Buy an escape hatch for the pz 3 tank. Armored vehicles after the Second World War

Official designation: Pz.Kpfw.III
Alternative designation:
Year of commencement of work: 1939
Year of construction of the first prototype: 1940
Completion stage: three prototypes have been built.

The history of the Pz.Kpfw.III medium tank began in February 1934, when the Panzerwaffe had already entered the phase of actively filling its armor tank park new types of military equipment. Back then, no one could have imagined how successful and eventful the career of the famous “troika” would be.

And it all started quite prosaically. Having barely launched the Pz.Kpfw.I and Pz.Kpfw.II light tanks into mass production, representatives of the Armament Service of the Ground Forces formulated the requirements for a combat vehicle of the type ZW (Zurführerwagen)- that is, a tank for company commanders. The specification stated that the new 15-ton tank should be equipped with a 37 mm gun and 15 mm thick armor. The development was carried out on a competitive basis and a total of 4 companies took part in it: MAN, Rheimetall-Borsig, Krupp and Daimler-Benz. It was also planned to use a Maybach HL 100 engine with a power of 300 hp, an SSG 75 transmission from Zahnradfabrik Friedrichshafen, a Wilson-Cletrac type turning mechanism and Kgs.65/326/100 tracks.

In the summer of 1934, the Armament Directorate issued orders for the production of prototypes, distributing orders among four companies. Daimler-Benz and MAN were to produce chassis prototypes (two and one prototype, respectively). At the same time, Krupp and Rheinmetall were obliged to provide a similar number of towers.
The Armament Directorate gave its preference not to the Krupp machine, which later became known under the designation MKA, but to the Daimler-Benz project. Although this decision then seemed somewhat controversial, because the prototype from Krupp was built back in August 1934. However, after testing the chassis Z.W.1 And Z.W.2 Daimler-Benz received an order for the supply of two more improved prototypes under the designations Z.W.3 And Z.W.4.

The new tank, developed by Daimler-Benz engineers, could rather be classified as a light tank. The first option, designated Vs.Kfz.619(experimental vehicle No. 619), in fact, was a pre-production vehicle on which numerous innovations were tested. There is no doubt that it differed favorably from the “ones” and “twos” with more powerful weapons and better working conditions for the crew (due to a more massive hull), but then the combat value of the “troika” was not assessed so highly.

The design was based on a completely new chassis of the original configuration. For one side, it consisted of five double road wheels with coil spring suspension, two small support rollers, a front drive wheel and a rear idler wheel. The small-link caterpillar consisted of steel single-ridge tracks.

The tank's hull was designed with a more spacious fighting compartment in mind and the installation of a powerful engine capable of providing the required driving performance. At the same time, German designers actually abandoned the practice of installing armor plates at rational angles of inclination, giving preference to better manufacturability of the design.

The layout of the hull was close to classical. In the front part there was a mechanical transmission, which included a 5-speed gearbox, a planetary rotation mechanism and final drives. To service its units, two large rectangular hatches were made in the upper armor plate.

The transmission included a Zahnradfabrik ZF SGF 75 five-speed mechanical synchronized gearbox. The torque from the gearbox was transmitted to the planetary turning mechanisms and final drives. The engine and gearbox were connected by a driveshaft running under the floor of the fighting compartment.

Behind the transmission compartment there were places for the driver (on the left) and the gunner-radio operator (on the right). The middle part of the hull was occupied by the fighting compartment, on the roof of which was installed a hexagonal three-man turret with an upper inclined armor plate. Inside there were places for the commander, gunner and loader. At the rear of the tower there was a high observation turret with six viewing slits and an upper double-leaf hatch. In addition, a periscope device was installed on the roof of the tower, and there were viewing slots with armored glass in the sides.

In general, starting with the “troika”, the Germans paid great attention not only to good visibility, but also to ways to escape the tank in emergency situations - in total, the turret received three hatches: one on the top and two on the side. At the same time, the prototype and tanks of the first modifications did not have hatches for the driver and radio operator.

At the rear of the hull there was an engine compartment. A 12-cylinder V-shaped gasoline engine Maybach HL108TR was installed here, developing a power of 250 hp. at 3000 rpm. The cooling system is liquid.

The tank's armament consisted of one 37-mm 3.7cm KwK cannon with a barrel length of 46.5 calibers. According to the table values, the 3.7cm Pzgr armor-piercing projectile weighing 815 grams developed an initial speed of 1020 m/s and could penetrate a vertically mounted sheet of armor 34 mm thick at a distance of up to 500 meters. But in fact, the armor penetration of 37-mm shells turned out to be much lower, which subsequently forced German designers to constantly look for ways to strengthen weapons. Additional small arms consisted of three 7.92 mm MG34 machine guns. Two of them were mounted in the mantlet to the right of the gun, and the third was located in the front hull plate. The ammunition for the 37-mm cannon was 120 armor-piercing and high-explosive fragmentation rounds, as well as 4,425 rounds of machine gun ammunition.

The first order for 25 “zero series” tanks was issued in December 1935. At the same time, deliveries were planned to begin in October 1936, so that by April 1, 1937, the entire batch would be transferred to the troops.

After relatively successful testing on April 3, 1936, the tank received the official designation Panzerkampfwagen III (Pz.Kpfw.III), while according to the end-to-end designation system adopted in the Wehrmacht it was designated as Sd.Kfz.141.

A total of 10 tanks of this modification were produced, which bore the original designation 1.Serie/Z.W.(later) and were a development of Z.W.1. Due to the tight deadlines, it was necessary to take a number of temporary measures and solutions, which did not allow them to be considered full-fledged combat vehicles. As a result, two tanks had non-armored steel hulls. In addition, the armor protection of the first tanks turned out to be too modest. The forehead, sides and rear (both hull and turret) were only 14.5 mm thick, the roof – 10 mm, and the bottom – 4 mm. The Soviet light tanks T-26 and BT-7 of the 1936-1937 model had similar performance, with more powerful cannon armament.

Almost all Ausf.As built were distributed among the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Panzer Divisions, where they were used primarily for crew training. In the winter of 1937-1938. They took part in the big winter maneuvers of the Wehrmacht and showed themselves well. Of the significant defects, only poor suspension design was noted, which was corrected on other modifications of the tank.

The first combat operation involving the PzIII Ausf.A was the Anschluss of Austria and the annexation of the Sudetenland in the spring of 1938. Several tanks were used in the invasion of Poland in September 1939, although this was, for the most part, a necessary measure, since tank regiments and divisions had to be equipped as fully as possible.

In addition, the power plant units were improved, primarily the turning mechanism and final drives. Other modifications included changes to the design of the power compartment vents and exhaust system. At the same time, a new type of commander's cupola was introduced, the same as on the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.A tank, and five smoke bombs could be installed in special pockets at the rear. The antenna mounting location was also moved a little further to the stern. In total, the improvements made made it possible to increase the maximum speed to 35 km/h, although the combat weight increased to 15.9 tons. Deliveries of Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf. tanks to the active army began from mid-1937 to January 1938. The next batch of 15 “zero series” tanks, with chassis numbers from 60201 to 60215, was called 2.Serie/Z.W.(later Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf.B) and was a development of the Z.W.3 prototype. The main difference of this modification was the new chassis, instead of the five-wheel one on vertical springs, which did not justify itself. Apparently, Daimler-Benz engineers decided to carry out a kind of unification of individual elements of the Pz.Kpfw.III and the future Pz.Kpfw.IV - now there were eight road wheels on each side, which were locked in pairs into bogies. Each of the bogies was suspended on two groups of leaf springs and equipped with hydraulic shock absorbers of the Fichtel und Sachs type. At the same time, the design of the drive and guide wheels remains the same. The upper part of the track was now supported by three support rollers. The length of the supporting surface of each track chain has been reduced from 3400 to 3200 mm.

Modification 3.Serie/Z.W, which became better known under the designation, was also released in 15 copies. The differences from the Ausf.B were minimal - in fact, an attempt was made to modernize the chassis. The first and last bogies had short parallel springs, while the second and third bogies had one common long spring. In addition, the design of the exhaust system, the design of the planetary rotation mechanisms were changed, and a new type of tow hook was used. Another difference between the Ausf.C modification (as well as the Ausf.B) was the rounded shape of the hinged hatches, which were located on the upper armor of the front part of the hull and were intended for access to the steering. After all the modifications carried out, the mass of the tank was 16,000 kg. Deliveries of Ausf.C were carried out in parallel with Ausf.B until January 1938 inclusive /

In January 1938, production of the latest modification of the tank began ( 3b.Serie/Z.W), which still used a 16-wheel chassis with leaf spring suspension. True, a new series of changes were made to its design: the front and rear springs were installed not parallel, but at an angle. The list of other changes was no less impressive:

— new drive and guide wheels were introduced;

— the shape of the stern and the armoring of the power compartment have been improved (the access hatches to the units do not have ventilation shutters);

— the shape of the stern has been changed;

— the side air intakes have been modified;

— modified front tow hooks;

— the rear towing hooks were installed in a new location;

— the capacity of the fuel tanks was increased to 600 liters;

— modified exhaust system;

— a new six-speed ZF SSG 76 gearbox was introduced;

— the thickness of the hull and turret armor, in the frontal and side projections, has been increased to 30 mm;

— the design of the commander’s cupola was changed (the wall thickness was increased to 30 mm, the number of viewing slots was reduced to five).

Thus, Ausf.D became a kind of prototype for many subsequent modifications. All the improvements made had a beneficial effect on specifications, but the tank’s combat weight increased to 19,800 kg. Apparently, in order to speed up production, the first few tanks did not receive the 30 mm rolled armor and their hulls were made of 14.5 mm thick armor.

In practice, the introduction of a 16-wheel chassis did not change anything for the better. In addition, the weak armor of the first modifications of the Pz.Kpfw.III was indicated. It is not surprising that after the Polish campaign it was decided to withdraw Ausf.B, C and D from the combat units. This process was completed in February 1940.

The tanks were transferred to training units, but after some time they were in demand again. Tanks of the Ausf.D modification had the opportunity to take part in the Norwegian campaign as part of the 40th Tank Battalion, and in October 1940, five Ausf.B served as prototypes for self-propelled gun Sturmgeschutz III.

Sources:
P. Chamberlain, H. Doyle “Encyclopedia of German tanks of the 2nd World War.” AST\Astrel. Moscow, 2004
M.B. Baratinsky “Middle Panzer tank III" ("Armor Collection MK" 2000-06)

TACTICAL AND TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF MEDIUM TANKS Pz.Kpfw.III model 1937-1942.

This story must begin with the fact that in the fall of 1939, two damaged German tanks were discovered and secretly removed in Poland, which were carefully studied at the NIBT training ground. Light tank PzKpfw II was almost complete, but did not evoke any special emotions. The successful armoring of 15-20 mm sheets of cemented armor, the successful design of the engine (the engine was transferred to the Yaroslavl plant for careful study in order to develop a design for a similar product with a power of 200-250 hp), gearbox and cooling system were noted, but overall the assessment tanka was reserved.

But when examining the tank PzKpfw III , referred to in ABTU documents as "medium 20-ton Daimler-Benz tank", the Soviet specialists ended up breaking the pattern. The weight of the tank was approximately 20 tons, it had cemented (that is, unequally hardened armor, when the top layer of the armor plate is hardened to high hardness, and the back layer remains viscous) armor 32 mm thick, a very successful 320-horsepower gasoline engine, excellent observation devices and a sight , as well as the commander's cupola. The tank was not on the move, and it was not possible to repair it, because already in the spring of 1940, its armor sheets were subjected to fire from anti-tank guns and anti-tank guns. But in 1940, the same tank was officially purchased in Germany “for informational purposes” and delivered to Kubinka for sea trials.
IN domestic documents this tank is called T-ShG, but most likely its modification was Ausf F, and the letter “F” was transformed from a typewritten capital letter G by manually drawing a small crossbar.

The results obtained from testing these two tanks amazed Soviet specialists. It turned out that German tanks have very high quality armor.

Even during the process of capturing and secretly transporting the “Polish” PzKpfw III, two shots were fired at it from a distance of 400 m from a 45 mm cannon, which did not penetrate (!) the 32 mm thick side armor. The standard BR-240 armor-piercing projectile left two round-shaped holes in the side with a depth of 18 and 22 mm, but the back of the sheet was not damaged, only bulges 4-6 mm high formed on the surface, which were covered with a network of small cracks.

The mention of this made me want to do the same experiment at the NIBT test site. But here, firing from the specified distance at an angle of contact from the normal to 30 degrees, they penetrated the specified armor twice (out of five). Deputy People's Commissar of Defense for Armaments G. Kulik authorized an inquiry through the technical department of the NKV and GAU under the leadership of E. Satel, which showed the following:
“...Firing an armor-piercing shell from a 45-mm cannon against the armor of a German medium tank gives us an extreme case of penetration, since the specified German cemented armor with a thickness of 32 mm is equally strong with 42-44 mm hemogenic armor of the IZ type (Izhora plant). Thus, cases where the side of a tank is fired at at an angle greater than 30 degrees leads to a ricochet of shells, especially since the surface hardness of German armor is extremely high...
In this case, the matter is aggravated by the fact that when firing, shells manufactured in 1938 were used with poor-quality heat treatment of the body, which, in order to increase yield, was carried out according to a reduced program, which led to increased fragility of the shell body and its splitting when overcoming thick, high-hardness armor.
Details about the shells of this batch and the decision to remove them from the troops were reported to you on June 21, 1939...
The investigation convincingly shows that despite the said decision to seize, a large number of The 45-mm armor-piercing shells of the part noted above, as well as those in the neighboring one, have the same marks and, apparently, the same defect... Thus, the removal of these shells from the troops was carried out to this day. there was no time, and shells produced in 1938 are to this day side by side with new ones of normal quality...
When shelling the armored hull of a tank at the BT-Polygon, 45-mm BRZ shells were used. 1940, free from the specified defect and fully satisfying the TTT..."

A 32-mm thick armor plate of a PzKptw III tank after being fired at by a series of five 45-mm shells (2 holes). Meeting angle up to 30 degrees.

But even the use of high-quality shells did not make the “forty-five” powerful enough to fight the PzKpfw III tank at medium and long ranges. After all, according to our intelligence data, Germany has already begun producing these tanks with 45-52 mm hull and turret armor, insurmountable to 45 mm shells at all ranges.
The next feature of the German tank What delighted domestic tank builders was its transmission, and in particular its gearbox. Even rough calculations showed that the tank should be very mobile. With an engine power of 320 hp. and weighing about 19.8 tons, the tank was supposed to accelerate to 65 km/h on a good road, and the successful selection of gears allowed it to realize its speed well on all types of roads.
The joint run of the German tank with the T-34 and BT-7, approved from above, confirmed the advantages of the German on the move. On a measured kilometer of gravel highway on the Kubinka-Repishe-Krutitsy stretch, the German tank showed a maximum speed of 69.7 km/h, the best value for the T-34 was 48.2 km/h, for the BT-7 - 68.1 km/h . At the same time, the testers gave preference to the German tank due to better ride quality, visibility, and comfortable crew positions.

In the fall of 1940, the Chairman of the Defense Committee K. Voroshilov received a letter from the new head of ABTU:
"A study of the latest examples of foreign tank construction shows that the most successful among them is the German medium tank"Daimler-Benz T-3G". It has the most successful combination of mobility and armor protection with a small combat weight - approx. 20 tons. This means that this tank, with armor protection comparable to the T-34, with a more spacious fighting compartment, excellent mobility, is undoubtedly cheaper than the T-34, and therefore can be produced in large quantities.
According to the dissenting opinion of comrade Ginzburg, Gavruta and Troyanova, the main disadvantage of this type of tank is its armament of a 37 mm cannon. But according to Sept. this year reconnaissance survey, these tanks are already being modernized by increasing the armor to 45-52 mm and arming with a 47 mm or even 55 mm cannon...
I believe that the German army, represented by this tank, today has the most successful combination of mobility, firepower and armor protection, supported by good visibility from the crew members’ workplaces...
It is necessary to continue work on the "126" tank without delay for a minute in order to bring all its characteristics to the level of the German vehicle (or exceed it), as well as to introduce the most successful solutions of the German tank into the design of our other new tanks, such as:
1. design of escape hatches;
2. engine cooling circuit;
3. gearbox design;
4. power supply diagram with the engine and fuel tank located behind a sealed enclosure from the team;
5. commander's observation tower;
6. placement of the radio station in the housing.
I ask you to make a decision to refine the design of new tanks in view of newly discovered circumstances...

Fedorenko 13/1Х-40"

All this determined some course corrections Soviet tank building, taken in 1937-1938. and corrected at the beginning of 1940.
At the end of October, the leadership of ABTU basically formulated requirements for supplementing and changing the designs of new tanks and tactical and technical requirements for them, and On November 6, 1940, Marshal S. Timoshenko addressed the Chairman of the KO under the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR K. Voroshilov with the following letter:
“The experimental exercises of the Tank and Mechanized Forces have shown that the issues of controlling tank units are extremely difficult.
The results of long runs and tests of tanks, as well as the study of advanced models of foreign tank equipment, show that appropriate additions must be made to the Tactical and Technical Requirements for our tanks.
The tank commander, starting from an individual tank and above, must be given the opportunity to fully and constantly monitor the battlefield, the situation and the tanks subordinate to him, completely freeing him from the duties of an artilleryman or loader.
Currently time, observation devices and visual aids for the commander are limited and cause an urgent need to increase all-round visibility and visibility for each individual tank.
At the same time, it is necessary to significantly reduce the effort on the tank control drives when driving.
In order to improve the combat qualities of tanks... it is necessary to make the following additions to the TTT.
1) Install special commander's observation turrets with all-round visibility on tank turrets.
2) Reconsider the number of crews.
3) Specify weapons and ammunition.
4) For external communications, require the installation of an account with KRSTB smaller. in size than 71-TK and easier to set up.
5) For internal communications, require the use of laryngophones instead of bulky microphones.
6) Replace the driver's and radio operator's viewing devices with more advanced ones. The driver must also install an optical viewing device.
7) Require a warranty period for the operation of the tank of at least 600 hours before K.R.
8) Convert the suspension of the T-34 tank to an individual torsion bar.
9) In the first half of 1941, factories must develop and prepare for serial production a planetary transmission for T-34 and KV tanks. This will increase the average speed of the tanks and make it easier to control.
I present the draft resolution of the CO.
Please approve.
Marshal of the Soviet Union S Timoshenko"

So, unlike the claims of some amateurs armored vehicles, the Soviet military was well aware of the shortcomings of our pre-war tanks, even the “fresh” T-34 and KV. Largely because of this understanding, such a machine as the T-50 was born, or a project for a deep modernization of the T-34 tank known as the A-43 (or T-34M).

Sources

M. Svirin “Stalin’s armor shield. History of the Soviet tank 1937-43.” Yauza/EXMO. 2006
M. Svirin “Stalin’s self-propelled guns. Story Soviet self-propelled guns 1919-45.” Yauza/EXMO. 2008
M. Baryatinsky "Soviet tanks in battle. From T-26 to IS-2." YAUZA\EXMO. Moscow. 2007.
"Complete encyclopedia of world tanks 1915-2000." Compiled by G.L. Kholyavsky. Harvest.Minsk\AST.Moscow. 1998

In 1934, the Armament Service ground forces(Heereswaffenamt) issued an order for a combat vehicle with a 37-mm cannon, which received the designation ZB (Zugfuhrerwagen - company commander's vehicle). Of the four companies that participated in the competition, only one - Daimler-Benz - received an order for the production of a pilot batch of 10 cars. In 1936, these tanks were transferred to military testing under the army designation Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf.A (or Pz.IIIA). They clearly bore the mark of the influence of W. Christie's designs - five large-diameter road wheels.

The second experimental batch of 12 Model B units had a completely different chassis with 8 small road wheels, reminiscent of the Pz.IV. On the next 15 experimental tanks Ausf.C chassis was similar, but the suspension was noticeably improved. It should be emphasized that all other combat characteristics of the mentioned modifications, in principle, remained unchanged.

This cannot be said about the D series tanks (50 units), the frontal and side armor of which was increased to 30 mm, while the tank mass reached 19.5 tons, and the ground pressure increased from 0.77 to 0.96 kg/cm2 .

In 1938, at the factories of three companies at once - Daimler-Benz, Henschel and MAN - production of the first mass modification - Ausf.E - began. 96 tanks of this model received a chassis with six rubber-coated road wheels and a torsion bar suspension with hydraulic shock absorbers, which was no longer subject to significant changes. The combat weight of the tank was 19.5 tons. The crew consisted of 5 people. This number of crew members, starting with the Pz.III, became standard on all subsequent German medium and heavy tanks. Thus, already from the mid-1930s, the Germans achieved a functional division of duties among crew members. Their opponents came to this much later - only in 1943-1944.

The Pz.IIIE was armed with a 37-mm cannon with a 46.5-caliber barrel and three MG 34 machine guns (131 rounds of ammunition and 4,500 rounds of ammunition). Maybach HL120TR 12-cylinder carburetor engine with a power of 300 hp. at 3000 rpm it allowed the tank to reach a maximum speed on the highway of 40 km/h; The cruising range was 165 km and 95 km on the ground.

The layout of the tank was traditional for the Germans - with a front-mounted transmission, which shortened the length and increased the height of the vehicle, simplifying the design of control drives and their maintenance. In addition, the prerequisites were created for increasing the size of the fighting compartment. Characteristic of the hull of this tank, as indeed of all German tanks of that period, was the uniform strength of the armor plates on all main planes and the abundance of hatches. Until the summer of 1943, the Germans preferred ease of access to units over the strength of the hull.

The transmission deserves a positive assessment, which was characterized by a large number of gears in the gearbox with a small number of gears: one gear per gear. The rigidity of the box, in addition to the ribs in the crankcase, was ensured by a “shaftless” gear mounting system. To facilitate management and improve average speed movements, equalizers and servomechanisms were used.

Pz.III Ausf.D. Poland, September 1939. Theoretically, the driver and gunner-radio operator could use access hatches to the transmission units to enter the tank. However, it is quite obvious that it was almost impossible to do this in a combat situation.

The width of the track chains - 360 mm - was chosen mainly based on road driving conditions, significantly limiting off-road capability. However, the latter still had to be found in the conditions of the Western European theater of military operations.

The next modification was the Pz.IIIF (440 units produced), which had minor design improvements, including a new type of commander's cupola.

600 tanks of the G series received the 50-mm KwK 38 tank gun with a barrel length of 42 calibers, developed by Krupp in 1938, as their main armament. At the same time, the re-equipment of the previously produced E and F tanks with a new artillery system began. The ammunition load of the new gun consisted of 99 rounds, and 3,750 rounds of ammunition were intended for two MG 34 machine guns. After rearmament, the tank's weight increased to 20.3 tons.

The H variant received an improved turret, a new commander's cupola, and later additional 30 mm frontal armor and a new 400 mm track. From October 1940 to April 1941, 310 Ausf.H tanks were produced.

Pz.III Ausf.G tanks of the 5th Tank Regiment of the 5th Light Division before being sent to North Africa. 1941

The Pz.III Ausf.J was protected by even thicker armor. Among the minor improvements, the most significant was the new type of machine gun mounting. The first 1,549 Ausf.J tanks were still armed with a 50-mm KwK 38 cannon with a 42-caliber barrel. Starting in January 1942, the new 50-mm KwK 39 gun with a barrel length of 60 calibers began to be installed on Ausf.J tanks for the first time. 1067 tanks of this modification received such guns.

Front-line experience forced us to move on to the next modification - L, in which the front of the hull and the front of the turret were protected by additional 20-mm armor plates. The tanks also received a modernized mask installation, which simultaneously served as a counterweight to the 50 mm gun. The tank's weight increased to 22.7 tons. From June to December 1942, 653 (according to other sources - 703) tanks of the L modification were manufactured.

Pz.III Ausf.J from the 6th Tank Regiment of the 3rd Tank Division. Eastern front, winter 1941.

On the M variant, a 1350 kg “eastern” caterpillar appeared. With it, the width of the car increased to 3266 mm. Since March 1943, these tanks were produced with bulwarks - 5-mm steel sheets that protected the vehicle from cumulative shells. The initial order was 1,000 units, but the low effectiveness of 50-mm guns in the fight against Soviet tanks forced the Wehrmacht Ground Forces Armament Service to reduce the order to 250 vehicles. Another 165 ready-made chassis were converted into assault ones StuG guns III, and another 100 - in flamethrower tanks Pz.III (Fl).

The lack of tungsten in the Reich reduced the effectiveness of the long-barreled 50-mm cannon (its sub-caliber projectile with a tungsten core, which had an initial speed of 1190 m/s, penetrated 94-mm armor at a distance of 500 m); Therefore, it was decided to re-equip some of the tanks with a “short” 75-mm KwK 37 cannon with a barrel length of 24 calibers - for use as assault weapons. 450 L series vehicles were rearmed, and later another 215 M series tanks. The frontal armor of the turrets on these vehicles was increased to 57 mm, and the turret weight was 2.45 tons. These tanks - Ausf.N - became the last modification of the Pz.III, mass-produced.

In addition to combat, so-called linear tanks, 5 types of command tanks were produced with a total of 435 units. 262 tanks were converted into artillery fire control vehicles. A special order - 100 Pz.III Ausf.M with flamethrowers - was completed by Wegmann in Kassel. For a flamethrower with a range of up to 60 m, 1000 liters of fire mixture were required. The tanks were intended for Stalingrad, but only reached the front in early July 1943, near Kursk.

At the end of the summer of 1940, 168 tanks of models F, G and H were converted for movement under water and were to be used in the landings on the English coast. The immersion depth was 15 m; Fresh air It was supplied with a hose 18 m long and 20 cm in diameter. In the spring of 1941, experiments were continued with a 3.5-m pipe - a “snorkel”. The Pz.III and Pz.IV submersible tanks and the Pz.II amphibious tanks formed the 18th Tank Regiment, which was deployed into a brigade in 1941, and then into the 18th Tank Division. Some Tauchpanzer III vehicles entered service with the 6th Tank Regiment of the 3rd Tank Division. These units were trained at the Milovice training ground in the protectorate of the Czech Republic and Moravia.

Since July 1944, the Pz.III was also used as an ARV. At the same time, a square wheelhouse was installed in place of the tower. In addition, small batches of vehicles for transporting ammunition and engineering were produced. There were prototypes of a minesweeper tank and options for converting it into a railcar.

Pz.III Ausf.J during unloading from a railway platform. Eastern Front, 1942. On the right wing of the vehicle is the tactical badge of the 24th Panzer Division of the Wehrmacht.

It should be noted that a significant number of tank turrets released as a result of the conversion were installed as firing points on various fortifications, in particular on the Atlantic Wall and in Italy on the Ready Line. In 1944 alone, 110 towers were used for these purposes.

Production of the Pz.III was discontinued in 1943, after about 6 thousand tanks had been produced. Subsequently, only the production of self-propelled guns on its basis continued.

Pz.III Ausf.N during testing at the NIBT Test Site in Kubinka near Moscow. 1946

It must be said that all German tanks created in the pre-war years had a rather monotonous fate. Like the Pz.IV, the first “troikas” formally entered service with the troops in 1938. But not to combat units! New machines were concentrated in training centers Panzerwaffe, staffed by the most experienced tank instructors. Throughout 1938, essentially military tests took place, during which it became clear, in particular, that the chassis of the first modifications was unreliable and futile.

A number of foreign and domestic sources indicate the participation of the Pz.III in the Anschluss of Austria in March and the occupation of the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia in October 1938. However, their presence in the units of the 1st and 2nd Wehrmacht tank divisions that participated in these operations is not confirmed by German sources. Perhaps the Pz.III tanks were delivered there a little later in order to demonstrate German military power. In any case, the first 10 Pz.III tanks were transferred to combat units in the spring of 1939 and could actually only participate in the occupation of the Czech Republic and Moravia in March of this year.

The total order for tanks of this type was 2,538 units, of which 244 were to be produced in 1939. However, the Armament Service was able to accept only 24 vehicles. As a result, on September 1, 1939, the Wehrmacht had only 98 of the 120 Pz.IIIs produced by that time and 20–25 command tanks at its base. Only 69 vehicles took direct part in the hostilities against Poland. Most of them were concentrated in the 6th Tank Training Battalion (6 Panzer Lehr Battalion), attached to the 3rd Panzer Division, which was part of the XIX tank corps General G. Guderian. The 1st Tank Division also had several vehicles.

Unfortunately, there is no information about combat clashes between Pz.III and Polish tanks. We can only say that the “troika” had better armor protection and maneuverability than the most powerful Polish tank 7TR. Different sources give different figures German losses: according to some, they amounted to only 8 Pz.III, according to others, 40 tanks were out of action, and irrecoverable losses amounted to 26 units!

By the beginning of active hostilities in the West - May 10, 1940 - the Panzerwaffe already had 381 Pz.III tanks and 60-70 command tanks. True, only 349 vehicles of this type were immediately ready for combat.

After the Polish campaign, the Germans increased the number of tank divisions to ten, and although not all of them had the standard structure with two tank regiments, it was not possible to fully equip them with a regular number of all types of tanks. However, the “old” five tank divisions were not much different from the “new” ones in this regard. The tank regiment was supposed to have 54 Pz.III and Pz.Bg.Wg.III tanks. It is not difficult to calculate that there should have been 540 Pz.III in ten tank regiments of five divisions. However, this number of tanks was not simply physical. Guderian complains about this: “The re-equipment of tank regiments with tanks of the T-III and T-IV types, which was especially important and necessary, progressed extremely slowly due to the weak production capacity industry, as well as as a result of the conservation of new types of tanks by the main command of the ground forces." The first reason expressed by the general is indisputable, the second is highly doubtful. The presence of tanks in the troops was quite consistent with the number of vehicles produced by May 1940.

Be that as it may, the Germans had to concentrate scarce medium and heavy tanks in formations operating in the directions of the main attacks. Thus, in the 1st Panzer Division of Guderian’s corps there were 62 Pz.III tanks and 15 Pz.Bf.Wg.III tanks. The 2nd Panzer Division had 54 Pz.IIIs. Other divisions had smaller numbers of combat vehicles of this type.

The Pz.III turned out to be quite suitable for fighting French light tanks of all types. Things were much worse when meeting with medium D2 and S35 and heavy B1bis. German 37 mm cannons did not penetrate their armor. Guderian himself also drew personal impressions from this situation. This is what he writes, recalling the battle with French tanks south of Junivville on June 10, 1940: “During tank battle I tried in vain to knock out the French tank “B” (B1bis. – Note auto); all the shells bounced off the thick armored walls without causing any harm to the tank. Our 37- and 20-mm cannons were also not effective against this vehicle. Therefore, we were forced to suffer losses.” As for losses, the Panzerwaffe lost 135 Pz.III tanks in France.

Pz.III Ausf.N, knocked out by Soviet artillery in the Sinyavino area. Winter 1943.

Like other types of German tanks, the Troikas took part in the operation in the Balkans in the spring of 1941. In this theater, the main danger to German tanks was not the small number of Yugoslav and Greek tanks and anti-tank guns, but the mountainous, sometimes unpaved roads and poor bridges. Serious clashes, leading to losses, albeit minor, occurred between the Germans and British troops who arrived in Greece in March 1941. The largest battle took place when the Germans broke through the Metaxas Line in northern Greece, near the city of Ptolemais. Tanks from the 9th Panzer Division of the Wehrmacht attacked the 3rd Royal Tank Regiment here. The British A10 cruiser tanks were powerless against the Pz.III, especially the H modification, which had 60 mm frontal armor and a 50 mm gun. The situation was saved by the Royal Horse Artillery - 15 German tanks, including several Pz.IIIs, were shot down by fire from 25-pounder guns. However, this did not affect the development of events as a whole: on April 28, the regiment’s personnel, abandoning all their tanks, left Greece.

Pz.III Ausf.J, knocked out in the summer of 1941. The Soviet shell literally broke through the frontal armor of the tower.

In the spring of 1941, the “troikas” had to master another theater of operations - North African. On March 11, units of the 5th Light Division of the Wehrmacht, numbering up to 80 Pz.III, began to unload in Tripoli. These were mainly cars of the G modification in a tropical version (trop) with reinforced air filters and a cooling system. A couple of months later they were joined combat vehicles 15th Panzer Division. At the time of arrival, the Pz.III was superior to any English tank in Africa, with the exception of Matilda.

The first major battle in the Libyan desert involving the Pz.III was the attack by the 5th Tank Regiment of the 5th Light Division on British positions near Tobruk on April 30, 1941. The offensive undertaken German tank crews after lengthy aviation training, it turned out to be ineffective. The 2nd battalion of the 5th regiment suffered especially heavy losses. Suffice it to say that 24 Pz.IIIs alone were knocked out. True, all the tanks were evacuated from the battlefield and 14 vehicles soon returned to service. It must be said that the commander of the German Afrika Korps, General Rommel, quickly drew conclusions from such failures, and in the future the Germans did not undertake frontal attacks, preferring the tactics of flank attacks and envelopments. This was all the more important because by the end of the autumn of 1941, neither the Pz.III nor the Pz.IV had such a decisive superiority over the majority of British tanks as in the spring. During Operation Crusader, for example, in November 1941, the British advanced with 748 tanks, including 213 Matildas and Valentines, 220 Crusaders, 150 older cruiser tanks and 165 American Stuarts. production. The Afrika Korps could oppose them with only 249 German (of which 139 Pz.III) and 146 Italian tanks. At the same time, the armament and armor protection of most British combat vehicles were similar to, and sometimes superior to, German ones. As a result of two months of fighting, British troops were missing 278 tanks. Italian losses German troops were comparable - 292 tanks.

The British 8th Army drove the enemy back almost 800 km and captured all of Cyrenaica. But she couldn't solve her main task- Destroy Rommel's forces. On January 5, 1942, a convoy arrived in Tripoli, delivering 117 German (mainly Pz.III Ausf.J with a 50-mm 42-caliber gun) and 79 Italian tanks. Having received this reinforcement, Rommel launched a decisive offensive on January 21. In two days, the Germans advanced 120–130 km east, while the British rapidly retreated.

Command tank Pz.Bf.Wg.III Ausf.Dl. Poland, September 1939.

The natural question is: if the Germans had neither quantitative nor qualitative superiority over the enemy, then how can their success be explained? This is the answer to this question given by Major General von Mellenthin (at that time, with the rank of major, he served on Rommel’s headquarters): “In my opinion, our victories were determined by three factors: the qualitative superiority of our anti-tank guns, the systematic application of the principle of interaction combat arms and - last but not least - our tactical methods. While the British limited the role of their 3.7-inch anti-aircraft guns (very powerful guns) to fighting aircraft, we used our 88-mm guns to fire at both tanks and aircraft. In November 1941 we had only thirty-five 88 mm guns, but moving with our tanks, these guns inflicted huge losses on British tanks. In addition, our 50-mm anti-tank guns with a high muzzle velocity were significantly superior to the British two-pounder guns, and batteries of these guns always accompanied our tanks in battle. Our field artillery was also trained to cooperate with tanks. In short, German tank division Was in highest degree a flexible connection of all types of troops, always, both in offensive and defensive, relying on artillery. The British, on the contrary, considered anti-tank guns to be a defensive weapon and failed to adequately use their powerful field artillery, which should have been trained to destroy our anti-tank guns.”

Everything said by von Mellenthin, especially concerning the interaction of all types of troops with tanks, was also typical for another theater of military operations - the Eastern Front, which became the most important for the Pz.III, as well as for all other German tanks.

Command tank Pz.Bf.Wg.III Ausf.E and command and staff armored personnel carrier Sd.Kfz.251/3 of the headquarters of the 9th Tank Division. Eastern Front, 1941.

As of June 1, 1941, the Wehrmacht had 235 Pz.III tanks with 37 mm guns (another 81 vehicles were under repair). There were significantly more tanks with 50 mm guns - 1090! Another 23 vehicles were in the process of being re-equipped. During June, the industry was expected to receive another 133 combat vehicles. From this amount directly for the invasion Soviet Union 965 Pz.III tanks were intended, which were distributed more or less evenly among 16 German tank divisions out of 19 that participated in Operation Barbarossa (the 6th, 7th and 8th tank divisions were armed with Czechoslovak-made tanks). So, for example, the 1st Tank Division had 73 Pz.III and 5 command Pz.Bf.Wg.III, the 4th Tank Division had 105 combat vehicles of this type. Moreover, the vast majority of tanks were armed with 50-mm L/42 cannons.

Since the landing on the shores of Foggy Albion did not take place, Tauchpanzer III underwater tanks were also transferred to the east. In the first hours of Operation Barbarossa, these tanks, which were part of the 18th Panzer Division, crossed the Western Bug along the bottom. Here is how the German historian Paul Karel describes this extraordinary event for those years: “At 03.15, in the sector of the 18th Panzer Division, 50 batteries of all calibers opened fire to ensure the crossing of the river by submarine tanks. The division commander, General Nehring, described the operation as a magnificent spectacle, but at the same time rather pointless, since the Russians were smart enough to withdraw their troops from the border areas, leaving only a few units of border guards who fought bravely.

At 04.45, non-commissioned officer Virshin plunged into the Bug on tank No. 1. The infantry watched what was happening in amazement. The water closed over the roof of the tank turret.

“Tankers give in!” They're playing submariners!"

Where Virshin’s tank was now located could be determined by the thin metal pipe sticking out of the river and by the bubbles from the exhaust on the surface that were carried away by the current.

So, tank by tank, the 1st Battalion of the 18th Tank Regiment, led by battalion commander Manfred Count Strachwitz, disappeared to the bottom of the river. And then the first of the strange “amphibians” crawled ashore. There was a quiet bang, and the gun barrel was freed from the rubber plug. The loader lowered the motorcycle camera around the turret ring. They did the same in other cars. The tower hatches opened, from which the “captains” appeared. The battalion commander’s hand flew up three times, which meant “Tanks, forward!” 80 tanks crossed the river under water. 80 tanks rushed into battle. The appearance of armored vehicles on the coastal bridgehead was very opportune; enemy armored reconnaissance vehicles were approaching. Immediately the leading tanks received an order:

“Towers for one hour, load with armor-piercing, range 800 meters, at a group of enemy armored vehicles, rapid fire!”

Panzerbeobachtungswagen III forward artillery observer vehicle. 20th Panzer Division. Eastern Front, summer 1943.

The muzzles of the “amphibious” guns spewed out flames. Several armored vehicles caught fire. The others hastily retreated. The tank fist of Army Group Center rushed towards Minsk and Smolensk."

In the future, similar episodes of forcing water barriers there was no longer any, and the Pz.III was used underwater like regular tanks.

It must be said that the “troikas” as a whole were an equal opponent of most Soviet tanks, surpassing them in some ways, but inferior in some ways. In three main evaluation parameters - armament, maneuverability and armor protection - the Pz.III was significantly superior only to the T-26. The German vehicle had an advantage over the BT-7 in armor protection, and over the T-28 and KB in maneuverability. In all three parameters, the “troika” was inferior only to the T-34. At the same time, the Pz.III had an undeniable superiority over all Soviet tanks in the quantity and quality of observation devices, the quality of sights, the reliability of the engine, transmission and chassis. An important advantage was the 100% division of labor among the crew members, which most Soviet tanks could not boast of. The latter circumstances, in the absence of a pronounced superiority in performance characteristics, generally allowed the Pz.III to emerge victorious in tank duels in most cases. However, when meeting with the T-34, and even more so with the KB, it was very difficult to achieve this - good optics or bad, but the German 50-mm cannon could penetrate their armor only from a very short distance - no more than 300 m. It is no coincidence that that during the period from June 1941 to September 1942, only 7.5% of the total number of T-34 tanks hit by artillery became victims of fire from these guns. At the same time, the main burden of the fight against Soviet medium tanks fell on the shoulders of anti-tank artillery– 54.3% of T-34 tanks were hit by fire from 50-mm Pak 38 anti-tank guns during the specified period. The fact is that the anti-tank gun was more powerful than a tank gun, its barrel had a length of 56.6 calibers, and the initial speed of the armor-piercing projectile was 835 m/s. And she had a better chance of meeting a Soviet tank.

After the turret was dismantled, some of the tanks were converted into Munitionsschlepper III ammunition carriers.

From the above it follows that the most popular Wehrmacht tank at that time, the Pz.III, which also had the greatest capabilities for fighting tanks, in 1941 was in most cases absolutely powerless against the Soviet T-34 and KV. If we take into account the lack of quantitative superiority, it becomes clear how, perhaps without knowing or understanding it, Hitler was bluffing when attacking the USSR. In any case, on August 4, 1941, at a meeting at the headquarters of Army Group Center, he told General G. Guderian: “If I knew that the Russians really have the number of tanks that were given in your book, I would probably I didn’t start this war.” (In his book “Attention, Tanks!”, published in 1937, G. Guderian indicated that at that time the USSR had 10,000 tanks, but Chief of the General Staff Beck and the censorship objected to this figure. - Note auto)

However, let's return to the Pz.III. In six months of 1941, 660 tanks of this type were irretrievably lost, and in the first two months of 1942, another 338. Given the then existing rate of production of armored vehicles in Germany, it was not possible to quickly make up for these losses. Therefore, the Wehrmacht tank divisions constantly maintained a chronic shortage of combat vehicles.

Throughout 1942, the Pz.III remained the main striking force of the Panzerwaffe, including during large-scale offensive operations on the southern flank of the Eastern Front. On August 23, 1942, Pz.III Ausf.J from the 14th Tank Corps were the first to reach the Volga north of Stalingrad. During the Battle of Stalingrad and the Battle of the Caucasus, the Pz.III suffered the most severe losses. Moreover, “troikas” armed with both types of guns – 42 and 60 calibers – took part in these battles. The use of a long-barreled 50-mm cannon made it possible to push back the firing distance, for example, from the T-34, to almost 500 m. In combination with the rather powerful armor protection of the frontal projection of the Pz.III, the chances of victory for both tanks were largely equalized. True, the German vehicle could only achieve success in combat at such a distance using PzGr 40 sub-caliber projectiles.

In May 1942, the first 19 Ausf.J tanks with 50 mm L/60 guns arrived in North Africa. In English documents these vehicles appear as Panzer III Special. On the eve of the battle at El Ghazala, Rommel had only 332 tanks, of which 223 were “troikas”. It should be taken into account that those who appeared at the front American tanks"Grant I" were practically invulnerable to the guns of German tanks. The exceptions were the Pz.III Ausf.J and Pz.IV Ausf.F2 with long-barreled guns, but Rommel had only 23 such vehicles. However, despite the numerical superiority of the British troops, the Germans again went on the offensive, and by June 11 the entire forward line of strong points from El Ghazala to Bir Hakeim was in their hands. Over the course of several days of fighting, the British army lost 550 tanks and 200 guns, and British units began a disorderly retreat to a rear defensive position on Egyptian territory near El Alamein.

Pz.III Ausf.F of the 7th Tank Regiment of the 10th Tank Division. France, May 1940.

Heavy fighting on this line began at the end of August 1942. On the eve of the offensive that Rommel launched at this time, the Afrika Korps had 74 Panzer III Specials. During unsuccessful offensive battles, the Germans suffered heavy losses in equipment, which they could not replace. By the end of October, only 81 combat-ready tanks remained in the German forces. On October 23, 1029 tanks of General Montgomery's 8th Army went on the offensive. By November 3, the resistance of the German and Italian troops was broken, and they began a rapid retreat, abandoning all heavy equipment. In the 15th Panzer Division, for example, by November 10, there were 1,177 personnel left, 16 guns (of which four were 88 mm) and not a single tank. Leaving Libya, Rommel's army, which received reinforcements, was able to stop the British on the Tunisian border, on the Maret Line, in January 1943.

In 1943, a number of Pz.III tanks, mainly modifications L and N, took part in the final battles of the African campaign. In particular, Ausf.L tanks of the 15th Panzer Division took part in the defeat of American troops in the Kasserine Pass on February 14, 1943. Ausf.N tanks were part of the 501st heavy tank battalion. Their task was to protect the Tigers’ positions from attacks by enemy infantry. After the surrender of German troops in North Africa On May 12, 1943, all these tanks became Allied trophies.

The main theater of combat use of the Pz.III in 1943 remained the Eastern Front. True, the main burden of the fight against Soviet tanks passed to the Pz.IV with long-barreled 75-mm guns by the middle of the year, and the “troikas” increasingly played a supporting role in tank attacks. Nevertheless, they still made up approximately half of the Wehrmacht tank fleet on the Eastern Front. By the summer of 1943, the German tank division included a two-battalion tank regiment. In the first battalion, one company was armed with “triples”, in the second – two. In total, the division was supposed to have 66 linear tanks of this type.

The “farewell tour” of the Pz.III was Operation Citadel. The table gives an idea of ​​the presence of Pz.III tanks of various modifications in the tank and motorized divisions of the Wehrmacht and SS troops at the beginning of Operation Citadel.

In addition to these tanks, there were 56 more vehicles in the 502nd and 505th heavy tank battalions, the 656th tank destroyer division and other units. According to German data, during July and August 1943, 385 “troikas” were lost. In total, during the year, losses amounted to 2,719 Pz.III units, of which 178 were returned to service after repairs.

By the end of 1943, due to the cessation of production, the number of Pz.IIIs in first-line units had sharply decreased. A significant number of tanks of this type were transferred to various training and reserve units. They also served in secondary theaters of war, for example in the Balkans or Italy. By November 1944, a little more than 200 Pz.III remained in the first-line combat units: on the Eastern Front - 133, in the West - 35 and in Italy - 49.

As of March 1945, the following number of tanks remained in the army:

Pz.III L/42 – 216

Pz.III L/60 – 113

Pz.III L/24 – 205

Pz.Beob.Wg.III – 70

Pz.Bf.Wg.IIl – 4

Berge-Pz.III – 130.

Of the line tanks and forward artillery observer vehicles, 328 units were in the Army Reserve, 105 were used as training vehicles, and 164 vehicles located in front-line units were distributed as follows:

Eastern Front – 16

Western Front -

Italy – 58

Denmark/Norway – 90.

German statistics last year the war ends on April 28, and the figures for the presence of Pz.III in the troops on this date are almost no different from those given above, which indicates the practical non-participation of the “troikas” in the battles of the last days of the war. According to German data, from September 1, 1939 to April 10, 1945, the irretrievable losses of Pz.III tanks amounted to 4,706 units.

A few words about export deliveries of Pz.III, which were very insignificant. In September 1942, Hungary received 10 tanks of the M modification. Another 10–12 vehicles were transferred to the Hungarians in 1944. At the end of 1942, 11 Ausf.N vehicles were delivered to Romania. They were in service with the 1st Romanian Tank Division "Greater Romania" (Romania Mage). In 1943, Bulgaria ordered 10 such tanks, but in the end the Germans supplied it with Pz.38(t). Slovakia received 7 Ausf.N in 1943. Several vehicles of modifications N and L were in service with the Croatian troops. Turkey planned to purchase 56 vehicles of the L and M variants, but these plans could not be realized. Thus, only no more than 50 Pz.IIIs entered the armies of Germany's allies.

In battles with the Red Army, the Hungarian army most actively used these tanks.

A number of captured Pz.IIIs were also used by the Red Army, mainly in 1942–1943. On chassis captured tanks About 200 SU-76I self-propelled artillery mounts were manufactured, which were used in battles with German troops until the end of 1943.

In 1967, in his book “Designs and Development of Combat Vehicles,” British tank theorist Richard Ogorkiewicz outlined an interesting theory of the existence of an intermediate class of “light-medium” tanks. In his opinion, the first vehicle in this class was the Soviet T-26, armed with a 45-mm cannon. In addition, Ogorkevich included in this category the Czechoslovak LT-35 and LT-38, the Swedish La-10, the British “cruisers” from Mk I to Mk IV, the Soviet tanks of the BT family and, finally, the German Pz.III.

One of 135 Pz.IIIs destroyed during the French campaign. Judging by the image of the buffalo on the side of the turret, this Pz.III Ausf.E belongs to the 7th Tank Regiment of the 10th Panzer Division. May 1940.

It must be said that Ogorkevich’s theory makes a certain sense. Indeed, the tactical and technical characteristics of all these combat vehicles are quite close to each other. This is all the more important since these tanks have become opponents on the battlefield. True, by 1939 their performance characteristics had changed slightly, mainly in the direction of strengthening the armor, but the main thing remained the same - all these combat vehicles, to a greater or lesser extent, were a kind of overgrown light tanks. They seemed to have stepped over the upper bar of the light class, but did not reach the full-fledged intermediate class.

Nevertheless, in the 1930s, thanks to a successful combination of the main parameters of armament and mobility, “light-medium” tanks were considered universal, equally capable of supporting infantry and performing the functions of cavalry.

Pz.III Ausf.G from the 6th company of the 5th tank regiment in battle. North Africa. 1941

However, accompanying infantry required movement at the speed of an infantryman, and such vehicles, which had relatively weak armor protection, became easy prey for anti-tank artillery, as was clearly demonstrated in Spain. The second function, which was confirmed already at the very beginning of World War II, they also could not perform independently; they had to be supported or ultimately replaced by tanks with more powerful weapons, for example, with a 75-mm cannon, capable of not only hitting enemy equipment, but also to conduct effective fire with high-explosive fragmentation shells.

The march to the East has begun! A Pz.III unit of the 11th Panzer Division advances into the interior Soviet territory. In the background is a burning BT-7. 1941

However, the need to combine “light-medium” tanks with tanks armed with a 75-mm cannon was realized already in the mid-1930s. They just solved this problem in different ways: the British installed parts of their cruiser tanks with 76-mm howitzers in the standard turrets instead of 2-pounder guns, the USSR produced several hundred BT-7A artillery tanks with a 76-mm cannon in an enlarged turret, while the Germans went with the most radical and least simple way to create two tanks.

In fact, in 1934, four German firms received an order to develop two different tanks under the mottos ZW (“company commander’s vehicle”) and BW (“battalion commander’s vehicle”). It goes without saying that these were only nominal mottos. The technical specifications for these machines were close. Base weight, for example, 15 and 18 tons, respectively. There were significant differences only in armament: one vehicle was supposed to carry a 37-mm gun, the other – a 75-mm cannon. The similarity of the technical specifications ultimately led to the creation of two vehicles almost identical in weight, dimensions and armor, but differing in armament and completely different in design - Pz.III and Pz.IV. At the same time, the layout of the second one was clearly more successful. The Pz.IV has a lower hull that is narrower than that of the Pz.III, but the Krupp builders, having expanded the turret box to the middle of the fenders, increased the clear diameter of the turret ring to 1680 mm versus 1520 mm for the Pz.III. In addition, due to the more compact and rational layout of the engine compartment, the Pz.IV has a noticeably larger control compartment. The result is obvious: the Pz.III does not have landing hatches for the driver and radio operator. What this can lead to if it is necessary to urgently leave a damaged tank is clear without explanation. In general, with almost identical overall dimensions the reserved volume of the Pz.III was less than that of the Pz.IV.

Pz.III Ausf.J, knocked out tank unit Guard Colonel Khasin. Southwestern Front, 1942.

It should be emphasized that both machines were created in parallel, each according to its own technical specifications, and there was no competition between them. It is even more difficult to explain the appearance of such similar technical specifications and the subsequent adoption of both tanks. It would be much more logical to accept one tank, but with two weapon options. Such a solution would entail significantly lower costs in the future. It is quite obvious that by launching into mass production two tanks that were practically identical in all respects, but differed in armament and different in design, the Germans made a mistake. However, we should not forget that we are talking about 1934–1937, when it was difficult to guess the path that tank building would take.

Pz.III Ausf.L tanks in Tunisia. December 1942.

In its category of “light-medium” tanks, the Pz.III turned out to be the most modern, having to the least extent inherited the shortcomings characteristic of light tanks. After its armor and armament were strengthened, and its weight exceeded 20 tons, which practically made the “troika” a medium tank, its superiority over its former “colleagues” increased even more. It was strengthened many times over by the superiority in tactical methods of using tank units and formations. As a result, the German command in the first two years of the war had no particular reason to worry about the combat qualities of the Pz.III.

A Pz.III Ausf.M from the SS motorized division "Reich" capsized as a result of unsuccessful maneuvering. Kursk Bulge, 1943.

The situation changed completely in 1941, when the Germans encountered the T-34 on the Eastern Front, and the Grant in Africa. The Pz.III also had certain advantages over them. In particular, the T-34 was superior in the quantity and quality of observation and aiming devices, crew comfort, ease of control and technical reliability. The Grant was fine with surveillance devices and reliability, but in design and layout it was inferior to the Troika. However, all these advantages were negated by the main thing: both of these vehicles were designed within the framework of the promising concept of a “universal” tank, designed to replace both “light-medium” and support tanks. In the USSR, they came to understand the need for such a replacement as a result long journey evolution of “light-medium” tanks. There was no evolution at all in the USA, but the Americans made quick and, most importantly, correct conclusions from the experience of others. What about the Germans? Apparently, by mid-1941 they fully realized the seriousness of the mistake they had made. On September 6, 1941, Hitler was presented with a report that substantiated the benefits of the “unification” of the Pz.III and Pz.IV. The case was set in motion, and several companies received the task of working on various options Panzerkampfwagen III und IV n.A. (n.A. neue Ausfuhrung - new version).

Pz.III Ausf.N, knocked out during Operation Citadel. Judging by the emblems, this vehicle is from the 3rd Tank Regiment of the 2nd Tank Division of the Wehrmacht. Oryol direction, August 1943.

The Krupp company built two prototypes, which were Pz.III with a new chassis intended for Pz.III/IV. The road wheels were staggered and the suspension was torsion bar. Both vehicles were tested at various testing sites for quite some time. Other suspension and chassis options were also tested. Design and testing led at the beginning of 1942 to the creation of a unified Geschutzwagen III/IV chassis (“gun chassis”), in which the road wheels, suspension, support rollers, idler wheels and tracks were borrowed from the Pz.IV Ausf.F tank, and the drive wheels, engine and gearbox - for Pz.III Ausf.J. But the idea of ​​a “single” tank never came to fruition. This project was buried in March 1942, after a 75-mm cannon with a 43-caliber barrel length was installed in the Pz.IV Ausf.F, turning the support tank into a “universal” one overnight and without hassle.

It was impossible to apply such a solution to the Pz.III. An indispensable condition for creating a “universal” tank was the presence of a long-barreled gun with a caliber of at least 75 mm, which could not be installed in the Pz.III turret without significant alterations in the design of the tank. And with a 50-mm cannon, even with a length of 60 calibers, the Troika remained the same “light-medium” tank. But she has no “colleagues” or opponents left. The removal of the Pz.III from production in the summer of 1943 was the only and, it must be said, belated solution.

As a result, the “universal” “four” was in mass production until the end of the war; the Geschutzwagen III/IV chassis was actively used to create various self-propelled guns...And what about the “troika”? Alas, the mistake made by the customer when choosing the type of tank devalued the work of the designers and manufacturers. In the Panzerwaffe tank “palette” the “troika” turned out to be superfluous.

Tank T-3 (Pz.3) - first for realWehrmacht battle tank.It was developed on a competitive basis by four companies as a ma- tires for company commanders "ZW" (Zugfuhrerwagen). A sample from Daimler-Benz was accepted for production. From 1940 to early 1943 it was the main medium tank of the German army

Tank T-3 Pz.3 - the first combat tank weapon of the German army of World War II

Pz.3A - pre-production version weighing 15.4 tons. The hull and turret are welded. Move-

Maybach HL 108TR with a power of 250 hp, five-speed synchronized gearbox, planetary steering mechanism. Five-support chassis- with large diameter rollers, Christie type suspension. Speed ​​32 km/h. Crew 5 people Dimensions: 5690x2810x2340 mm. In- weapons: 37 mm KwK L46.5 cannon and three MG 34 machine guns - two in the turret to the right of the gun, and one in the front hull. Max. Armor thickness - 14.5 mm. Made- leno 10 units.

Pz.3B - a new chassis with eight small-diameter road wheels and a blocked balancer suspension on semi-elliptical leaf springs. The commander's cupola is unified with the Pz.lVA. 15 units produced.

Pz.3C - minor differences from the previous model. The suspension, exhaust system and planetary steering mechanism have been slightly modified. Weight 16 tons. Manufactured- leno 15 units.

Pz.3 D - the thickness of the front and side armor has been increased to 30 mm. The aft part of the hull and the engine roof were redone- th department. Improved suspension- ka and a new one was introduced commander's cupola with five viewing slits. The power reserve has been increased to 165 km. Combat weight 19.8 tons. 30 units manufactured.

Pz.3 E - chassis with six supports- rollers and torsion bar suspension. Maybach HL 120TR engine 300 hp, ten-speed gearbox- dacha Double-leaf side hatches were introduced in the turret, and a course bullet was installed- meta Kugelblende 30, combined driver observation device, evacuation hatches in the sides of the hull. From- The rear part of the hull has undergone changes. The weapons remained the same. Combat weight 19.8 tons. Speed ​​35 km/h. 96 units produced.

Pz.3 F - slightly modernized- bathroom Pz.lllE. Since June 1940 - 50 mm KwK 38 gun. 435 units manufactured.

Subsequently, all tanks of the Pz.lllF variant and most Pz.lllE were transferred- armed with a 50 mm cannon. At the same time, the number of machine guns was reduced to two.

Pz.3G - minor changes in body parts. New commander's ba-

turret with five viewing devices, unified with the turret of the Pz.IV. Equipment box at the rear of the turret. Vooru- Power: 50 mm KwK 38 cannon and two machine guns- MG 34 600 units were produced (of which 54 were in the tropical version Pz.lllG (trop).

Pz.3 H - new design directing- drive and drive wheels. Additional 30 mm plate on the front of the hull. Tracks are 400 mm wide. Changed core- the main part of the tower. Combat weight 21.6 tons. Armament and engine unchanged,

six-speed gearbox. Outcast- 310 units sold.

Pz.lll J - frontal armor 50 mm thick, ball mounting for directional machine gun- that Kugelblende 50. Since January 1942 - a 50-mm KwK 39 cannon with a barrel length of 60 calibers. Combat weight 21.5 tons. Dimensions with L/60 gun: 6280x2950x2500 mm. Outcast- 2616 units were sold (of which 1067 were from lengths- no-barreled gun).

Pz.lllL (Sd.Kfz. 141/1) - increased weight- armor thickness of the gun mantlet and additional 20 mm armor in the frontal part of the hull. A number of other minor improvements. Move- body and weapons like the later Pz.lIIJ- launches 653 units produced.

Pz.lllM (Sd.Kfz. 141/1) - last va - riant Pz.lll as a line tank armed with a 50 mm cannon. Insignificant- significant differences from Pz.lllL. The hatches in the sides of the hull have been eliminated. The tank's exhaust system was adapted to overcome- without preparing a ford with a depth of up to 1.3 m. Smoke grenade launchers, brackets for mounting anti-cumulative screens, and an anti-aircraft machine gun on the commander’s turret are installed. Push ammunition- ki increased to 98 shots. 250 units produced.

Pz.lllN (Sd.Kfz. 141/2) - an assault tank armed with a 75 mm KwK 37 cannon with a 24-caliber barrel. Hull and turret like Pz.lllL and Pz.lllM. The commander's cupola is like the later Pz.IV. Combat weight 23 tons. 663 units manufactured.

The first 10 Pz.lll tanks were transferred to Panzerwaffe combat units in the spring of 1939. Their baptism of fire took place during the Polish campaign. On September 1, 1939, German tank units had- elk only 98 Rz.lll out of 120 issued by this time. Direct training- Only 69 vehicles were used in combat. Most of them (37 units) were concentrated in the 6th training tank- battalion (6. Panzer Lehr Battalion), attached to the 3rd Panzer Division, included- shay to the 19th Tank Corps Ge- neral G. Guderian. The 1st Tank Division also had several vehicles. Bezvo- The fatal losses of combat vehicles of this type during the battles in Poland amounted to 8 units (according to other sources - 26 units!).

To the beginning of the French campaign Panzer- The waffe already had 381 Pz.lll tanks and 60 - 70 command tanks on their battlefield- ze. At the same time, the shortage amounted to- approximately 100 combat vehicles. Therefore- the people had to concentrate the deficit- new medium tanks in formations operating in the directions of the main attacks. 135 Pz.lll tanks were irretrievable- but were lost during the fighting.

After the defeat of France, in preparation for the invasion of the British Isles, in the late summer of 1940, 168 tanks of the F, G and H models were converted into submarine tanks. For Afri parts- Kan Corps was developed by Tropi- ical version of the tank, with more productivity- cooling and cleaning systems- air ki.

Like other types of German tanks, the Troikas took part in the operation in the Balkans in the spring of 1941. That's it for those- Atre, the main danger for German tanks was not the small number of Yugoslav

COMBAT WEIGHT, t: 19.5 - CREW, people: 5.

OVERALL DIMENSIONS, mm* length 5380, width - 2910, height - 2440, ground clearance - 385.

ARMAMENT "1 cannon Kw" 4 L/45 caliber 37 mm and 3 machine guns MG 34 caliber 7.92 mm.

AMMUNITION: 131 artillery rounds and 4425 rounds

AIMING DEVICES: monocular telescopic sight

TZE 5a.

RESERVATION, mm: hull front - 30: side 30, stern - 21: days- more - 16; roof - 17; tower - 30,

ENGINE: Maybach HL 120TR, 12-cylinder carburetor, V-shaped, liquid cooling; power 300 l s (22^ kW) at 3000 rpm, displacement 11,867 cm3 3 TRANSMISSION: multi-disc main clutch, ten-axle shaftless manual gearbox with pre-selection and pneumatic shifting (10 forward, 4 reverse), planetary turning mechanisms, final drives. CHASSIS: six dual rubber-coated support rollers per boat, three rubber-coated support rollers, a guide wheel, a front drive wheel with two removable gear rims, lantern engagement; pendant - individual- al, torsion: each caterpillar has 94 tracks with a width of 360 mm, track pitch is 130 mm.

MAXIMUM SPEED km/h: 40. POWER RESERVE, km-165.

OBSTACLES TO OVERCOME, elevation angle 30 degrees; width- on the ditch m - 2.0; wall height, m ​​- 0.6; ford depth, m - 0.8 COMMUNICATIONS: radio station Fu 5.

Kie and Greek tanks and anti-tank guns, and mountainous, sometimes unpaved, up to- horns and bad bridges. Serious collision- events that led to losses, even if- significant, originated from the Germans with English- Liyan troops who arrived in Greece in March 1941. Fire 25-pound- Several commercial guns were knocked out.

In the spring of 1941, Pz.lll arrived in the North- new Africa. On March 11, units of the 5th Light Division of the Wehrmacht, which consisted of- We carry up to 80 Pz.lll. These were mainly G modification cars in tropical-

com version with reinforced air- mi filters and cooling system. A couple of months later, I joined them- combat vehicles of the 15th Tank Division- Zia. At the time of arrival, Pz.lll was excellent- killed any English tank in Africa, with the exception of the Matilda

The first major battle in the Libyan desert with the participation of Pz.lll was an attack by forces of the 5th tank regiment of the 5th light infantry- views of British positions near Tobruk on April 30, 1941. Subsequently, Pz.lll tanks took part in almost all combat operations of German troops in this theater. In the fall of 1941 and spring of 1942. number of Pz.lll in the African Corps- everything was maximum. For example, in but- in November 1941, German troops had-

or 249 tanks, of which 139 Pz.lll. In yang- Varya 1942, another large batch of vehicles of this type arrived - several- Syatkov Pz.lllJ, albeit with a short 50 mm cannon. The first 19 Pz.lllJ with length- free guns arrived in Africa in May 1942. On the eve of the battle at El-Ghazala, the Germans had only 332 tanks- mi, 223 of them were Pz.lll of various types

Difications. Most of these vehicles also took part in the battle of El Alamein, in which German troops were defeated and retreated to Tu- nis, abandoning all equipment.

In 1943, a number of Pz.lll tanks, mainly modifications L and N, took part in the final battles of Af- Rican campaign. In particular, Ausf.L tanks of the 15th Panzer Division took part in the defeat of American troops in the Kasserine Pass on February 14, 1943. Ausf.N tanks

were part of the 501st heavy tank- th battalion. Their task was to protect- positions of the "tigers" from enemy attacks- hots. After the surrender of German troops in North Africa on May 12, 1943, all these tanks became Allied trophies.

On the eve of the war with the Soviet Union, the Wehrmacht had 235 Pz.lll tanks with 37 mm guns (another 81 vehicles were- was under repair). Tanks with 50 mm gun- we were much larger - 1090! Another 23 vehicles were in the pre-production stage- rearmament. During June from pro- industry expected the arrival of another 133 combat vehicles. Of this amount- 965 Pz.ll tanks were intended directly for the invasion of the Soviet Union, which were distributed more or less evenly across 16- German tank divisions from 19, part- who fought in Operation Barbarossa (the 6th, 7th and 8th Panzer Divisions had- weapons tanks of Czechoslovak production- dstva). So, for example, in the 1st Tank Division- the vision had 73 Pz.lll and 5 command Pz.Bf.Wg.Ill, the 4th tank had 105 combat vehicles of this type. Moreover, the vast majority of tanks were armed with 50 mm L/42 cannons.

According to three main evaluation parameters- ram - weapons, maneuverability and bro- new protection - Pz.lll is significantly superior- Only the T-26 ascended. The German vehicle had an advantage over the BT-7 in armor protection, and over the T-28 and KB in maneuverability. In all three parameters, the German environment- This tank was second only to the T-34. At the same time, Pz.lll had undeniable superiority- control over all Soviet tanks in the ko- quantity and quality of monitoring devices- quality, quality of sights, reliability of movement- engine, transmission and chassis. An important advantage was the 100% division of labor among crew members, which was not the case in most- Vet tanks. Latest circumstances- properties, in the absence of a pronounced superiority in performance characteristics in general, allowed the Pz.lll to go out in most cases- winner of tank duels. However, when meeting with the T-34, and even more so with the KB, before- it was very difficult to fight: a German 50-mm cannon could penetrate their armor

only from a very short distance - not more- more than 300 m.

By the end of 1941, losses in vehicles of this type on the Eastern Front amounted to 660 units, and in the first two months of 1942 another 338! However, throughout 1942, the Pz.lll remained the main striking force of the Panzerwaffe, including during large-scale offensive operations on the southern flank of the Eastern Front. 23 Aug- thick 1942 Pz.lll Ausf.J from the 14th Panzer- th corps were the first to reach the Volga north- her Stalingrad. In the Battle of Stalingrad and the Battle of the Caucasus, Pz.lll suffered the most serious losses. These battles involved tanks armed with both types of guns - 42 and 60 calibers. Is- using a long-barreled 50 mm push gun- ki allowed us to move the fire distance- in a new battle, for example, with a T-34 almost up to 500 m.