Second time in the easy class. Tank T-II - Other modifications Tank pz 2 and its modifications

Official designation: Medium Tank T2
Alternative designation: Cunningham T2
Start of design: 1929
Date of construction of the first prototype: 1930
Completion stage: one prototype has been built.

The M1921 medium tank, which was born in 1921, undoubtedly became, if not a breakthrough, then at least a landmark vehicle in the history of American tank building, which was only gaining momentum in those years.

In addition to the “classic” layout, this tank had good protection and armament, but a number of technical problems did not allow its mass production to be organized in a timely manner, and even after standardization in 1928 as the Medium Tank T1, it still did not go into mass production. In parallel, since March 1926, work was carried out on the M1924 tank, but this vehicle could not get beyond the stage of sketches and scale models.

However, it is also impossible to say that American tank builders are fixated only on improving the M1921. The main “engine of progress” was engineer Harry Nox, who, thanks to his irrepressible energy, was able to literally push through several rather controversial (from a design point of view) designs and bring them to the stage of full-fledged prototypes.

When it became clear that it would not be possible to “squeeze” anything more out of the M1921, Knox presented a project for a completely new medium tank, the prototype for which was the already built Light Tank T1 prototype. In turn, the layout of the light tank was clearly borrowed from the British Medium Tank Mk.I.

Design of a medium tank, later designated Medium Tank T2, was started in 1929. The lead designer was the already mentioned Harry Knox, and the team of engineers was provided by James Cunningham Son & Co. In fact, the construction and modification of the prototype was subsequently carried out at its facilities.

Structurally, the American “medium” was indeed very close to the British “medium”. In the bow of the hull was located power point, which was based on a very powerful 12-cylinder aircraft air-cooled Liberty L-12 engine, derated from 400 to 338 hp to reduce the load on the transmission. The engine was installed offset to the right, since the driver’s seat was located to the left of it.

To improve the living conditions of this crew member, a box-shaped superstructure was introduced with three hatches that opened upward on hinges: a front one with an inspection slot and two side hatches. The engine compartment contained a lubrication and cooling system, and the exhaust pipe was located on the starboard side. The fuel tanks were taken outside the hull and placed in side boxes. At the same time, for ease of maintenance, air filters were installed in the fighting compartment.

Behind the partition, in the rear part of the hull, there were combat and transmission compartments, which were combined. For boarding and disembarking from the tank, there was only one double-leaf door in the vertical rear armor plate of the hull. Thanks to the large volume, the layout of the workplaces of the remaining crew members (commander/gunner, loader and second gunner) turned out to be quite spacious.

The armor of the T2 tank could hardly be called impressive, but the frontal armor with a thickness of 19-22 mm reliably protected against small arms fire (including heavy machine guns) and small fragments. The situation on board was a little worse, but even in this case, the protection of the crew and vital components was considered sufficient.

The composition of the weapons was very powerful. A cylindrical turret mounted on the roof of the fighting compartment contained a 5-round 47 mm gun and a 12.7 mm Browning M2HB machine gun. On the roof of the tower there was a commander's cupola with a single-leaf hatch.

In addition, in the frontal plate of the hull, to the right of the driver, there was a T3E1 ball mount with a 37-mm semi-automatic cannon and a coaxial 7.62-mm machine gun. It is worth noting that this gun fired 1.91-pound projectiles with initial speed 777 m\s. In theory, such a combination of barrels was lethal for any armored vehicle of a potential enemy, but in practice problems emerged with the maintenance of such installations.

The chassis deserves special mention. Draw analogies with chassis Medium Tank Mk.I\Mk.II will not be very correct, because British tank a slightly different suspension system was used.

On the American T2, 12 road wheels were used per side, assembled into 6 bogies with suspension on spring springs, 4 support rollers, a front guide wheel and a rear drive wheel. The caterpillar track consisted of 80 metal tracks with a width of 381 mm. Open elements the suspensions were protected by a bulwark with hinged folding sections.

Tests of the prototype T2 medium tank, which arrived at the Aberdeen Proving Ground at the end of December 1930, were initially very successful. With a combat weight of 14,125 kg, the tank had a specific power of about 20 hp. per ton, which even in our time is considered a more than acceptable indicator.

Maximum speed was 25 mph (40 km/h) when traveling on paved roads, but was subsequently limited to 20 mph (32 km/h) in order to preserve the life of the chassis. With a fuel reserve of 94 gallons (356 liters), the range was 145 km. In general, reviews of the T2 were favorable and the matter could well have reached mass production if not for two difficult circumstances.

The Great Depression that began in 1929 led to such a significant reduction in military orders that subsequently manufacturing companies were forced to purchase necessary equipment for your money with a very slim hope of recoupment.

Accordingly, money for the Medium Tank T2 modernization program was allocated on a very modest scale. But that was not all that was so bad - the real problem was the fast M1928 and M1931 tanks designed by engineer G.W. Christie, which truly represented a revolutionary breakthrough. Despite weaker armor and modest armament, these vehicles developed simply fantastic speed and had a then promising “candle” suspension.

Despite this, testing of T2 continued. During practical firing, it became clear that the 47-mm automatic cannon was unbalanced. They tried to eliminate this drawback by installing counterweights in front of the gun mantlet, which was done in May 1931.

Next, the T3E1 installation was dismantled (more for economic reasons), in its place a T1 installation with an old short-barreled M1916 37-mm cannon appeared. However, this option was also considered unsatisfactory, so in the summer of the same year the cannon was replaced by a 7.62 mm machine gun. The number of external fuel tanks was also increased to two on the left side.

Having completed the first part of the test cycle, the tank was sent for revision. New track tracks were installed, as well as an anti-aircraft machine gun turret, although the T2's design was otherwise unchanged. When the tank was transferred again to the Aberdeen Proving Ground in January 1932, the weapons in the turret were removed. However, it was all in vain. The American “medium” developed by Harry Knox looked clearly unpresentable against the background of Christie’s tanks, and it was in this situation that the Armament Directorate decided to hold “demonstration performances” with the participation of all competitors.

Somewhat earlier, medium tanks T2 and T3, as well as light tanks T1E1 and T1E2, were transferred for military testing to the 2nd tank company, which in October 1932 was reorganized into the 67th infantry company. Its place of deployment was Fort Benning, where American congressmen periodically came, on whose opinions it depended further fate many combat vehicles. Having seen the potential capabilities of Christie's tanks, it immediately became clear to them what they should spend their already meager funds on - thus, by the beginning of 1932, the fate of the T2 was finally decided.

The only prototype built in the late 1930s. sent to the Aberdeen Proving Ground, where it became a museum exhibit. He stayed there for many decades and only Lately The question was raised about moving the Medium Tank T2 to the exhibition of the new tank museum in Fort Lee. In the meantime, the tank is in Anniston (Alabama) awaiting restoration.

Sources:
Sources:
R.P. Hunnicutt “Sherman: A History of American Medium Tank.” Part I." Echo Point Books & Media. ISBN-10:1626548617. 2015
George F.Hofmann, Donn Albert Starry "Camp Colt to Desert Storm"
Warspot: Scaling Method (Yuri Pasholok)
WW2Vehicles: United States T2 medium tank
Surviving rare US pre-1945 Tanks

TACTICAL AND TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MEDIUM TANK T2 Medium Tank model 1932

No, don’t be alarmed, it’s not me who has gone crazy, this is normal American practice, when the naming of equipment took place independently across different departments and branches of the military. So, we are not talking about a light infantry tank T2, and about " cavalry"car with the same name.

It was built in 1928 and was intended to reinforce and escort cavalry units. An indispensable requirement was cannon armament and speed sufficient to ensure that the cavalry did not run too far away from the tanks. The author of the machine, engineer Cuningham (company " James Cunningham & Sons Company"), did not reinvent the wheel and based on a series of his lungs experimental tanks T1 (still shushi, I must say) built a slightly enlarged version called T2. The car had a classic Cuningham layout, with a front-mounted MTO and rear drive wheels. In fact, according to the layout, it was a truck cabin, armored and topped with a turret.

Since the car had to be nimble, with its own weight of about 13.6 tons, it was equipped with an engine V12 Liberty, power in 312 hp, which allowed it to accelerate to 27 mph (43.5 km/h), almost 2-3 times faster than typical tanks of that period. With such an engine, the car looked very menacing at the training ground, quickly overcoming obstacles. True, at such speeds and a four-speed gearbox, the engine was running wild, so a rev limiter had to be introduced into the design, which slowed the car down to a still very decent 20 mph (32 km/h) at that time.

In general, in 1933, one of Cunningham’s experimental tanks on tracks with rubber-metal joints (?) invented by him (?) accelerated to 50 miles (80 km) per hour. And without any wheeled-tracked perversions.

The vehicle's armament was not formed immediately. No, what d.b. gun - was not discussed, but everything else... The original version of the vehicle was armed with two cannons, 37mm in the hull and 47mm in the turret, but it did not have a machine gun.

Armor was differentiated, from 22.23mm (7/8 inch) in front and in the turret, to 3.35mm (1/4 inch) on horizontal surfaces.

Most likely, the Pz Kpfw II owes its appearance to Guderian. It was he who wanted to see relatively light tank having anti-tank weapons. In July 1934, such a machine weighing 10 tons was ordered to MAN, Henschel and Krupp-Gruson. The tank with a 20 mm cannon was intended for use as a reconnaissance vehicle and was intended to replace the machine gun Pz Kpfw I. Until the restrictions of the Treaty of Versailles were lifted, this tank was officially created as the LaS 100 agricultural tractor.

In October 1935, the first prototypes, made of non-armored steel, were ready. Not a single project was completely satisfactory to the customer, and a combined vehicle was put into production: a chassis developed by MAN, a turret and a hull by Daimler-Benz. Between May '36 and February '37, 75 tanks were produced. The chassis of all vehicles consisted of six small-diameter road wheels, which were grouped into three bogies on one side. The combat weight of the tank is 7.6 tons.

German tanks in the Rzhev area, 1941. On the left is a PzKpfw II light tank, on the right are Pz medium tanks Kpfw III

German tank PzKpfw II on the road somewhere in the USSR

In turn, this batch of armored vehicles was divided into three submodifications a/1, a/2 and a/3, each of which consisted of 25 vehicles. In general terms, the submodifications differed insignificantly from each other, but at the same time they served as a test bench for testing individual techniques. decisions. For example, the Pz Kpfw II Ausf a/2 received a welded one instead of a cast sloth, as well as fire walls in the engine compartment. Pz Kpfw II Ausf a/3 had reinforced suspension springs and an enlarged radiator in the cooling system.

In the spring of 1937, 25 Pz Kpfw II Ausf b were produced with an improved transmission and chassis (wide support rollers, road wheels and a new idler wheel). Along the way, a more powerful engine was installed, which was much better cooled and ventilated. The weight of the tank increased to 7.9 tons.

The chassis, which later became classic for this type of tank, consisting of five medium-diameter road wheels mounted on an individual suspension and made in the form of quarter-elliptical springs, was tested on the 25 Pz Kpfw II Ausf of the Henschel company.

Serial production of tanks began in March 1937. Until April 1940, 1088 tanks of modifications A, B and C were produced. All modifications had the same design, with a rounded nose part of the hull. The difference was only in the size and location of the viewing slits, as well as the sights used. As the campaign in Poland showed, the armor protection of tanks is quite weak. Even the frontal armor was easily penetrated by the Polish-made Ur anti-tank rifle. The armor protection was hastily reinforced by shielding - the application of 20-mm additional plates.

A German armored personnel carrier Sd.Kfz.251 of the 14th Motorized Corps drives past a column of Pz.Kpfw II tanks and a burning truck in the Serbian city of Nis, Yugoslavia

Battered and burned german easy tank Pz.Kpfw. II Ausf.C

From May '38 to August '39, MAN and Daimler-Benz produced 143 Schnellkampfwagen (fast vehicles) for tank battalions of light divisions. In fact, the tanks were the following modifications - D and E. These vehicles differed significantly from previous modifications in the Christie chassis, which had four large road wheels, in which there were no support rollers. The rollers have individual torsion bar suspension. The hull was significantly reconfigured. The turret and armament remained unchanged. Maybach HL62TRM engine with 140 hp power. allowed to reach speeds of up to 55 km/h. The combat weight was 10 tons, the cruising range was 200 kilometers. Reservations: hull forehead 30 mm thick, turret and hull sides - 14.5 mm.

In an effort to expand the capabilities of this type of vehicle, in 1940 they decided to create flamethrower tanks based on the manufactured chassis. Until the summer of 1942, 112 vehicles were created, another 43 flamethrower vehicles were converted from linear ones during the overhaul. A 7.92 mm machine gun was mounted in the reduced turret. A pair of flamethrowers in armored heads were installed on the front corners of the hull. Flamethrowers in the horizontal plane were aimed in a 180° sector and produced 80 flamethrowers at a distance of 35 meters lasting 2-3 seconds.

The combat weight of the Pz Kpfw II Flamm Ausf A and E (Sd Kfz 122), also known as Flamingo, was 12 tons. Power reserve – 250 km. The number of crew members did not change and was three people. The thickness of the armor has increased slightly: in the frontal parts of the hull and turret up to 30 mm, on the sides up to 20-25 mm. however, this was not enough: the short flamethrowing range forced the flamethrower tanks to get too close to the enemy’s combat positions and they suffered significant losses. Adopted in June 1941 baptism of fire on the Soviet-German front, these vehicles were eventually converted into self-propelled guns.

Destroyed German light tank PzKpfw II

Destroyed Soviet artillery German light tank Pz.Kpfw. II Ausf. C

The Pz Kpfw II Ausf F tank is practically the last mass modification of the “twos”. From March '41 to December '42, 524 vehicles were produced (later on, only self-propelled guns on the base chassis were produced). The main difference (as well as the main advantage) from previous models was the enhanced armor protection. Now the bow of the hull was made of 35 mm thick sheet, the inclination to the vertical was 13°. The top sheet, 30 mm thick, had an inclination of 70°. The shape of the sloth and the design of the turret box were changed. In the frontal sheet of the turret box, which was installed at an angle of 10°, a groove on the right imitated an inspection slot.

The commander's cupola had eight periscopes.

At the beginning of World War II, light tanks Pz Kpfw II accounted for about 38% of the entire Wehrmacht tank fleet. In battles, they turned out to be weaker in armor and armament than almost all vehicles of a similar class: French H35 and R35, Polish 7TR, Soviet BT and T-26. But at the same time, the production of Pz Kpfw II tanks, which decreased significantly in 1940, increased sharply in the next couple of years. Until the accumulation of the required number of Pz Kpfw III and Pz Kpfw VI, light vehicles remained the main equipment in tank units and units. Only in 1942 were they withdrawn from tank regiments; they were partially used in assault artillery brigades and in secondary sectors of the front. After repairs, the tank chassis of these vehicles were handed over in increasing quantities for the installation of self-propelled guns.

On a few experimental machines (twenty-two VK1601, twelve VK901, four VK1301) original technical specifications were tested. solutions. For example, in preparation for the invasion of England, German designers developed mounted pontoons with propellers for the Pz Kpfw II. The experimental vehicles afloat reached a speed of 10 km/h, and the sea state was 3-4. Attempts to radically strengthen the reservation and increase speed did not end in anything.

Combat and specifications German light tanks Pz Kpfw II (Ausf A/Ausf F):
Year of manufacture 1937/1941;
Combat weight - 8900/9500 kg;
Crew – 3 people;
Body length – 4810 mm;
Width – 2220/2280 mm;
Height – 1990/2150 mm;
The thickness of the armor plates of the frontal part of the hull (angle of inclination to the vertical) is 14.5 mm (cyl.)/35 mm (13 degrees);
The thickness of the armor plates on the sides of the hull is 14.5 mm (0 degrees)/15 mm (0 degrees);
The thickness of the armor plates of the front part of the turret is 14.5 mm (cyl.)/30 mm (cyl.);
The thickness of the armor plates of the roof and bottom of the hull is 15 and 15/15 and 5 mm;
Gun - KwK30/KwK38;
Gun caliber - 20 mm (55 klb.);
Ammunition - 180 rounds;
Number of machine guns – 1;
Machine gun caliber - 7.92 mm;
Ammunition - 2250/2700 rounds;
Engine type and brand - Maybach HL62TR;
Engine power – 140 l. With.;
Maximum speed on the highway is 40 km/h;
Fuel capacity – 200/175 l;
Cruising range on the highway – 200 km;
Average ground pressure is 0.76/0.66 kg/cm2.

"Tiger" or who?

Many people are still concerned about the question of what kind of tank it was best tank Second World War. They carefully compare performance characteristics tables, talk about the thickness of armor, armor penetration of shells and many other figures from performance characteristics tables. IN different sources Different figures are given, so disputes begin about the reliability of the sources. In these disputes, it is forgotten that the numbers in the tables themselves do not mean anything...

Aviation of the USSR

Remember that MiG

The I-200 fighter (hereinafter referred to as MiG-1 and MiG-3) can be called a distant descendant of the I-16, differing from it in many ways, but nevertheless retaining certain “ancestral features”. .

The first of the new generation fighters in JanuaryIn 1940, the aircraft of aircraft designer A.S. entered testing.Yakovleva I-26, later renamed Yak-1.

Most a prominent representative"wooden style" in Soviet fighter aircraft during the war there was a plane designed by aircraft designers S.A. Lavochkina, V.P. Gorbunov and M.I. Gudkov I-301, which received the designation LaGG-3 when launched into production, as well as its further development - La-5 and La-7

Luftwaffe aircraft

This is the thing

The disdainful assessment of the Yu-87 dive bomber was equally commonplace, as is the praise of the Il-2 attack aircraft...

CITY DESTROYERS

The most reliable assessment of the effectiveness of the actions of German bomber aviation can only be based on evidence from the side that suffered losses from its impact. That is, according to reports and reports of commanders at different levels of the Red Army. And these reports indicate the high performance of German pilots...