DOCSLIB.ORG

Tanks in the Winter

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tanks in the Winter This installment of the diaries will focus on the type of Soviet tank most commonly fielded by the Soviet 8th Tank Army: the T-26. Note: At the end of the last Diaries installment, I reported that Part 8 would examine Soviet tactics in the Winter War. I've since received some emails requesting to hear more about the tanks. I'm happy to oblige. Part 8 – Tanks in the Above: Armored units in Red Winter include T-26 models '31 and '33, the amphibious T-37, Winter War: The T-26 and the BA-10 armored car. Playtest counters Family of Soviet Tanks by Michael Evans. Below: Soviet T-26 tanks, 1933 models sporting rail antennae on the turrets and spotlights for night fighting. The T-26 is actually a family of tanks, and Sporting twin 7.62 mm machine gun turrets but appears in many models and variants. We will no main gun, the T-26m31 was mainly intended quickly examine some of those models which for use against enemy infantry and machine were most commonly fielded during the Winter guns; at this task it excelled. It's light armor and War. lack of a main gun left it unsuitable for fighting enemy armor. T-26m31 Below: This is one of the four Soviet armored units appearing in Red Winter. It represents a Produced from 1931 to 1933, this was the most company of T-26m31 tanks- about ten vehicles. common tank in the Red Army until 1941. Over Of the armor in Red Winter, these tanks are the 11,000 of these tanks were produced. The most effective, given that the Finns have only T-26m31 is a rather light tank, weighing about infantry (no tanks) at Tolvajärvi. 8.7 tons and having between 6 and 15 mm of armor protection. It is capable of a top speed of about 28 kph. During the earliest weeks of the Winter War, these tanks proved very effective against Finnish machine gun nests, as they were virtually immune to return fire. The T-26m31 used the Vickers-Armstrong chassis, the same one used in the Vickers tanks bought by Finland in the 1930's. The lead tank in photos below is a Vickers. The remaining tanks in the column are T-26m31's. Note that three have been painted white; the rest are green. Destroyed T-26m31 tanks near Tolvajärvi. Above: T26m31 tank crew compare notes. Below: Soviet troops examine a Finnish tank helmet found in a Vickers. T-26 m33 Top: Soviet infantry advance beside a T-26m33. This 9.5 ton model was produced from 1933 through 1938. It sports a 45mm gun and one or two 7.62 mm machine guns. Armor thickness is Bottom: This T-26m33 models has a rail-shaped slightly better than previous models, at 10-15 turret antennae and a large spotlight for night mm. It is identifiable by a conical turret atop a fighting. base with vertical edges. Above: Playtest counter representing a company of T-26m33 tanks (roughly ten tanks). Below: A comparison of two commonly fielded versions of T-26 produced in 1933. The tank at left has the earlier twin-turrets. The tank at right sports a 45 mm gun, anti-aircraft MG, a spotlight for night fighting, and the rail-shaped antenna. Above: T-26m33 tanks race into battle. Below: A T-26m33 tank crew receives presents from Leningrad. T-26 m39 The most modern of the T-26 types used during the Winter War, the 10.2 ton 1939 model featured a conical turret atop a tapered base. Armament was identical to the m37 model, but armor protection had been improved slightly to 15-20 mm. A 100 hp engine provided top speeds of 30 kph. Note: These models do not appear in the game Red Winter. Below: A Soviet medic tends to a wounded soldier. A T-26 tank looms in the background. The T-26 Family of Tanks, ChT-26 Chemical Tank continued: The Oddballs These flame-throwing tanks were used to The T-26 chassis was used for some other, more combat heavily fortified infantry. They were unusual, versions as well. first tested in June and July of 1931. The Command for Military Chemistry (VOChIMU) of the RKKA (Red Army) called for "a chemical T-26 test model be developed and provided with equipment for dispersing smoke and flame- throwing, along with technology for dispersing poisonous substances. Below: Cht-26 Chemical Tank in battle. The first models were T-26 m31 tanks with the left turret removed. This freed up space for a 400 liter storage tank for substances including: flame-throwing, smoke dispersion, poisonous gas dispersion, or neutralization of poisonous Below: The tank on right is a Cht-26 chemical gases. tank. Note that it has not been painted white. The white tank at left is a T-26 m33 which lacks When the Winter War began, the 8th Tank Army the rail antenna. The tank has driven over a included two chemical tank battalions, the 218th mine, and it is being evacuated by a S-60 and 201st, with 31 and 51 Cht-26 tanks, tractor. respectively. T-26 Radio-Controlled Tank I believe these were mainly used in the highly mined areas near the Mannerheim Line. I have yet to come across any documentation of their use in the Tolvajärvi campaign. Below: Here's real odd duck- a radio-controlled chemical tank. These two photos appear to be the same tank, photographed from different angles. Red Winter Notes: Soviet Armor Commitment Armor Commitment Rules In Red Winter, the Soviet player decides when Historically, the Soviet tanks did not make their to commit his armor, and how much to deploy. appearance until the fifth and final day of the He has three tank companies and an armored battle. This created an interesting game design recon battalion of BA-10 armored cars (Note: challenge. I've played games where the designer While the latter sounds intimidating, this takes a rather rigid approach to history- if a "battalion" was most likely comprised of only 9 certain unit entered at a certain time on a certain or 10 vehicles). day, that's when it enters the game, period. I have no problem with this approach, but it Below: A portion of the playtest Turn Track. The doesn't address the uncertainty of the situation at orange values are VP costs associated with Tolvajärvi. commitment of Soviet armor units for the given game turn. Cost is on a unit per unit basis. The Finns knew the Soviet 139th Rifle Division Armored units are company-sized (Exception: had tank support; they had been overrun by the As mentioned above, the BA-10 armored cars tanks multiple times during the preceding week. are an armored recon battalion on paper, but The Soviets were sitting on a valuable resource, contained roughly the same number of vehicles presumably waiting for the critical moment to as the tank companies). commit it to the battle. As it was, the Finns' began their counteroffensive on the morning of December 12th, throwing the Soviets off balance. But what if the Soviets had the a chance to orchestrate a breakthrough using their armor? The Soviet player can commit none, some or all This "player's choice" approach has a convenient all of his armored units. But by committing his side effect. It gives the Soviet player a means of armor, he "ups the stakes" by forfeiting victory breaking a potential stalemate before it points to the Finnish player. The earlier he develops. For example, if the Soviet player finds commits the armor, the more VPs he forfeits. that his offensive is grinding to a halt by day 3 Thus it is possible for the Soviet player to or day 4, he can throw in the armor in an attempt commit all of his armor very early in the battle. to crack the Finns' defenses. This keeps the But if he does so, he has also committed to the game exciting, and avoids potential situations "all or nothing" approach of going for an where the players say "Well, we can see where automatic victory (capturing and holding this one is heading. Let's go play something Tolvajärvi village and the main highway, or else." (We've all played a game like that, and it eliminating sufficient Finns). Anything less than was not my goal with Red Winter) an automatic victory at this point will see the Finns win based on Victory Points. Committed armor units enter the game at the Soviet supply source hex, per normal After playtesting many options, I went with this reinforcement rules. approach because it creates some tense and interesting decisions for the Soviet player. It also Members of the RW team (pictured below) are increases the tension for the Finnish player, who currently in playtesting to determine whether the never knows when or how many tanks are en armor commitment VP costs are spot-on for route to the front. their corresponding game turns. Below: Soviet T-26 tank crew. Next time: The history raises some interesting questions. If the Soviet 139th Rifle Division had an entire tank battalion (plus armored recon battalion) in support at Tolvajärvi, why did they wait until the fifth day of the battle to deploy the armor? And three tanks is hardly the entire battalion. What gives? In the next installment of Red Winter Diaries, we'll put on our thinking caps and examine the evidence, and I'll offer some of my opinions. Below: Soviet T-26m39 tank crew..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Evolution of British Tactical and Operational Tank Doctrine and Training in the First World War
    The evolution of British tactical and operational tank doctrine and training in the First World War PHILIP RICHARD VENTHAM TD BA (Hons.) MA. Thesis submitted for the award of the degree of Master of Philosophy by the University of Wolverhampton October 2016 ©Copyright P R Ventham 1 ABSTRACT Tanks were first used in action in September 1916. There had been no previous combat experience on which to base tactical and operational doctrine for the employment of this novel weapon of war. Training of crews and commanders was hampered by lack of vehicles and weapons. Time was short in which to train novice crews. Training facilities were limited. Despite mechanical limitations of the early machines and their vulnerability to adverse ground conditions, the tanks achieved moderate success in their initial actions. Advocates of the tanks, such as Fuller and Elles, worked hard to convince the sceptical of the value of the tank. Two years later, tanks had gained the support of most senior commanders. Doctrine, based on practical combat experience, had evolved both within the Tank Corps and at GHQ and higher command. Despite dramatic improvements in the design, functionality and reliability of the later marks of heavy and medium tanks, they still remained slow and vulnerable to ground conditions and enemy counter-measures. Competing demands for materiel meant there were never enough tanks to replace casualties and meet the demands of formation commanders. This thesis will argue that the somewhat patchy performance of the armoured vehicles in the final months of the war was less a product of poor doctrinal guidance and inadequate training than of an insufficiency of tanks and the difficulties of providing enough tanks in the right locations at the right time to meet the requirements of the manoeuvre battles of the ‘Hundred Days’.
    [Show full text]
  • The M1A2 Abrams: the Last Main Battle Tank?
    The M1A2 Abrams: The Last Main Battle Tank? by Stanley C. Crist With its superb integration of fire- Although Longbow Hellfire was de- is expected to enter production around power, mobility, and armor protection, signed for the AH-64D Apache heli- 2015, replacing the M1-series tanks. the M1A2 Abrams is very nearly the copter, there is no obvious reason it Since the next generation armored ultimate incarnation of the main battle couldn’t be fired from an armored ve- fighting vehicle is no longer referred to tank (MBT). Although more advanced hicle. Indeed, at least one nation is ap- as an MBT, can it be inferred that the design concepts have been published in parently developing a similar system. future combat system need not be a recent years, it will likely prove quite According to the August/December tank as we know it today? difficult to produce an MBT suffi- 1993 issue of ASIAN MILITARY RE- If self-guided missiles are chosen for ciently superior (to the M1A2) to jus- VIEW, India has developed the NAG, a tify the cost, so why not look for a bet- fire-and-forget antitank missile with a the primary armament of the FCS, a ter idea? range of six kilometers. It was planned number of advantages present them- that the NAG would be the armament selves. For one, it ought to be possible to eliminate the turret assembly; this The Missile Option for a tracked combat vehicle. With would greatly simplify construction, ground surveillance radar (GSR) incor- When Egyptian Saggers surprised Is- porated into its fire control system, with a corresponding decrease in pro- duction cost and vehicle weight.
    [Show full text]
  • LIBERTY UNIVERSITY Master's Thesis the M26 Pershing
    LIBERTY UNIVERSITY Master’s Thesis The M26 Pershing: America’s Forgotten Tank - Developmental and Combat History Author : Reader : Supervisor : Robert P. Hanger Dr. Christopher J. Smith Dr. David L. Snead A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master’s of Arts In the Liberty University Department of History May 11, 2018 Abstract The M26 tank, nicknamed the “General Pershing,” was the final result of the Ordnance Department’s revolutionary T20 series. It was the only American heavy tank to be fielded during the Second World War. Less is known about this tank, mainly because it entered the war too late and in too few numbers to impact events. However, it proved a sufficient design – capable of going toe-to-toe with vaunted German armor. After the war, American tank development slowed and was reduced mostly to modernization of the M26 and component development. The Korean War created a sudden need for armor and provided the impetus for further development. M26s were rushed to the conflict and demonstrated to be decisive against North Korean armor. Nonetheless, the principle role the tank fulfilled was infantry support. In 1951, the M26 was replaced by its improved derivative, the M46. Its final legacy was that of being the foundation of America’s Cold War tank fleet. Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..1 Chapter 1. Development of the T26 …………………………………………………..………..10 Chapter 2. The M26 in Action in World War II …………...…………………………………40 Chapter 3. The Interwar Period ……………………………………………………………….63 Chapter 4. The M26 in Korea ………………………………………………………………….76 The Invasion………………………………………………………...………77 Intervention…………………………………………………………………81 The M26 Enters the War……………………………………………………85 The M26 in the Anti-Tank Role…………………………………………….87 Chapter 5.
    [Show full text]
  • France Historical AFV Register
    France Historical AFV Register Armored Fighting Vehicles Preserved in France Updated 24 July 2016 Pierre-Olivier Buan Neil Baumgardner For the AFV Association 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................4 ALSACE.................................................................................................................5 Bas-Rhin / Lower Rhine (67)........................................................5 Haut-Rhin / Upper Rhine (68)......................................................10 AQUITAINE...........................................................................................................12 Dordogne (24) .............................................................................12 Gironde (33) ................................................................................13 Lot-et-Garonne (47).....................................................................14 AUVERGNE............................................................................................................15 Puy-de-Dôme (63)........................................................................15 BASSE-NORMANDIE / LOWER NORMANDY............................................................16 Calvados (14)...............................................................................16 Manche (50).................................................................................19 Orne (61).....................................................................................21
    [Show full text]
  • The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare
    No. 109 JUNE 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare Michael B. Kim The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim The Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY AN INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE PAPER The purpose of the Institute of Land Warfare is to extend the educational work of AUSA by sponsoring scholarly publications, to include books, monographs and essays on key defense issues, as well as workshops and symposia. A work selected for publication as a Land Warfare Paper represents research by the author which, in the opinion of ILW’s editorial board, will contribute to a better understanding of a particular defense or national security issue. Publication as an Institute of Land Warfare Paper does not indicate that the Association of the United States Army agrees with everything in the paper but does suggest that the Association believes the paper will stimulate the thinking of AUSA members and others concerned about important defense issues. LAND WARFARE PAPER No. 109, June 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim Major Michael B. Kim currently serves as the Squadron Executive Officer for the 8th Squadron, 1st Cavalry Regiment, 2d Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2d Infantry Division. Prior to his current position, he graduated from the Command and General Staff College (CGSC), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and completed the Art of War Scholars Program.
    [Show full text]
  • The T-34-85 in Detail
    ASSEMBLY GUIDE STEP 1 THE T-34-85 IN DETAIL The three-man turret on the T-34-85 was one of several significant innovations that greatly enhanced its combat effectiveness in comparison with its earlier versions. Here is a view of the turret seen from above, and this is the part with which you start when you come to assemble the model. he turret roofs on the T-34-85 varied depending on scope. The most important diference between the turret the factory at which they were manufactured. Its designs was the location of the commander’s cupola. T turret armor thickness was 20 mm, as compared to In 1944, cupola production was increased, and the early 16 mm, on, for example, the German “Panther” tank. versions were given a small ledge on the left side of the All T-34-85 roofs had two covers above the ventilators. At turret intended for this cupola. The turret roof took the the end of 1945, one of the ventilators was placed in front form of an armored plate that rotated on a ball bushing. of the loader’s hatch. There were two diferent periscope It comprised two parts, one of which was hinged and able designs: some T-34-85s had a high PTK-5 periscope from to open. On the early version of the T-34, both parts of this 1943, but the majority were equipped with a low MK-4 peri- hatch could be opened. In 1944 this Т-34-85 was equipped with a commander’s cupola, for which a ledge was provided on the side of the turret.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of the American Tank-Infantry Team During World War II in Africa and Europe
    Art by Jody Harmon Development of the American Tank-Infantry Team During World War II in Africa and Europe by Captain J. L. Mudd The American tank-infantry team was to destroy antitank weapons, bunkers, and tions, and its weight ranged from 33 to the key maneuver element that led to the unarmored or lightly-armored vehicles.5 almost 36 tons. Typically, the tank car- overwhelming number of tactical suc- When the United States Army entered ried a 75-mm gun, but many were later cesses enjoyed by the United States in the World War II, the two main tanks in its fitted with a 76-mm higher velocity can- Second World War.1 However, this win- arsenal were the M3 light tank and the non. It bristled with bow and coaxial .30- ning combination of men and machines M3 medium tank.6 The Light Tank, M3 caliber machine guns and a flexible tur- had developed throughout the course of Series weighed approximately 14-16 ret-mounted Browning .50 caliber ma- the war, and included a number of varia- tons, depending on the model, and was chine gun for antiaircraft use. Armor on tions based on the theater and areas armed with a 37-mm cannon and up to the turret front was 3.75 inches in effec- within each theater. Original develop- five .30-caliber machine guns. Its thickest tive thickness, while the hull front was ment came from training and lessons effective armor was 1.75 inches on the effectively up to four inches thick.10 learned in the decades between the two turret front and 3 inches on the hull front.
    [Show full text]
  • Exmoor Tanks Pack
    North Hill in World War II Minehead, Somerset SCHOOLS RESOURCE PACK for Key Stages 2 & 3 This pack has been created by Sarah Butterworth and Caroline Barnes of Emerald Ant C.I.C. Emerald Ant is dedicated to engaging communities in their local history and heritage through exciting arts projects and interactive education. Community Interest Company 9608594. www.emeraldant.com Contents >> ACTIVITY >> >> CURRICULUM AREA >> 1. Tank Missions and Top Trumps Science / Engineering, Geography, History 2. Designing a Tank Training Ground Art & Design, Maths, Geography, History 3. Camouflage Design Art & Design, Geography 4. Radar Station: A Very Hush Hush Building Language & Literacy, Creative Writing, History 5. Radar Detection: Creating an Invisible Plane Art & Design, History, Science Credits Cover Painting by Year 5 pupils at Minehead Middle School. Photograph credit Caroline Barnes. Top Trump cards >> Crusader Miller, David – An Illustrated Guide to World War II Tanks and Fighting Vehicles, 1981 CRUSADER MARK III - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ACrusader_tank_III.jpg http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/Cruiser-MkVI_Crusader.php >> Stuart M3 Image - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AM3-Stuart-Fort-Knox-1.jpg >> Sherman Image - “M4 Sherman tank - Flickr - Joost J. Bakker IJmuiden” by Joost J. Bakker - M4 Sherman tank. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:M4_Sherman_tank_-_Flickr_-_Joost_J._Bakker_IJmuiden.jpg#/media/File:M4_Sherman_ tank_-_Flickr_-_Joost_J._Bakker_IJmuiden.jpg Miller, David – An Illustrated Guide to World War II Tanks and Fighting Vehicles, 1981 >> Churchill Infantry Tank Image: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Tanks_and_Afvs_of_the_British_ Army_1939-45_KID1265.jpg Activity 2 Legend reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO.
    [Show full text]
  • British Armoured Regiment
    MOTIVATION AND SKILL RELUCTANT CONSCRIPT Britain fielded two armoured brigades, one from the Royal Tank Regiment, and one of CONFIDENT TrAINED cavalry regiments converted to tanks. Both are trained and ready for action. An Armoured FEARLESS VETERAN Regiment is Confident Trained. (TANK COMPANY) Colonel S Major R HEADQUARTERS You must field one platoon from each box shaded black and may field one platoon from each Colonel TE R box shaded grey. Major British companies can have French troops (marked ) as support options. Remember that these platoons retain their own rules and ratings, and count as Allied Platoons (see page 183 Company Command 2iC Command Light Mk VI B 118 of the rulebook). Command A13 Mk II A13 Mk II A10 Cruiser Mk II Light Mk VI B HEADQUA Regiment HQ Cruiser Mk IV Cruiser Mk IV Regiment HQ Armoured Regiment HQ A9 Cruiser Mk I CS A9 Cruiser Mk I CS Light Mk VI B tanks maybe upgraded to Light Mk VI C ArMOUR RECONNAISSANCE INFANTRY 125 HQ Platoon tanks for +5 points per tank. Rifle Platoon (Territorial) 129 Subaltern LATOONS LATOONS LOC Platoon OMPANIES 123 P P C Divisional Cavalry 149 T T Carrier Platoon R 119 Fusiliers Portés Platoon Armoured Company 127 CHARGE! Scout Car Patrol Command A13 Mk A13 Mk II A13 Mk II UPPO OMBAT OMBAT S II Cruiser Mk IV Cruiser Mk IV Cruiser Mk IV British armoured regiments displayed a distinct ‘cavalry’ C WEAPONS WEAPONS Cruiser Platoon ArMOUR AIRCRAFT attitude, even on occasion launching charges in tradi- 167 Subaltern tional cavalry style. Due to their light armour and inabil- Air Support ISIONAL ISIONAL ity to successfully engage anti-tank guns, the armoured V I regiments fighting in France lost large numbers of tanks D 119 Command Light Mk VI B Light Mk VI B in their attacks.
    [Show full text]
  • Manual Tank Gauging for Small Underground Storage Tanks
    United States Solid Waste And EPA 510-B-93-005 Environmental Protection Emergency Response November 1993 Agency 5401P Manual Tank Gauging For Small Underground Storage Tanks Printed on Recycled Paper CONTENTS Why You Should Read This Booklet ................................. 1 How Does Manual Tank Gauging Work? .............................. 2 Do You Have The Right Equipment? ................................. 4 Step 1 — Find The Right Testing Period .............................. 5 Step 2 — Measure The Tank’s Contents .............................. 5 Step 3 — Do Some Math .......................................... 6 Step 4 — Find The Right Test Standards .............................. 6 Step 5 — Compare Your Measurements With Test Standards .................................... 7 Using Tank Charts Without 1/8-Inch Conversions ....................... 8 Why You Should Read This Booklet Federal and state laws require underground storage tanks (USTs) to have leak detection. A lot of attention has been focused on large gasoline tanks, but it is also important to detect leaks from tanks 2,000 gallons or smaller, which often contain used oil. If your USTs do not have leak detection, you can be cited for violations and fined. Leak detection violations can also keep you from getting legally required insurance coverage and reimbursement for cleanup costs. Without leak detection, you constantly risk discovering a leak only after it becomes a major financial burden for yourself and an environmental problem for everyone. Manual tank gauging is a unique leak detection method that can be used only on tanks 2,000 gallons or smaller. If this method is appropriate for any of your USTs, this booklet can help you make sure you do manual tank gauging correctly. If you need information on federal leak detection requirements and the various methods of leak detection available to you, see Straight Talk On Tanks at www.epa.gov/oust/pubs/straight.htm.
    [Show full text]
  • The Success of the Light Armoured Vehicle
    Canadian Military History Volume 20 Issue 3 Article 9 2011 The Success of the Light Armoured Vehicle Ed Storey Canadian Expeditionary Forces Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh Recommended Citation Storey, Ed "The Success of the Light Armoured Vehicle." Canadian Military History 20, 3 (2011) This Feature is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canadian Military History by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Storey: Light Armoured Vehicle The Success of the Light Armoured Vehicle Ed Storey s a military vehicle enthusiast make them cost effective and easier AI was quite excited to see the Abstract: In order to understand the to deploy. article by Frank Maas in Canadian purchase of military vehicles, one must The AVGP series of vehicles Military History dealing with the understand the vehicle and where it falls purchased by Canada in 1976 was in the evolution of vehicle procurement. Canadian Light Armoured Vehicle This article, written in response to an a 10.7 ton, 6 wheeled amphibious (LAV) series of vehicles (vol.20, earlier article in Canadian Military vehicle based on the Swiss Mowag no.2 Spring 2011). I was also keenly History by Frank Maas, examines the Piranha I. Canada bought three interested in the article as my Father chronology and motivations behind versions: the Cougar 76 mm Fire was stationed at CFB Petawawa in the Canadian acquisition of wheeled Support Vehicle, the Grizzly armoured fighting vehicles.
    [Show full text]
  • Kv-1 and 2 Heavy Tanks, 1939-45 Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    KV-1 AND 2 HEAVY TANKS, 1939-45 PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Steven Zaloga | 48 pages | 15 Jan 1996 | Bloomsbury Publishing PLC | 9781855324961 | English | Osprey, United Kingdom KV-1 and 2 Heavy Tanks, 1939-45 PDF Book It depended on which factories had which parts at the time of production. These large tracks had excellent traction on soft ground snow and mud. I enjoy using your articles as references for technical illustrations, just as a hobby. Some of his designs worked better than others. This website uses cookies to provide all of its features. Leigh Neville. Secondary armament comprised a coaxial DT 7. Top charts. Zaloga Illustrations ,. Dimensions L-w-h 5. At first, the This was a response to new German tactics, hastily devised on the spot to counter the impregnable KV KV-1 model late production , Central front, early Neil Baumgardner rated it really liked it Feb 15, Tanks in the Battle of the Bulge Steven J. Add to Your books. Illusive rated it liked it Mar 15, Details if other :. Lexical Index. The turret was easy to spot, top-heavy, making the tank fairly unstable. Zaloga , Trade Paperback 5. Please show me the quote from Yuri stating that KV-3 and T are the same vehicle. KV-1 and 2 Heavy Tanks, 1939-45 Writer Bundle Offer! Only then did the Germans realize they were under attack, but they failed to find the source of the shots. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. This website uses cookies to provide all of its features. It was shipped to the front with a KV-1 turret and destroyed in combat by German field artillery in This volume examines the transition from multi-turreted tanks to heavy single-turret vehicles, consisting of the KV-1 and 2, and the increased favour gi Named after Klimenti Voroshilov, the People's Commissar for Defence, the KVs proved a nasty surprise for German tank crews during the early days of Operation Barbarossa.
    [Show full text]