Description
By the beginning of the Wehrmacht's eastern campaign, there were 746 PzII tanks on the Soviet borders. In the summer of 1941, this tank was certainly outdated, the weak 20mm automatic gun successfully fought only the most lightly armored Soviet technology- T-37, T-38 and T-40. Faced with "T-26" or "BT-7", german tank could only count on luck, because to defeat these machines.jpg)
it was necessary to approach them at a very short distance - less than 300 meters, which is almost impossible in a real battle. Newer Soviet vehicles such as the T-34 had an even more impressive advantage over the German tank. The weak armor of the PzII dictated the need for its use in the absence of a powerful anti-tank defense of the enemy. The armor of the PzII was easily pierced by regular 37mm and 75mm cannons of the Polish Army in 1939 and standard 45mm field guns of the Red Army in 1941. Despite numerous attempts to strengthen the armor, the tank was clearly inferior in terms of projectile resistance to its Soviet opponents. In addition, due to the small size of the turret, it was impossible to install a more powerful gun on the PzII, which would at least somehow increase the combat value of this outdated vehicle. .jpg)
However, it should be noted that tanks of this type, according to the original project, were to become training vehicles for German tankers and only the lack of newer tanks - "PzIII" and "PzIV", their unsatisfactory production and entry into the troops, forced the German command to continue to use these hopelessly outdated tanks in combat operations. By 1942, the PzII was officially withdrawn from the German tank units. By the end of the war, approximately 145 vehicles of this type had survived in the German army. to favorites to favorites from favorites 0
By the beginning of World War II, specialists from the Main Armored Directorate of the Red Army (GABTU KA) had a rather vague idea of what the armored vehicles of a potential enemy were. Approximately the same, however, can be said about their colleagues from the allied countries of the USSR in the not yet created anti-Hitler coalition. For quite objective reasons, there was little available information about the tanks of Germany and its allies. Basically, it was limited to reference books, which sinned with inaccuracies. A full-fledged study of foreign technology became possible only after the outbreak of hostilities. In this sense, the USSR was almost ahead of the rest. The first trophies began to arrive from Spain, they were German Pz.Kpfw.I Ausf.A and Italian L3 / 35. In the summer of 1939 on Far East Japanese light tank "Ha-Go" was captured. The beginning of World War II significantly expanded the list of trophies, among which was the German light tank Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C.
Quietly took out and left - is called "found"
Despite the fact that the Pz.Kpfw.II was absent from the Soviet reference books of 1939, this tank became known even before the start of the war. Here it is worth dwelling separately on how this vehicle was designated in the USSR - a rather important question, since it explains the legend that the Pz.Kpfw.II was allegedly used in Spain. In some materials, even the year of the combat debut is called - 1938, despite the fact that the Germans themselves "do not admit" this. There are no Pz.Kpfw.II tanks in the list of tanks supplied to the Francoists.
The clue lies in the notation used in the Soviet Union. In 1939, a “light tank type II” appears in Soviet documents, which, apparently, became the source of the myth. The piquancy of what is happening is that under the "light tank type II" was meant ... Pz.Kpfw.I Ausf.B. This is how this tank was designated on information posters issued in October 1939. Moreover, in some reference books of the war period, this tank continues to be designated in the same way - despite the fact that at the same time it was also designated as the "German light tank T-Ia". Such confusion probably gave birth to the myth about the use of the Pz.Kpfw.II in Spain.
A clear demonstration of what exactly in Soviet reference books was referred to as the "German T-II tank"
Meanwhile, along with the “light tank Type II”, or T-II, even before the start of the war, it was known about another vehicle - the “light tank Type IIa”, or T-IIa. The description of this tank unambiguously indicates that by it the Soviet specialists meant the Pz.Kpfw.II in the Ausf.a or Ausf.b modification. This is evidenced by the description of the undercarriage: 6 road wheels of small diameter interlocked into bogies.
When exactly this tank became known, history is silent, but you can be sure that this is not a Pz.Kpfw.I Ausf.B. It is possible that information about him came from foreign intelligence, especially since the Germans did not particularly hide these vehicles, and they participated in various events.
So Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C arrived at the NIIBT training ground
For the first time, the Red Army encountered the Pz.Kpfw.II in the autumn of 1939. September 17, 1939 began fighting, which went down in history as the Polish campaign of the Red Army. By two o'clock in the morning on September 19, 1939 soviet tanks broke into Lvov. A week before, battles began in the Lvov region between the Polish army and German troops, among which was the 2nd Panzer Division under the command of Lieutenant General Rudolf Fayel. The division operated northwest of Lvov, in particular, it took part in the battle with the Polish army for the city of Tomaszow-Lubelsky.
To begin studying the machine, first it was necessary to put it in order
As a result of the battles, the Polish army lost three and a half dozen armored vehicles in this area, including 7TP, Vickers Mk.E tanks and TK-S tankettes. Some of these vehicles belonged to the 10th Motorized Cavalry Brigade under the command of Stanisław Maczek. A significant part of the brigade managed to escape to the Polish-Hungarian border. However, the Germans also got it here: at the SPAM (collection point for emergency vehicles), organized in Tomaszow-Lubelski, there were not only Polish, but also German tanks.
The same tank after restoration. A large cross on the front of the turret is clearly visible, which was an excellent target for Polish anti-tank gun crews.
For the first week, the 24th light tank brigade under the command of Colonel P. S. Fotchenkov, which occupied Lvov, settled in a new base. It is possible that from one of the captured Polish soldiers it became known about a large accumulation of Polish armored vehicles. At that time, the finally new borders between the USSR and Germany were not defined, which the Soviet tankers took advantage of:
“By order of the Military Council of the Ukrainian Front on October 6, a detachment of 152 people was organized with the necessary number of combat and transport vehicles to evacuate captured property from the Krasnobrod, Uzefov, Tomashov area, already occupied by German units.
Working selflessly, the detachment took out a lot of valuable property, including two German tanks, two German anti-tank guns, 9 Polish tanks, 10 tankettes and up to 30 guns; returned without loss.
Since there were no German lighting equipment, domestic-made lights were put on the tank
By the way, this list could also include a third German tank. According to the memoirs of A.V. Egorov, who served in the 24th light tank brigade, Senior Lieutenant Tkachenko stole a Pz.Kpfw.III, but the tank was quickly returned to its owners. Nevertheless, among the vehicles, information about which was prepared in the form of posters with performance characteristics and vulnerabilities, was the Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf.D. This is the same machine that, according to some historians, the Red Army captured in the fall of 1939. Naturally, she did not go to any study, but she still managed to get minimal information about her.
A completely different situation developed with another vehicle, the Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C. This tank, which a detachment of the 24th light tank brigade dragged from SPAM in Tomaszow Lubelski, was not going to be returned to the Germans. He became legal prey and went to study at the training ground of the Research Institute of Armored Vehicles (NIIBT) in Kubinka near Moscow. Also, another tank, Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.A., was brought to the USSR.
"Is a modern combat vehicle"
Captured tanks arrived at the training ground in 1940. In the documents Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C received the designation T-IIb. The tank did not end up on SPAM in Poland because of some kind of mechanical failure. According to the inspection report, the car received several hits. In particular, a shell from a Polish anti-tank gun hit one of the hatches in the frontal part of the hull, damaging the gearbox housing. As a result, the tank lost its course and was probably abandoned by the crew. Wear of the spring attachment points of two road wheels was also found. These damages were the result of the active operation of the tank, released in 1938.
The remaining damage was caused by other factors. Most likely, the car, deprived of a move and abandoned by the crew, was thrown into a ditch, and the troops passing nearby began to slowly dismantle it for spare parts. This was a common occurrence: there are many photographs of cars with similar damage that were "vandalized" by German repairmen. In especially severe cases, the hull and turret remained from the tank, as well as large components and assemblies that could not be removed without heavy crane equipment. At the same time, the tank, standing on stumps (all elements of the chassis had already been removed from it), continued to be listed as temporarily losing its combat capability.
From the point of view of attachments, the tank was almost empty
In fairness, the vast majority of such victims of vandalism then returned to service, but after they were sent to the factories. For this reason, it is quite difficult to get a more or less real picture of the losses of German armored vehicles. The tank “privatized” by the Soviet tankers formally had only a hit in the checkpoint, which could be relatively easily changed from serious combat damage. But during the time spent in the ditch and on SPAM, the tank received additional "damage". The homely Germans removed from him part of the electrical equipment and wiring, crew seats, a radio station with an antenna, an instrument panel, an ammunition rack, a coaxial machine gun, tow hooks, spare parts, tools and accessories.
Thrifty German soldiers even removed the antenna from the tank along with the lodgement
With such a volume of faults about full-fledged tests, similar topics that the Pz.Kpfw.I Ausf.A passed was out of the question. From the testers, the employees of the NIIBT test site had to retrain as restorers. In order to return at least one tank to a working condition, the landfill workers used the “buy three shawarma and collect a kitten” method. The Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.A was used as a spare parts donor: the gearbox, the hatch on the front plate and a number of other parts were removed from it.
The Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C itself was completely dismantled. During the assembly process, the site employees described the components and assemblies of the tank in parallel, and also made their drawings. The result was technical description, in places even more detailed than the original manual for the tank.
It was not possible to fully assemble the restored car from "native" German parts. Headlights, battery, part of the instruments and tow hooks had to be taken from domestic cars. As a result, the tank was still able to be restored to running condition, but due to the lack of spare parts, there was no full-fledged test program for it. The maximum that could be done was to conduct a test run over a distance of 100 kilometers. Its purpose was to determine the performance characteristics of the T-IIb.
View of the engine room. One could only guess that there was a radio operator's hatch on the left side here.
It was not possible to get any documents for the tank, for this reason some design features of the Pz.Kpfw.II remained outside the field of view of Soviet specialists. This is especially true for very specific elements, which, for example, included the way the radio operator left the tank. The fact that for this at the same time served as an access hatch to the engine compartment, our experts did not know. However, this is not surprising: few people could guess that you can get out of the tank in such an exotic way.
Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C booking scheme
Tank engine Soviet specialists special attention they didn’t give it, since this motor was already known by the fall of 1940. In Germany, the USSR quite officially acquired three Sd.Kfz.7 half-track tractors, which also used Maybach HL 62 engines. The ZF SSG 46 gearbox aroused more interest. The testers noted the high level of accuracy in the manufacture of the gearbox. Its advantage was the use of helical ground gears: their use increased wear resistance and reduced noise during operation. The experts also liked the use of a synchronizer and the layout of the rocker mechanism, devoid of long rods.
Gearbox ZF SSG 46, which pleasantly surprised by the high level of manufacturing precision
At the same time, the difficulty of removing the gearbox from the tank was indicated, for which it was necessary to remove the turret and turret box. The Pz.Kpfw.I and other German tanks had similar problems. Such was the fee for the layout with the front transmission.
The planetary turning mechanism, reliable and durable, received a positive assessment. But the Soviet specialists did not like the brakes, since they turned out to be difficult to regulate. The general conclusion about the transmission was the following: reliable in operation, easy to operate and can be attributed to one of the best types of mechanical transmissions.
Kinematic diagram of the Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C transmission
The undercarriage of the tank aroused considerable interest among the testers. According to the specialists of the NIIBT test site, despite its low weight, it provided a smooth ride and rapid damping of oscillations. The leaf spring suspension turned out to be compact and light, the track rollers made of aluminum alloy. The track tensioning mechanism was also praised. Somewhat difficult to manufacture, it proved to be simple and reliable in operation.
However, for Soviet tank building, spring suspension was already yesterday. After a series of experiments, it became clear that the future belongs to the torsion bar, which by the time the Pz.Kpfw.II was tested was serially installed on the T-40 reconnaissance amphibious tank.
Chassis diagram. The spring suspension was praised, but torsion bars were already used on Soviet light tanks by that time.
The hull and turret of the tank did not surprise the Soviet specialists. Their design seemed to be a completely logical development of the hull and turret of the Pz.Kpfw.I, which was partly the correct conclusion. The design of the driver's hatch was not liked, as it turned out to be inconvenient to use. However, the testers made the correct conclusion, assuming that the crew mainly used the turret hatch to climb into the tank.
AT performance characteristics The trophy indicated that its crew consisted of three people, but at the same time, the description of the fighting compartment said that only the commander was there. The fact is that all the seats were removed from the tank, so exactly where the radio operator was located remained a mystery. Moreover, there was no radio with an antenna on the tank either.
Viewing devices of the driver. They were only partially preserved: the German repairmen who passed by the wrecked tank “tried”
Surveillance devices aroused much more interest. On the one hand, according to the principle of placement, viewing devices differed little from those of the Pz.Kpfw.I. At the same time, the Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C had upgraded viewing hatches with thicker glass. Our specialists were also interested in the fact that the same binocular viewing device was installed on the tank as on the Pz.Kpfw.III. The device itself was not preserved (cunning German mechanics took it out along with the glass block of the driver's viewing device), but the exact same one was on the Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf.G, which was bought in Germany in 1940. For testing, the device was removed from the Pz.Kpfw.III and placed in a light tank. In general, the visibility of the tank was found to be quite satisfactory.
Tower scheme
Based on the results of studying the captured German car, the following conclusions were made:
“The German captured tank T-2b (conditional name) 1938 represents a further development and modernization of type IIa tanks.
Comparing these tanks, it can be seen that the modernization took place along the line of changing the chassis of the tank.
1. The armament of the IIa and T-2b tanks is completely identical and consists of a twenty-millimeter automatic cannon coaxial with a normal-caliber machine gun and a submachine gun.
The armor of both vehicles is 6-15 mm, designed to protect only from rifle-machine-gun-armor-piercing fire of normal caliber.
The external shape of the hull is quite successful and provides a good layout of the chassis of the tank.
In terms of weapons and instruments, the following deserves the attention of designers of the domestic industry:
- a) The turning mechanism of the tower.
- b) Lifting mechanism of twin installation.
- c) Installation and fastening of the machine gun in the tower.
- d) Backup device for monitoring the driver.
2. As the engine on the tank, a serial Maybach automobile engine is installed (the same engine is installed on the Krauss-Maffei half-track tractors). The engine has been worked out well and is quite reliable in operation.
Starting the engine is provided, in addition to the electric starter, by an inertial starter.
3. On tanks II-a, the undercarriage is made on six small-diameter rollers (from each side), connected to 3 carriages.
On the T-2b tank, the suspension is independent and there are five road wheels of increased diameter on each side. The suspension is original in design, easy to manufacture and ensures constant contact of the rollers with the caterpillar. The suspension in its compactness and damping properties has an advantage over torsion bar suspensions.
The caterpillar is melkozvenchaty, lantern gearing with a small lateral clearance on the drive wheel, which guarantees the caterpillar from falling off.
4. The transmission scheme of the T-2b tank is similar to the T-2a, and is typical for German tank building. The presence of a six-speed gearbox with synchronizers provides the tank with good maneuverability and ease of control.
The planetary turning mechanism is large in size and weight, and difficult to manufacture. Its advantage is reliability in operation and the absence of the need for adjustment.
5. Access to units subject to frequent inspection and adjustment is good. The dismantling of the tank units is difficult (for example, the removal of the turret is required to remove the gearbox). The latter can be explained by the fact that the quality of the produced tanks is of high quality, which eliminates the need for frequent removal of units from the tank.
A common feature of the light tank T-2b is that, like all German tanks, it is made according to a single scheme adopted in Germany for tanks.
The use of a single scheme and common standard parts in the production of tanks significantly reduces the cost and speeds up the production of tanks, and facilitates the training of combat and repair personnel.
In terms of design and production design, the T-2b tank is a modern combat vehicle.
Of no interest
Despite the rather flattering assessment of the training ground specialists, the Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C did not really impress the Soviet tank builders. In 1939-40, Soviet tank building took a big step forward. An analogue of the Pz.Kpfw.II in the USSR was to be the SP-126 infantry escort tank, which later turned into the T-50. Even at an early stage of design German car yielded to him in everything.
Designers were much more interested not in the light German tank, but in the medium Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf.G, which really had a noticeable impact on Soviet tank building. This also applies to Soviet light tanks. At the same time, it was decided to bring Soviet light vehicles as close as possible to a medium tank in a number of characteristics.
General visibility scheme Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C
The second tank, Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.A, was sent for study to Leningrad, at NII-48. There, the car was included in the program for studying the quality of foreign armor. It's funny, but this car, according to the report, passes as "Polish tank of German production of welded structure" . The car was dismantled, and later the hull with the turret was shot, and a report was made. It was noted that the details of the hull were carefully made, and the welds after the shelling did not have cracks. The armor itself was considered fragile.
The Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.C restored at the NIIBT test site as of April 1, 1941 was supposed to be placed in the museum at the test site. But after the start of the Great Patriotic War, traces of the tank are lost.
Dismantled "Polish German-made tank" Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.A under study in Leningrad
Already during the war, several Pz.Kpfw.IIs hit Kubinka. After the war, one tank remained here - Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.F, turret number 28384. Most likely, it was made at the Ursus factory in Warsaw. It should be noted that during the Great Patriotic War none research work to study the Pz.Kpfw.II in the USSR was not carried out. By this time, for our tank building, it was yesterday.
An old German tank was recently restored on the open area of the Lenino-Snegirevsky Military History Museum
People from the "Workshop Leibstandarte" (as it was written on the minibus) worked at the tank - they pulled up the caterpillars. I myself can’t stand it when someone watches my work, and therefore I didn’t begin to flicker in front of them very annoyingly.
Light tank T-2 / Pz.II / Pz.Kpfw.II
In 1934, the German military command decided to quickly develop an intermediate model of a light tank, so that temporarily, before the planned T-3 / Pz.III and T-4 / Pz.IV tanks entered service, fill the troops with armored vehicles. So appeared light tank T-2 / Pz.II / Pz.Kpfw.II, which was originally called Tractor 100 or LaS 100 in secrecy chains. The development contract was received by Henschel, Krupp and MAN. After comparative tests of the presented samples, the model of the MAN company, which was instructed to improve the chassis, seemed to be the most promising. The rest of the work was entrusted to Daimler-Benz, as well as MIAG, Wegmann and Famo.
Light tanks T-2 / Pz.II / Pz.Kpfw.II were the main striking force of the German tank divisions during the invasion of France. More than 1,000 of these tanks participated in the operation, and they were mainly in the forward units. In 1941, T-2/Pz.II tanks took part in the attack on the USSR, although it quickly became clear on the Eastern Front that their firepower and armor protection were insufficient. The T-2 / Pz.II tank was created primarily as a combat training vehicle. The first production tanks T-2A / Pz.II Ausf A were produced in 1935. Military tests showed insufficient engine power of 130 hp. ((97 kW)). The next modification of the T-2B / Pz.II Ausf B tanks had thicker frontal armor and a more powerful engine of 140 hp. (104 kW), and its weight reached 8 tons.
In 1937, a new model of a light tank, the T-2Ts / Pz.II Ausf C, was introduced. It had reinforced armor and a new undercarriage with five road wheels, which became standard for all subsequent modifications. In 1938, modifications of the T-2D / Pz.II Ausf D and T-2E / Pz.II Ausf E light tanks were created using a torsion bar suspension. This made it possible to increase the maximum speed on paved roads, but slightly worsen cross-country performance.
The last modification in the T-II light tank series was the T-2F / Pz.II Ausf F, produced in 1941-1942. The thickness of the frontal armor of these machines was 35 mm, side - 20 mm. The mass of the tank has increased to 10 tons. Experts believed that this car achieved a good ratio of speed and armor protection.
The hull and turret of the light tank T-2F / Pz.II Ausf F are welded. The driver's seat was in front of the hull, the seats of the other two crew members were in a circular turret armed with a 20-mm cannon with 180 rounds of ammunition and to the right of it - a 7.92-mm machine gun with 1425 rounds of ammunition.
A reconnaissance vehicle was developed on the basis of the T-2 / Pz.II light tank, but its production was carried out in very small batches.
In the early 1940s, a model of an amphibious light tank was created in Germany. The engine, through a special drive, rotated a propeller fixed on the shaft, which ensured the movement of the machine afloat at speeds up to 10 km / h. Later, a model with two screws appeared. About 100 of these vehicles entered service by 1942 under the designation T-2 / Pz.II amphibious tank.
Later, these vehicles were withdrawn from combat units and converted into tank destroyers, with effective anti-tank 76.2-mm guns captured in battles from Soviet troops. Such vehicles were designated Marder, and were soon replaced by the Marder II with 75 mm German anti-tank guns. In total, approximately 1,200 tanks were converted. Until 1944, self-propelled vehicles were produced at the factories of occupied Poland. artillery mounts, which were 150-mm howitzers mounted on the chassis of the T-2 / Pz.II light tank.
No, don't be scared, it's not my roof that's gone, it's a normal American practice, when the naming of equipment took place independently according to different departments and branches of the military. So, this is not about a light infantry tank. T2 ah o' 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 sufficient speed so that the cavalry did not really run away from the tanks. The author of the machine, engineer Cunningham (firm " James Cunningham & Sons Company"), did not reinvent the wheel and, on the basis of a series of his light experimental tanks T1 (those are still shushi, I must say), built a slightly enlarged version called T2. The car had a classic Cunningham layout, with a front-mounted MTO and rear-wheel drive. In fact, in terms of layout, it was a truck cab, armored and crowned with a turret.
Since the car had to be nimble, with a dead weight of about 13.6 tons, it was equipped with an engine V12 Liberty, power in 312 hp, which allowed her to accelerate to 27 miles per hour (43.5 km / h), almost 2-3 times faster than typical tanks of that period. With such an engine, the car at the training ground looked very menacing, rapidly overcoming obstacles. True, at such speeds and a four-speed gearbox, the engine was peddling, so a rev limiter had to be introduced into the design, which slowed down the car to still very decent 20 miles per hour (32 km / h) at that time.
In general, in 1933, one of Cunningham's experimental tanks on tracks invented by him (?) with rubber-metal hinges (?) accelerated up to 50 miles (80 km) per hour. And without any wheel-tracked perversions.
The armament of the machine was not formed immediately. No, what d.b. the gun was not discussed, but everything else.
In the process of improvements, everything happened - the gunner in the hull greatly interfered with those sitting in the turret, the hefty breech pushed him literally under their feet, and it was inconvenient to serve the gun with one hand, while you were loading it - it had already lost its target, so the 37mm gun migrated to tower, and its place (not immediately) was taken by a machine gun. Then, in addition to the machine gun in the hull, a second machine gun appeared, coaxial with a cannon, and also a large-caliber one (classic, M2), and the cannon itself in the turret again grew in caliber from 37mm to 47mm. At the same time, it should be noted that the BC of a heavy machine gun was (if Heigl is not mistaken) as much as 2000 rounds. Quite, by the way, not bad for 1928-31, in the end, I find it difficult to name a more powerful and faster tank on the fly.
The armor was differentiated, from 22.23mm (7/8") forward and in the turret to 3.35mm (1/4") on horizontal surfaces.
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 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 security and weapons, but a number of technical problems prevented its mass production in a timely manner, and even after standardization in 1928 as the Medium Tank T1, it still did not enter series production. In parallel, from March 1926, work was underway on the M1924 tank, but this machine could not get out of 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 constructive 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” something more out of the M1921, Knox presented a project for a completely new medium tank, the already built prototype Light Tank T1 was used as a model for the appearance of which. 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 a team of engineers was allocated by James Cunningham Son & Co. Actually, at its facilities, the construction and refinement of a prototype was subsequently carried out.
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 aircraft 12-cylinder air-cooled Liberty L-12 engine, derated from 400 to 338 hp to reduce the load on the transmission. The engine was installed with an 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 up on hinges: a front one with a viewing slot and two side hatches. The engine compartment contained a lubrication and cooling system, and the exhaust pipe was brought to the starboard side. The fuel tanks were taken out of the hull and placed in the side boxes. At the same time, for ease of maintenance, air filters were installed in the fighting compartment.
Behind the partition, in the aft part of the hull, there was a combat and transmission compartment, which were made combined. For boarding and disembarking from the tank, only one double-leaf door was intended in the vertical aft armor plate of the hull. Due to the large volume, the layout of the workplaces of the rest of the 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 19-22 mm thick reliably protected from fire small arms(including heavy machine guns) and small fragments. The situation from the sides was a little worse, but even in this case, the security of the crew and vital units was considered sufficient.
The armament was very powerful. In a cylindrical turret mounted on the roof of the fighting compartment, an installation of a 5-shot 47-mm gun and a 12.7-mm Browning M2HB machine gun was mounted. On the roof of the tower was a commander's cupola with a single hatch.
In addition, in the frontal hull sheet, 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 a muzzle velocity of 777 m/s. In theory, such a combination of barrels was deadly for any armored vehicle of a potential enemy, but in practice there were problems with the maintenance of such installations.
The undercarriage deserves special mention. Drawing analogies with the chassis of the Medium Tank Mk.I\Mk.II would not be very correct, since the British tank used a slightly different suspension system.
On the American T2, 12 road wheels were used on one side, assembled in 6 bogies with suspension on spring springs, 4 support rollers, a front guide wheel and a rear drive wheel. The caterpillar belt consisted of 80 metal tracks 381 mm wide. Open elements the suspensions were protected by a bulwark with hinged folding sections.
Tests of the prototype medium tank T2, which arrived at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in late December 1930, were initially very successful. With a combat weight of 14125 kg, the tank had a specific power of about 20 hp. per ton, which even in our time is considered more than an acceptable indicator.
Top speed was 25 mph (40 km/h) on paved roads, but was subsequently limited to 20 mph (32 km/h) to conserve undercarriage life. With a fuel reserve of 94 gallons (356 liters), the cruising 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, which began in 1929, led to such a significant reduction in military orders that subsequently manufacturing firms were forced to purchase the necessary equipment for their own money with a very illusory hope of payback.
Accordingly, money for the Medium Tank T2 modernization program was allocated on a very modest scale. But that was only half the trouble - the real problem was engineer GW Christie's fast M1928 and M1931 tanks, which really represented a revolutionary breakthrough. Despite the weaker armor and modest armament, these vehicles developed simply fantastic speed and had the then promising "candle" suspension.
Despite this, the T2 tests were continued. In the process of practical firing, it turned out that the 47-mm automatic gun is unbalanced. They tried to eliminate this shortcoming 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), instead of which the T1 installation appeared with the old short-barreled M1916 gun of 37 mm caliber. However, this option was also considered unsatisfactory, so in the summer of that year the gun was replaced by a 7.62-mm machine gun. Also increased the number of external fuel tanks to two on the port side.
After completing 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 in January 1932 the tank was re-transferred to the Aberdeen Proving Ground, the weapons in the turret were dismantled from it. However, it was all in vain. The American "medium" developed by Harry Knox did not look presentable against the background of Christie's tanks, and it was in this situation that the Ordnance Department 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. The place of its deployment was Fort Benning, where American congressmen periodically came, on whose opinion the fate of many combat vehicles depended. Seeing the potential capabilities of Christie's tanks, it immediately became clear to them what to spend the 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 he became museum exhibit. It was there for many decades and only recently the question of moving the Medium Tank T2 to the exposition of the new tank museum in Fort Lee was raised. In the meantime, the tank is in Anniston (Alabama) awaiting restoration.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Sources:
Sources:
R.P. Hunnicutt “Sherman: A History of the 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
PERFORMANCE AND TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MEDIUM TANK T2 Medium Tank Model 1932
| COMBAT WEIGHT | 14125 kg |
| CREW, pers. | 4 |
| DIMENSIONS | |
| Length, mm | 2760 |
| Width, mm | 2440 |
| Height, mm | ~2500 |
| Clearance, mm | 400 |
| WEAPONS | one 47 mm cannon and coaxial 12.7 mm Browning M2HB machine gun in the turret, one 37 mm cannon in the hull and one 7.62 mm Browning M1919 machine gun |
| AMMUNITION | 75 rounds, 2000 rounds for 12.7 mm machine gun and 4500 rounds for 7.62 mm machine gun |
| AIMING DEVICES | telescopic sight М1918 |
| BOOKING | hull forehead - 19 mm hull board - 6.4 mm hull feed - 6.4 mm tower - 22 mm roof - 3.35 mm bottom - 3.35 mm |
| ENGINE | Liberty, 12-cylinder, 338 hp at 750 rpm, water-cooled |
| TRANSMISSION | mechanical type |
| CHASSIS | (on one side) 12 track rollers interlocked in 6 bogies, 4 support rollers, front guide and rear drive wheel, caterpillar of 76 steel tracks 381 mm wide and 108 mm pitch |
| SPEED | 40 km/h highway (max.) 32 km/h (normal) |
| HIGHWAY RANGE | 145 km |
| OBSTACLES TO OVERCOME | |
| Climb angle, deg. | 35° |
| Wall height, m | ? |
| Ford depth, m | ? |
| Ditch width, m | ? |
| MEANS OF COMMUNICATION | — |
