Re: Problems with the T-34
- From: "Nicholas Smid" <nsmid2@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 12:03:43 -0400
"Wylie Wilde" <sniper968@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:44306c66$0$20114$afc38c87@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The T-34 has often been touted as one of the best tank of WW2. Heck eventhe
Germans wanted to copy it. (IIRC Mercedes made a copy of it).Well in combat the driver would have his hatch shut, using the built in
But what were its main problems? I heard that it suffered from a rough
design but was that so important?
Right up front, no pun intended, I can see that the drivers' hatch- which
also acts as his viewing port- is directly in the the line of any hostile
fire. I would have thought that many T-34s got taken out when an anti-tank
round or grenade got lobbed into that big port.
vision blocks to drive by but the hatch did weaken the front plate, also the
hull MG mount in early models was a weakness. In the early types the biggest
hatch problem was the turret hatch, which took up about half the turret
roof, very heavy to lift, when its open you might as well not have a roof on
the turret, lots of commanders got shot peering round the edge trying to see
where they were going, in part to direct the driver, even in western tanks
drivers often needed some help from the commander .
The vision devices for use closed down were, charitably, ah poor, crew
condisions were very cramped and uncomfortable, to the point crew
effectivness was affected rapidly, though the Russians might well have stood
up to it better than western troops would have.
The major problems were the transmission and engine, it wasn't uncommon in
the early years to see T-34's going into action with a spear transmission
lashed to the rear deck. They got better after 1942 but reliablity was never
that good, though a pluse was you mostly didn't need very fancy gear to fix
a T-34. Once the Germans started fitting long 75 mm guns the T-34's hull
armour was nolonger up to scratch and it never got better.
Still it was a very nicely balanced design able to take alot of upgrades,
easy to build and easy to look after even if it did need alot more
maintanince than most armies would have found acceptable. It could be
operated, more or less, by crews with the most basic of training and suted
the Russian approach to war, mass over quality.
.
- References:
- Problems with the T-34
- From: Wylie Wilde
- Problems with the T-34
- Prev by Date: Re: bombing the beach - D-Day
- Next by Date: Re: Germans Killing Helpless Paratroopers at Normandy
- Previous by thread: Re: Problems with the T-34
- Next by thread: Re: British units in Palestine
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
