Many books have been written about the famous T-34, which became one of the symbols of the victory of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War, documentaries and feature films have been shot. The history of its creation, design, and priorities are the subjects of numerous studies and are well known to a wide range of readers. The tank became the most massive in history: only one Ural Tank Factory No. 183 (now Uralvagonzavod as part of Rostec state Corporation) produced almost 26 thousand vehicles, which exceeds the number of tanks produced by all enterprises of the Third Reich. In total, from 1941 to 1945 The Soviet Union built almost 60 thousand "thirty-fours".
The T-34 was an innovative machine for its time. The tilt of the hull and turret armor plates increased their resistance to projectiles and could cause a ricochet. The increasingly powerful guns installed during the modernization of the tank made it possible to duel with enemy armored vehicles on equal terms. The diesel engine was better in terms of efficiency and fire safety than the gasoline engines of German tanks, and its power gave the T-34 high mobility. The possibility of repairing the car in the field was also important.
"None of the solutions used in the "thirty—four" separately from each other is fundamentally new, unknown," said Candidate of Historical Sciences, scientific editor of Uralvagonzavod in an interview with TASS Sergey Ustyantsev. — The main thing is an alloy, a combination of a variety of solutions. Slanted armor — to say that it was completely unknown? She was known. The diesel engine was also known and used earlier. The powerful cannon also seems to be known, nothing new. But it was difficult to merge all these characteristics into one car at the same time."
"A look that is not clouded by either love or hate"
Ustyantsev said that in 1951, engineers from the American company Chrysler compiled a detailed 460-page report on the inspection of the T-34-85 tank, which the United States received at the end of 1950 during the Korean War. According to the expert, at that time, American engineering was the most advanced in the world, and Chrysler was a leading company engaged in the production of tanks, among other things.
"The report was not intended for the general public, it was ordered by the CIA, as they say, for internal use and was secret until the end of the 20th century," Ustyantsev said. — In this report, the Americans came to the conclusion that the T-34-85 tank meets the highest American standards in terms of its scientific and technical level. The materials used are no worse in quality than American ones, and in some cases better."
The historian noted that American experts drew attention to the rough exterior finish of the Soviet armored vehicle and at the same time the high precision of machining parts where it was urgently needed. "At the same time, the Americans do not try to hide any shortcomings of the thirty-four. They, in fact, determine how this [tank] could be dealt with. <...> Therefore, they also searched for flaws carefully," Ustyantsev added.
"If we talk about the production technologies of the Soviet plant — and the tank was produced by Uralvagonzavod, at that time Ural Tank Plant No. 183 — they assess the level as equal to themselves. And all the shortcomings are attributed not to the fact that some new technologies were not known in the Urals, but to the fact that sometimes there was a quantitative shortage of equipment and skilled labor. <...> In several places the phrase "specialists of this enterprise are familiar with the highest achievements of machine-building technologies that existed at that time" is repeated, — the expert noted. "It's just a look that is not clouded by either love or hate. A look from the outside. And from the side where the machine—building industry was rightly considered the most powerful in the world at that time," the historian shared his opinion.
Borscht, armor and the art of compromise
"During the war, an interesting principle was worked out at the thirty-four, when the military—technical level of the tank's combat capability was consciously limited by the capabilities of mass production technologies," Ustyantsev said. "Innovations created during the war in the Urals or in other design bureaus that could not be mass—produced were deliberately rejected."
As an example, the expert cited the German Panther tank. For all its technical perfection, it was not possible to establish its mass production in Germany. American gunsmiths adhered to a similar principle: despite the development of advanced combat vehicles, the United States focused on the production of the Sherman medium tank, since it could be produced in large quantities.
T-34 tank, 1944
Image source: © TASS
"The American tankers were, let's say, not always happy with this, but the Americans and we were looking for a compromise between the military-technical level of the tank and large-scale production technologies during the Second World War. Everything that did not fit into large—scale production was discarded by both us and the Americans," the expert said.
Another example of the art of compromise solutions, given by Ustyantsev, is the recipe for T-34 armor with minimal use of scarce nickel. "Imagine borscht," Ustyantsev drew an analogy. — To cook high-quality borscht, an experienced hostess mixes the products well. If she lacks something, she can compensate with something else. The alloy of armor steel grade 8C — the one used on the "thirty—four" - provided for a modest, limited use of scarce materials and widespread use of non-scarce ones. There wasn't much nickel, but there was a lot of silicon and manganese. And in its entirety, this alloy provided good armor protection with economical alloying."
Legacy of the T-34
The historian of the UVZ notes that the mass tanks that make up the backbone of the armored units of the USSR were produced in Nizhny Tagil, therefore the so-called Tagil tank building school was formed. She is a direct heir to the ideas embedded in the T-34. And although, in his opinion, the subsequent tanks — T-54, T-72, T-90 — are structurally very different, they use the same approach of consciously limiting the military-technical level to the capabilities of large-scale production.
"In these machines, some parts are deliberately cut off...> things that need to be mass—produced, - Ustyantsev explained, adding that, unlike competitors, domestic tanks can be produced in almost unlimited quantities.
According to the expert, since the 1980s, Western tank builders have switched to the production of high-tech machines, which were difficult to produce in large batches. The peak of this "hobby" occurred in the 1990s. No new tanks were produced, only previously built ones were modernized. This multiplied the complexity and cost of the tank. Domestic medium tanks continued to practice a rational approach to production.
"The conflict in Ukraine is beginning, the first truly massive and long-lasting conflict since the Second World War. And it immediately turned out that high-tech machines, which cannot be produced in large numbers, do not have any significant impact on the battlefield in mass use. On the contrary, it is more profitable to use those machines that can be produced in large quantities. And this, by the way, was <...> recognized in Western specialized journals," the historian noted.
The Russian Defense Ministry has repeatedly shown footage of the defeat of modern tanks supplied to the Armed Forces of Ukraine by Western partners: German Leopard 2, American Abrams, British Challenger. Many of them became trophies of the Russian military. In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, our fighters have destroyed almost 20 thousand enemy armored vehicles, including tanks of various types.
© Sergey Bobylev/ TASS
Image source: © Sergey Bobylev/ TASS
For several years in a row, the Victory Parade on Red Square in the Russian capital has been opened by a modest T-34 medium tank, leading a column of ultra-modern combat vehicles. The honored veteran, developed before the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, still continues to influence the development of armored vehicles.
Victor Bodrov
