the warm water warmed up the engine somewhat, you could try starting the engine with an electric starter. The "Kuhlwasserubertragung" system required minor modifications to the tank's cooling system.

Modern battle tanks Russia and the world photos, videos, pictures watch online. This article gives an idea of ​​the modern tank fleet. It is based on the principle of classification used in the most authoritative reference book to date, but in a slightly modified and improved form. And if the latter in its original form can still be found in the armies of a number of countries, then others have already become museum pieces. And just for 10 years! Follow in the footsteps of Jane's Guide and skip this one combat vehicle(very incidentally curious in design and fiercely discussed at one time), which formed the basis of the tank fleet last quarter XX century, the authors considered it unfair.

Films about tanks where there is still no alternative to this type of weapon ground forces. The tank was and will probably remain for a long time modern weapons thanks to the ability to combine such seemingly contradictory qualities as high mobility, powerful weapons and reliable crew protection. These unique qualities of tanks continue to be constantly improved, and the experience and technology accumulated over decades predetermine new frontiers in combat properties and achievements of the military-technical level. In the eternal confrontation between “projectile and armor”, as practice shows, protection against projectiles is increasingly being improved, acquiring new qualities: activity, multi-layeredness, self-defense. At the same time, the projectile becomes more accurate and powerful.

Russian tanks are specific in that they allow you to destroy the enemy from a safe distance, have the ability to make quick maneuvers on off-road, contaminated terrain, can “walk” through territory occupied by the enemy, seize a decisive bridgehead, cause panic in the rear and suppress the enemy with fire and tracks . The war of 1939-1945 became the most ordeal for all humanity, since almost all countries of the world were involved in it. It was a clash of the titans - the most unique period that theorists argued about in the early 1930s and during which tanks were used in large quantities virtually all warring parties. At this time, a “lice test” and a deep reform of the first theories of the use of tank forces took place. And it is the Soviet tank forces that are most affected by all this.

Tanks in battle have become a symbol of the past war, the backbone of the Soviet armored forces? Who created them and under what conditions? How did the USSR, having lost most of its European territories and with difficulty recruiting tanks for the defense of Moscow, was able to release powerful tank formations onto the battlefields already in 1943? This book is intended to answer these questions, telling about the development of Soviet tanks “during the days of testing”, from 1937 to early 1943. When writing the book, materials from Russian archives and private collections of tank builders were used. There was a period in our history that remained in my memory with some kind of depressing feeling. It began with the return of our first military advisers from Spain, and only stopped at the beginning of forty-three,” said former general designer of self-propelled guns L. Gorlitsky, “some kind of pre-storm state was felt.

Tanks of the Second World War It was M. Koshkin, almost underground (but, of course, with the support of “the wisest of the wise leaders of all nations”), who was able to create the tank that a few years later would shock the German tank generals. And not only that, he not only created it, the designer managed to prove to these military fools that it was his T-34 that they needed, and not just another wheeled-tracked "motor vehicle." The author is in slightly different positions, which formed in him after meeting the pre-war documents from the Russian State Military Academy and the Russian State Academy of Economics. Therefore, working on this segment of the history of the Soviet tank, the author will inevitably contradict something “generally accepted.” this work describes the story Soviet tank building in the most difficult years - from the beginning of a radical restructuring of all activities design bureaus and the People's Commissariats in general, during the frantic race to equip new tank formations of the Red Army, transfer industry to wartime rails and evacuation.

Tanks Wikipedia, the author would like to express his special gratitude to M. Kolomiets for his assistance in selecting and processing materials, and also thank A. Solyankin, I. Zheltov and M. Pavlov, the authors of the reference publication “Domestic armored vehicles. XX century. 1905 - 1941” , since this book helped to understand the fate of some projects that was previously unclear. I would also like to remember with gratitude those conversations with Lev Izraelevich Gorlitsky, the former chief designer of UZTM, which helped to take a fresh look at the entire history of the Soviet tank during the Great Patriotic War. Patriotic War Soviet Union. For some reason today it is common for us to talk about 1937-1938. only from the point of view of repression, but few people remember that it was during this period that those tanks were born that became legends of the wartime...” From the memoirs of L.I. Gorlinky.

Soviet tanks detailed assessment they were heard from many lips at that time. Many old people recalled that it was from the events in Spain that it became clear to everyone that the war was getting closer and closer to the threshold and it was Hitler who would have to fight. In 1937, mass purges and repressions began in the USSR, and against the backdrop of these difficult events, the Soviet tank began to transform from “mechanized cavalry” (in which one of its combat qualities was emphasized at the expense of others) into a balanced combat vehicle, possessing both powerful weapons, sufficient to suppress most targets, good maneuverability and mobility with armor protection, capable of maintaining its combat effectiveness when fired upon by the most widespread anti-tank weapons of a potential enemy.

It was recommended to add large tanks only special tanks– floating, chemical. The brigade now had 4 individual battalions 54 tanks each and was strengthened by the transition from three-tank platoons to five-tank ones. In addition, D. Pavlov justified the refusal to form three additional mechanized corps in addition to the four existing mechanized corps in 1938, believing that these formations were immobile and difficult to control, and most importantly, they required a different rear organization. The tactical and technical requirements for promising tanks, as expected, were adjusted. In particular, in a letter dated December 23 to the head of the design bureau of plant No. 185 named after. CM. Kirov, the new boss demanded that the armor of the new tanks be strengthened so that at a distance of 600-800 meters (effective range).

The newest tanks in the world, when designing new tanks, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of increasing the level of armor protection during modernization by at least one stage...” This problem could be solved in two ways: Firstly, by increasing the thickness of the armor plates and, secondly, by “using increased armor resistance." It is not difficult to guess that the second way was considered more promising, since the use of specially strengthened armor plates, or even two-layer armor, could, while maintaining the same thickness (and the mass of the tank as a whole), increase its durability by 1.2-1.5 It was this path (the use of especially hardened armor) that was chosen at that moment to create new types of tanks.

USSR tanks at the dawn tank production The most widely used armor was the properties of which were identical in all directions. Such armor was called homogeneous (homogeneous), and from the very beginning of armor making, craftsmen sought to create just such armor, because homogeneity ensured stability of characteristics and simplified processing. However, at the end of the 19th century, it was noticed that when the surface of an armor plate was saturated (to a depth of several tenths to several millimeters) with carbon and silicon, its surface strength increased sharply, while the rest of the plate remained viscous. This is how heterogeneous (non-uniform) armor came into use.

For military tanks, the use of heterogeneous armor was very important, since an increase in the hardness of the entire thickness of the armor plate led to a decrease in its elasticity and (as a consequence) to an increase in fragility. Thus, the most durable armor, all other things being equal, turned out to be very fragile and often chipped even from explosions high-explosive fragmentation shells. Therefore, at the dawn of armor production, when producing homogeneous sheets, the task of the metallurgist was to achieve the maximum possible hardness of the armor, but at the same time not to lose its elasticity. Surface-hardened armor with carbon and silicon saturation was called cemented (cemented) and was considered at that time a panacea for many ills. But cementation is a complex, harmful process (for example, treating a hot plate with a jet of illuminating gas) and relatively expensive, and therefore its development in a series required large expenses and improved production standards.

Wartime tanks, even in operation, these hulls were less successful than homogeneous ones, since for no apparent reason cracks formed in them (mainly in loaded seams), and it was very difficult to put patches on holes in cemented slabs during repairs. But it was still expected that a tank protected by 15-20 mm cemented armor would be equivalent in level of protection to the same one, but covered with 22-30 mm sheets, without a significant increase in weight.
Also, by the mid-1930s, tank building had learned to harden the surface of relatively thin armor plates by uneven hardening, known from late XIX century in shipbuilding as the "Krupp method". Surface hardening led to a significant increase in the hardness of the front side of the sheet, leaving the main thickness of the armor viscous.

How tanks fire video up to half the thickness of the slab, which was, of course, worse than cementation, since while the hardness of the surface layer was higher than with cementation, the elasticity of the hull sheets was significantly reduced. So the “Krupp method” in tank building made it possible to increase the strength of armor even slightly more than cementation. But the hardening technology that was used for thick naval armor was no longer suitable for relatively thin tank armor. Before the war, this method was almost not used in our serial tank building due to technological difficulties and relatively high cost.

Combat use of tanks The most proven tank gun was the 45-mm tank gun model 1932/34. (20K), and before the event in Spain it was believed that its power was quite sufficient to perform most tank tasks. But the battles in Spain showed that a 45-mm gun can only satisfy the task of fighting enemy tanks, since even shelling of manpower in the mountains and forests turned out to be ineffective, and it was only possible to disable a dug-in enemy firing point in the event of a direct hit . Firing at shelters and bunkers was ineffective due to the low high-explosive effect of a projectile weighing only about two kg.

Types of tanks photos so that even one shell hit can reliably disable anti-tank gun or machine gun; and thirdly, to increase the penetrating effect of a tank gun against the armor of a potential enemy, since in the example French tanks(already having an armor thickness of about 40-42 mm) it became clear that the armor protection of foreign combat vehicles tends to be significantly strengthened. There was a sure way for this - increasing the caliber tank guns and a simultaneous increase in the length of their barrel, since a long gun larger caliber fires heavier projectiles with greater initial speed to a greater distance without correcting the aiming.

The best tanks in the world had a large-caliber cannon, and also had big sizes breech, significantly more weight and increased recoil response. And this required an increase in the mass of the entire tank as a whole. In addition, placing large-sized rounds in a closed tank volume led to a decrease in transportable ammunition.
The situation was aggravated by the fact that at the beginning of 1938 it suddenly turned out that there was simply no one to give the order for the design of a new, more powerful tank gun. P. Syachintov and his entire design team were repressed, as well as the core of the Bolshevik design bureau under the leadership of G. Magdesiev. Only the group of S. Makhanov remained in the wild, who, since the beginning of 1935, had been trying to develop his new 76.2-mm semi-automatic single gun L-10, and the staff of plant No. 8 was slowly finishing the “forty-five”.

Photos of tanks with names The number of developments is large, but mass production in the period 1933-1937. not a single one has been accepted..." In fact, none of the five air-cooled tank diesel engines, work on which was carried out in 1933-1937 in the engine department of plant No. 185, was brought to series. Moreover, despite the decisions At the very top levels of the transition in tank building exclusively to diesel engines, this process was restrained by a number of factors. Of course, diesel had significant efficiency. It consumed less fuel per unit of power per hour. Diesel fuel less susceptible to fire, since the flash point of its vapor was very high.

New tanks video, even the most advanced of them, the MT-5 tank engine, required a reorganization of engine production for serial production, which was expressed in the construction of new workshops, the supply of advanced foreign equipment (they did not yet have their own machines of the required accuracy), financial investments and strengthening of personnel. It was planned that in 1939 this diesel would produce 180 hp. will go to production tanks and artillery tractors, but due to investigative work to determine the causes of tank engine failures, which lasted from April to November 1938, these plans were not implemented. The development of a slightly increased six-cylinder gasoline engine No. 745 with a power of 130-150 hp was also started.

Brands of tanks had specific indicators that suited tank builders quite well. The tanks were tested using a new technique, specially developed at the insistence of the new head of the ABTU D. Pavlov in relation to combat service in war time. The basis of the tests was a run of 3-4 days (at least 10-12 hours of daily non-stop movement) with a one-day break for technical inspection and restoration work. Moreover, repairs were allowed to be carried out only by field workshops without the involvement of factory specialists. This was followed by a “platform” with obstacles, “swimming” in water with an additional load that simulated an infantry landing, after which the tank was sent for inspection.

Super tanks online, after improvement work, seemed to remove all claims from the tanks. And the overall progress of the tests confirmed the fundamental correctness of the main design changes - an increase in displacement by 450-600 kg, the use of the GAZ-M1 engine, as well as the Komsomolets transmission and suspension. But during testing, numerous minor defects again appeared in the tanks. Chief designer N. Astrov was suspended from work and was in custody and under investigation for several months. In addition, the tank received a new turret with improved protection. The modified layout made it possible to place on the tank more ammunition for a machine gun and two small fire extinguishers (previously there were no fire extinguishers on small tanks of the Red Army).

US tanks as part of modernization work, on one production model of the tank in 1938-1939. The torsion bar suspension developed by the designer of the design bureau of plant No. 185 V. Kulikov was tested. It was distinguished by the design of a composite short coaxial torsion bar (long monotorsion bars could not be used coaxially). However, such a short torsion bar did not show enough in tests good results, and therefore the torsion bar suspension did not immediately pave the way for itself in the course of further work. Obstacles to overcome: climbs of at least 40 degrees, vertical wall 0.7 m, covered ditch 2-2.5 m."

YouTube about tanks, work on the production of prototypes of the D-180 and D-200 engines for reconnaissance tanks is not being carried out, jeopardizing the production of prototypes." Justifying his choice, N. Astrov said that the wheeled-tracked non-floating reconnaissance aircraft (factory designation 101 or 10-1), as well as the amphibious tank variant (factory designation 102 or 10-2), are a compromise solution, since it is not possible to fully satisfy the ABTU requirements. Option 101 was a tank weighing 7.5 tons with a hull according to the type of hull, but with vertical side sheets of cemented armor 10-13 mm thick, since: “The inclined sides, causing serious weighting of the suspension and hull, require a significant (up to 300 mm) widening of the hull, not to mention the complication of the tank.

Video reviews of tanks in which the tank’s power unit was planned to be based on the 250-horsepower MG-31F aircraft engine, which was being developed by industry for agricultural aircraft and gyroplanes. 1st grade gasoline was placed in the tank under the floor of the fighting compartment and in additional onboard gas tanks. The armament fully corresponded to the task and consisted of coaxial machine guns DK 12.7 mm caliber and DT (in the second version of the project even ShKAS is listed) 7.62 mm caliber. The combat weight of the tank with torsion bar suspension was 5.2 tons, with spring suspension - 5.26 tons. Tests took place from July 9 to August 21 according to the methodology approved in 1938, and Special attention was given to tanks.