Soviet technology from the Second World War. Soviet equipment of the Second World War Brief description of military equipment in WWII

USSR technology

USSR tank: T-34 (or “thirty-four”)

The tank was put into service on December 19, 1939. This is the only tank in the world that retained its combat capability and was in serial production until the end of the Great Patriotic War. The T-34 tank deservedly enjoyed the love of soldiers and officers of the Red Army, was the best car world tank fleet. He played a decisive role in the battles of Moscow, Stalingrad, the Kursk Bulge, Berlin and other military operations.

Soviet technology of World War II

Tank USSR: IS - 2 “Joseph Stalin”

IS-2 is a Soviet heavy tank during the Great Patriotic War. The abbreviation IS stands for Joseph Stalin. official name serial Soviet heavy tanks produced in 1943-1953. Index 2 corresponds to the second production model of the tank of this family. During the Great Patriotic War, along with the designation IS-2, the name IS-122 was used equally, in this case the index 122 means the caliber of the main armament of the vehicle.

USSR weapons: 76-mm divisional gun model 1942
The ZIS-3 became the most popular Soviet artillery gun produced during the Great Patriotic War. Thanks to its outstanding combat, operational and technological qualities, this weapon is recognized by experts as one of best guns Second World War. In the post-war period, the ZIS-3 was in service with the Soviet Army for a long time, and was also actively exported to a number of countries, in some of which it is still in service today.

USSR military equipment: Katyusha
Katyusha is the unofficial collective name for the BM-8 (82 mm), BM-13 (132 mm) and BM-31 (310 mm) rocket artillery combat vehicles. Such installations were actively used by the USSR during the Second World War.

Photo. Multi-purpose all-wheel drive army vehicle

Willys-MV (USA, 1942)

Unloaded weight 895kg. (2150lbs)

Engine carburetor liquid cooling 42 hp / 2500 rpm 4-cycle. 2200cm²

Gearbox: 3 speeds + 1 reverse

Maximum speed on the highway: 104 km/h.

Fuel consumption 14l/100kl.

Tank 57l.

Photo. Anti-tank gun. M-42. 45 mm. Caliber 45mm. Barrel length 3087mm. Maximum rate of fire is 15-30 rounds per minute.

Photo. Katyusha. BM-13 rocket launcher. Created in 1939 design bureau of A. Kostyukov. Tactical specifications: Caliber: 132mm. Weight without shells: 7200 kg. Number of guides: 16 Firing range: 7900m.

Photo. 122 mm. Howitzer. Model 1938 Created in 1938 design group of F. Petrov. Tactical and technical characteristics: Weight: in combat position 2400 kg. Firing range: 11800m. Maximum elevation angle + 63.5°. Rate of fire 5-6 rounds/min.

Photo. 76 mm. Divisional Cannon. Model 1942 Created in 1938-1942. design bureau of V. Grabin. Tactical and technical characteristics: Weight: in combat position 1200 kg. Firing range: 13290m. Maximum elevation angle + 37°. Rate of fire 25 rounds/min.

Photo. 57 mm. Anti-tank gun. Model 1943 Created in 1938-1942. design bureau of V. Grabin. Tactical and technical characteristics: Weight: in combat position 1250 kg. Firing range: 8400m. Maximum elevation angle + 37°. Rate of fire 20-25 rounds/min.

Photo. 85 mm. Anti-aircraft gun. Model 1939 Created in 1939 G. D. Dorokhin. Tactical and technical characteristics: Weight: in combat position 4300 kg. Firing range in height: 10500m. Horizontal: 15500m. Maximum elevation angle + 82°. Rate of fire 20 rounds/min.

Photo. Barrel 203 mm. Howitzers. Model 1931 Designers F. F. Pender, Magdesnev, Gavrilov, Torbin. Tactical and technical characteristics: Weight: in combat position 17700 kg. Firing range: 18000m. Maximum elevation angle + 60°. Rate of fire 0.5 rounds/min.

Photo. 152 mm. Howitzer gun M-10. Model 1937 Created in 1937 design group of F. Petrov Tactical and technical characteristics: Weight: in combat position 7270 kg. Firing range: 17230m. Maximum elevation angle + 65°. Rate of fire 3-4 shots/min

Photo. 152 mm. Howitzer D-1. Model 1943 Created in 1943 design group of F. Petrov Tactical and technical characteristics: Weight: in combat position 3600 kg. Firing range: 12400m. Maximum elevation angle + 63.30°. Rate of fire 3-4 rounds/min.

Photo. Field kitchen. KP-42 M.

Photo. Heavy Tank IS-2. Created in 1943 design group of Zh. Ya. Kotin, N. L. Dukhova Tactical and technical characteristics: Combat weight: 46 tons. Reservation: hull forehead; 120mm; hull side; 90mm; tower 110mm. Speed: 37 km/h Highway range: 240 km. Armament: 122mm cannon; 3 machine guns 7.62mm; 12.7mm anti-aircraft machine gun Ammunition: 28 shells, 2331 rounds Crew: 4 people

Photo. Heavy Self-Propelled Artillery Mount ISU-152 Created in 1944. Tactical and technical characteristics: Combat weight: 47t. Reservation: hull forehead; 100mm; hull side; 90mm; cutting 90mm. Speed: 37 km/h Highway range: 220 km. Armament: 152mm howitzer gun; 12.7mm anti-aircraft machine gun Ammunition: 20 shells Crew: 5 people

Photo. Heavy Tank IS-3 Developed under the direction of designer M. F. Blazhi. Adopted into service in 1945. Tactical and technical characteristics: Combat weight: 45.8 tons. Speed: 40 km/h Cruising range on the highway: 190 km. Power: 520hp Armament: 122mm D-25T cannon, model 1943. 7.62mm DT machine gun, 12.7mm DShK machine gun. Ammunition: 20 shells Crew: 4 people.

Information from the museum Battle of Stalingrad, in the city of Volgograd.

The text of the work is posted without images and formulas.
The full version of the work is available in the "Work Files" tab in PDF format

During the Second World War, for the first time in human history, major clashes of military equipment occurred, which largely determined the outcome of the military confrontation. The Great Patriotic War, from the point of view of the quality of tank forces, their material support and their management, is both the past and, partly, the present. The fragments of that war and that era still fly and injure people, so the problems raised by military historians are of interest to modern society.

Many people are still concerned about the question of which tank was the best tank of the Second World War. Some carefully compare the tables of tactical and technical characteristics (TTX), talk about the thickness of the armor, the armor penetration of shells and many other figures from the TTX tables. Different sources give different figures, 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. Tanks are not designed for duels with their own kind in perfectly identical conditions.

I have long been interested in armored vehicles from the Great Patriotic War. Therefore, in my work I would like to systematize all the information received, dwell in more detail on the characteristics of medium and heavy armored vehicles of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, analyze and compare the collected data. In my work I mainly refer to the book by A.G. Mernikov. "Armed forces of the USSR and Germany 1939 - 1945" and electronic resource"Tanks yesterday, today, tomorrow."

After I read the literature, where I learned the history of tank building, analyzed the quantitative and tactical and technical characteristics of tanks during the Great Patriotic War, and learned about many technical innovations from leading countries, I decided to conduct a sociological study. A survey was conducted, the survey participants were students from my 5th “B” class. Respondents had to answer the questions: “What tanks of the Great Patriotic War do you know? What tanks were used in the battle on the Kursk Bulge? Which tank was considered the best in the Soviet Union? What tank was created by the Germans to surpass the T-34? (Appendix A). The survey showed that more than half of my classmates do not know which tanks participated in the Kursk Bulge (57%) (Appendix B diagram 2), many do not know which tank was created by the Germans to surpass the T-34 (71%) (Appendix B diagram 4).

We all say that we are patriots of our country. Is this patriotism when a schoolchild cannot name which tanks were used in the battle on the Kursk Bulge? I hope that with my project I have inspired my classmates to research activities concerning the Great Patriotic War. Create the same works, and perhaps in the near future all the gaps, secrets and ambiguities of this war will be open and accessible to everyone!

The relevance of this work lies in the fact that tanks played a huge role during the world wars. And we must remember about these machines, about their creators. IN modern world people forget about the terrible days of these wars. My scientific work is aimed at remembering these war pages.

Purpose of the work: comparison of quantitative and tactical-technical characteristics of Soviet and German tanks during the Great Patriotic War.

Tasks: 1. Conduct comparative analysis medium and heavy tanks USSR and Germany during the Great Patriotic War.

2. Systematize the information received about medium and heavy tanks of the USSR and Germany during the Great Patriotic War in the form of tables.

3.Assemble a model of the T-34 tank.

Object of study: tanks from the Great Patriotic War.

Subject of research: medium and heavy tanks of the Soviet Union and Germany during the Great Patriotic War.

Hypothesis: there is a version that Soviet tanks from the Great Patriotic War had no analogues.

problem-search;

research;

practical;

The practical significance of the study is that the younger generation, to which I and my peers belong, do not forget about the role of tanks with the help of which our country withstood the fascist occupation. So that our generation never allows military action on our Earth.

Chapter 1. Comparative characteristics medium tanks of the USSR and Germany during the Great Patriotic War

A light tank is a tank that, according to one of the classification criteria (weight or armament), falls into the corresponding category of combat vehicles. When classified by weight, a light tank is considered fighting machine no heavier than the conventional limit value between the categories of light and medium tanks. When classified by armament, the category of light vehicles includes all tanks armed with automatic cannons (or machine guns) with a caliber of up to 20 mm inclusive (or non-automatic up to 50 mm), regardless of weight or armor.

Different approaches to the classification of tanks led to the fact that in different countries the same vehicles were considered to belong to different classes. The main purpose of light tanks was reconnaissance, communications, direct support of infantry on the battlefield, and counter-guerrilla warfare.

Medium tanks included tanks that had a combat weight of up to 30 tons and were armed with a large-caliber cannon and machine guns. Medium tanks were intended to reinforce infantry when breaking through a heavily fortified enemy defensive line. Medium tanks included T-28, T-34, T-44, T-111, Pz Kpfw III, Pz Kpfw IV and others.

Heavy tanks included tanks that had a combat weight of over 30 tons and were armed with large-caliber guns and machine guns. Heavy tanks were intended to strengthen combined arms formations when breaking through heavily fortified enemy defenses and attacking their fortified areas. Heavy tanks included all modifications of the KV tank, IS-2, Pz Kpfw V “Panther”, Pz Kpfw VI “Tiger”, Pz Kpfw VI Ausf B “Royal Tiger” and others.

Panzerkampfwagen III - German medium tank during the Second World War, mass-produced from 1938 to 1943. The abbreviated names of this tank were PzKpfw III, Panzer III, Pz III.

These combat vehicles were used by the Wehrmacht from the first day of World War II. Latest entries about the battle use of PzKpfw III in the regular composition of Wehrmacht units date back to mid-1944, single tanks fought until the surrender of Germany. From mid-1941 to early 1943, the PzKpfw III was the backbone of the Wehrmacht's armored forces (Panzerwaffe) and, despite its relative weakness compared to its contemporary tanks from the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition, made a significant contribution to the successes of the Wehrmacht of that period. Tanks of this type were supplied to the armies of Germany's Axis allies. Captured PzKpfw IIIs were used by the Red Army and the Allies with good results.

Panzerkamfwagen IV - surprisingly, this tank was not the main tank of the Wehrmacht, although it was the most popular (8686 vehicles were made). The creator of the T-IV (as it was called in the Soviet Union) was Alfred Krupp, great person Germany. He provided a lot of jobs for people, but that's not what this is about. It was mass-produced from 1936 to 1945, but began to be used only in 1939. This tank was constantly modernized, armor was increased, more and more powerful guns were installed, etc., which allowed it to withstand enemy tanks (even against the T-34). At first it was armed with the KwK 37 L/24 gun, later, in 1942, the KwK 40 L/43 and in 1943 the Kwk 40 L/47.

T-34 is a well-known tank. My personal opinion: he’s handsome, and probably everyone shares this opinion with me. It was created at Kharkov plant No. 183, under the leadership of M.I. Koshkin in 1940. Interesting feature This tank was that it had a V-2 aircraft engine. Thanks to this, it could accelerate to 56 km/h, which is a lot for tanks, but, to be honest, it is not the fastest tank. The T-34 was the main tank of the USSR and was the most produced tank of the Second World War, from 1940 to 1956 84,000 tanks were made, 55,000 of which were made during the war (for comparison: German T-IV, tigers and panthers were made at most 16,000). The T-34 was created with the L-11 76mm gun, a year later it was equipped with the F-34 76mm, and in 1944 the S-53 85mm.

From the very first hours of the war, T-34 tanks took part in battles and showed unsurpassed fighting qualities. The enemy, knowing nothing about our new tanks, was not ready to meet them. Its main T-III tanks and T-IV could not fight with thirty-fours. The guns did not penetrate the armor of the T-34, while the latter could shoot enemy vehicles from the extreme distances of a direct shot. A year passed before the Germans confronted them with vehicles more or less equal in firepower and armor.

Our answer to the panther - T-34-85 - the best tank of the Great Patriotic War. I can add that this modification featured an expanded turret and S-53 gun. And that’s it, there’s nothing more to add, the corps did not change throughout the war. From 1944 to 1945, 20,000 tanks were made (that's 57 tanks per day).

Mobility is the ability of a tank to cover a given distance in a certain time without additional means of support (Appendix C, table 1).

T-34-76 is the best tank in the category - “MOBILITY”.

Security is the tank’s ability to preserve the tank’s crew and equipment when hit by shells, shrapnel, and large-caliber bullets (Appendix C, Table 2).

T-34-85 is the best tank in the “DEFENSE” category.

German Pz. IV samples 1943-1945. the best tank in the category is “Firepower” (Appendix C, table 3).

Analyzing the technical characteristics of medium tanks, we can conclude that our medium tanks are superior to German tanks in speed, caliber, and ammunition (Appendix C, table 4) .

T-34 is the best medium tank of World War II.

Chapter 2. Comparative characteristics of heavy tanks of the USSR and Germany during the Great Patriotic War

Panther is the main heavy tank of the Wehrmacht, created by MAN in 1943 and is one of best tanks of that time (but it cannot surpass the T-34). Visually, it is somewhat similar to the T-34 and not surprising. In 1942, a commission was assembled to study Soviet tanks. Having collected all the pros and cons of our tanks, they assembled their own version of the T-34. If Daimler-Benz, sorry, stupidly copied our beauty, then MAN made a truly German tank (engine in the rear, transmission in the front, rollers in a checkerboard pattern) and only added a couple of little things. At the very least, he tilted the armor. The first time the panther was used was in the Battle of Kursk, after which it was used in all “theaters of war.” Serially produced from 1943 to 1945. About 6,000 tanks were made. All panthers were equipped with a KwK 42 L/70 75mm gun.

The Tiger is the first heavy tank of the Wehrmacht. The Tiger was the smallest tank (from 1942 to 1944, 1,354 vehicles were made). There are two possible reasons such a small production. Either Germany could not afford more tanks; one tiger cost 1 million Reichsmarks (about 22,000,000 rubles). Which was twice as expensive as any German tank.

Requirements for a tank weighing 45 tons were received in 1941 by two well-known companies, namely Henschel (Erwin Aders) and Porsche (Ferdinand Porsche) and the prototypes were ready by 1942. Unfortunately for Hitler, Ferdinand's project was not adopted due to the need for scarce materials for production. Aders' project was adopted, but the tower was borrowed from Ferdinand for two reasons. Firstly, the turret of the Henschel tank was only in development, and secondly, the Porsche turret had a more powerful KwK 36 L/56 88mm gun, popularly known as “eight eight”. The first 4 tigers, without any testing and without any training of the crew, were sent to the Leningrad Front (they wanted to carry out the tests during the battle), I think it’s easy to guess what happened to them... Heavy vehicles got stuck in the swamp.

The Tiger's armor turned out to be quite powerful - although without slope, the front plates were 100 mm thick. The chassis consisted of eight staggered double rollers on one side on a torsion bar suspension, which ensured a smooth ride of the tank. But, although the Germans, following the example of the KV and T-34s, used wide tracks, the specific pressure on the ground was still quite large, and on soft soil the Pz Kpfw VI burrowed into the ground (this is one of the disadvantages of this tank).

The Tigers suffered their first losses on January 14, 1943. On the Volkhov front, Soviet soldiers knocked out and then captured an enemy vehicle, after which it was sent to a training ground, where all its strengths and weak sides and instructions were developed to combat this “beast”.

KV-1 (Klim Voroshilov), Soviet heavy tank. It was originally called simply KV (before the creation of the KV-2). There was a misconception that the tank was created during the Finnish campaign to break through Finnish long-term fortifications (the Mannerheim Line). In fact, the design of the tank began at the end of 1938, when it was clear that the concept of multi-turret tanks was a dead end. The KV was created in the late 30s and successfully passed combat tests. Not a single enemy gun could penetrate the KV’s armor. The military’s only disappointment was that the 76-mm L-11 gun was not strong enough to fight the pillboxes. For this purpose, the KV-2 was created with a 152 mm M-10 howitzer. From 1940 to 1942, 2,769 tanks were created.

IS-2 (Joseph Stalin) is a Soviet heavy tank created to fight German “beasts”. The need for a tank more powerful than the KV was caused by the increased effectiveness of German anti-tank defense and the expected mass appearance of heavy German Tiger and Panther tanks at the front. Work on the new model since the spring of 1942 was carried out by a special group of designers (leading designer N.F. Shashmurin), which included A.S. Ermolaev, L.E. Sychev et al.

In the fall of 1943, the project was completed and three prototypes of the machine were produced. After testing, a commission of the State Defense Committee proposed adopting the tank for service, and its serial production began in December 1943.

The tank had an 85-mm semi-automatic cannon designed by F.F. Petrov and weighed a little more than the KV-1S (44 tons), but had thicker armor, rationally distributed over the hull and turret (differentiated armor thickness). The hull was welded from a cast frontal part and rolled sheets of the sides, stern, bottom and roof. The tower is cast. Installation of small-sized planetary rotation mechanisms designed by A.I. Blagonravova made it possible to reduce the width of the IS-1 hull by 18 cm compared to the KV-1S.

However, by that time the 85-mm cannon had also been installed on the T-34-85. It was not practical to produce medium and heavy tanks with the same armament. The team led by F.F. Petrov, presented calculations and layouts for placing a 122-mm gun in a tank. Petrov took as a basis a 122-mm hull cannon of the 1937 model with a slightly shortened barrel and installed it on the cradle of an 85-mm cannon. At the end of December 1943, factory tests of the tank with the new gun began. After a number of improvements (including replacing the piston bolt with a wedge one to increase the rate of fire), the 122-mm semi-automatic tank gun of the 1943 model was accepted for service and installed in the IS-2.

Thanks to well-thought-out design solutions, its size did not increase compared to the KV, but its speed and maneuverability were higher. The machine was distinguished by ease of operation and the ability to quickly replace units in the field.

The 122 mm gun had a muzzle energy 1.5 times greater than the Tiger's 88 mm gun. The armor-piercing projectile weighed 25 kg, had an initial speed of 790 m/s and penetrated armor up to 140 mm thick at a distance of 500 m. The IS-2 received its baptism of fire in the Korsun-Shevchenko operation in February 1944.

In the second quarter of 1944, sighting devices were improved and the gun mantlet was widened. From mid-1944, the IS-2 began to be produced with a modified hull shape - now its frontal part became the same as that of the T-34. Instead of an inspection hatch, the driver received an inspection slot with triplex. The tank was called IS-2M.

If we compare the IS-2 tank with the KV-1, the IS-2 turned out to be faster, easier to operate and repair in the field. The IS-2 was equipped with a D-25T 122mm gun, which was 1.5 times superior to the German “eight-eight” in muzzle energy and was more penetrating. But with a poor rate of fire.

The Germans, knowing in advance that new types of tanks would soon appear in the Soviet Union, in 1942 began to design a new, more armored tank, which was the Königstiger (Tiger II) - the royal tiger, like the IS-2, is one of the most powerful serial heavy tanks and the last tank of Nazi Germany. The situation with its design is almost the same as with the first tiger. Only if in the first case the hull was from Henschel, and the turret from Porsche, then in this case the royal tiger is the full merit of Aders. This monster was armed with the KwK 43 L/71 gun, which was more penetrating than the Soviet D-25T. I would like to add that in the second tiger all the mistakes of the first were corrected. Produced from 1944 to 1945, only 489 tanks were made.

Analyzing the data (Appendix C, Table 5) we can draw the following conclusion that the tiger, compared to the KV-1, was better armored (except for the bottom and roof), had better performance in speed and armament. But the KV was superior to the Tiger in range. The situation with Tiger 2 and IS is the same as that of Tiger with KV. Therefore, I believe that the Tiger is the best heavy tank of the Second World War (no matter how unpatriotic it sounds).

Conclusion

Thus, I half agree with the words from the tankers’ march “The armor is strong, and our tanks are fast.” In the category of medium tanks, we have the superiority of the T-34 by far. But in the category of heavy tanks, in my opinion, the best is the German P-VI Tiger.

Any war is a clash not only of troops, but also of the industrial and economic systems of the warring parties. This question must be remembered when trying to evaluate the merits of certain types of military equipment, as well as the successes of troops achieved using this equipment. When assessing the success or failure of a combat vehicle, you need to clearly remember not only its technical characteristics, but also the costs that were invested in its production, the number of units produced, and so on. In other words, it’s important A complex approach.

The Second World War gave impetus to the development of tank building in all participating countries, and especially the USSR, Germany and Great Britain. Tank troops were and remain the main striking force in ground operations. The best combination of mobility, protection and firepower allows them to solve a wide range of tasks. All this means is that tank forces Not only will they not die out in the foreseeable future, but they will also actively develop. Now Russian tanks are some of the best tanks in the world and are supplied to different countries peace.

List of references and sources

1. Great Patriotic War, 1941-1945. Events. People. Documents: Brief history. Directory / Under general. Ed. O. A. Rzheshevsky; Comp. E.K. Zhigunov. - M.: Politizdat, 1990. - 464 pp.: ill., map.

2. Guderian G., Memoirs of a Soldier: trans. with him. / G. Guderian. - Smolensk: Rusich, 1999.-653 p.

3. History of military art: A textbook for senior military officers educational institutions/ Under general ed. I.Kh. Bagramyan. - M.: Military Publishing House of the USSR Ministry of Defense, 1970. - 308 p.

4. Mernikov A.G. Armed forces of the USSR and Germany 1939-1945./A.G.Mernikov-Minsk: Harvest, 2010.- 352 p.

5. USSR in the Great Patriotic War, 1941-1945: Brief chronicle / I. G. Viktorov, A. P. Emelyanov, L. M. Eremeev and others; Ed. S. M. Klyatskina, A. M. Sinitsina. - 2nd ed. . - M.: Military Publishing House, 1970. - 855 s.

6. Tank yesterday, today, tomorrow [electronic resource] / Encyclopedia of tanks. - 2010. Access mode http://de.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc_tech/4239/Tank, free. (Date of access: 03/10/2017)

7. Battle of Kursk[electronic resource] / Material from Wikipedia - the free encyclopedia. Access mode https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle of Kursk#cite_ref-12, free. (Date of access: 03/10/2017)

8. Tank T-34 - from Moscow to Berlin [electronic resource]. Access mode http://ussr-kruto.ru/2014/03/14/tank-t-34-ot-moskvy-do-berlina/, free. (Date of access: 03/10/2017)

Appendix A

QUESTIONNAIRE.

What tanks of the Great Patriotic War do you know? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What tanks were used in the battle on the Kursk Bulge?The Battle of Kursk took place on July 12, 1943.

1. T-34, BT-7 and T-26 against Pz-3, Pz-2

   T-34, Churchill and KV-1 against Pz-5 "Panther" and Pz-6 "Tiger"

   A-20, T-43 and KV-2 against Pz4, Pz2

Which tank was considered the best in the Soviet Union?

1. What tank was created by the Germans to surpass the T-34?

   1. Pz-5 "Panther"

Which tank do you think is the best?

1. Soviet tank T - 34;

   German tank Pz-5 "Panther";

   Soviet tank KV - 2;

   German tank Pz-6 "Tiger";

   Soviet IS tank.

Appendix B

RESULTS OF THE SURVEY.

Diagram 1.

Diagram 2.

Diagram 3.

Diagram 4.

Diagram 5.

Appendix C

Table 1

Table 2.

Table 3.

Table 4.

Technical characteristics of medium tanks

Table 5.

Technical characteristics of heavy tanks

-When I saw the Russians, I was surprised. How did the Russians get from the Volga to Berlin in such primitive machines? When I saw them and the horses, I thought this couldn't be true. The Germans were technically advanced and their artillery was very much inferior to Russian technology. Do you know why? Everything with us must be accurate. But snow and mud do not help accuracy. When I was captured, I had a Sturmgever, modern weapons, but he refused after three shots - sand hit... - Günter Kühne, Wehrmacht soldier

Any war is a clash not only of troops, but also of the industrial and economic systems of the warring parties. This question must be remembered when trying to evaluate the merits of certain types of military equipment, as well as the successes of troops achieved using this equipment. When assessing the success or failure of a combat vehicle, one must clearly remember not only its technical characteristics, but also the costs that were invested in its production, the number of units produced, and so on. Simply put, an integrated approach is important.
That is why the assessment of a single tank or aircraft and loud statements about the “best” model of war must be critically assessed every time. It is possible to create an invincible tank, but issues of quality almost always conflict with issues of ease of manufacture and mass availability of such equipment. There is no point in creating an invincible tank if the industry cannot organize its mass production, and the cost of the tank will be the same as that of an aircraft carrier. The balance between the combat qualities of the equipment and the ability to quickly establish large-scale production is important.

In this regard, it is of interest how this balance was maintained by the warring powers at different levels of the military-industrial system of the state. How much and what kind of military equipment was produced, and how this affected the results of the war. This article attempts to collect statistical data on the production of armored vehicles by Germany and the USSR during the Second World War and the immediate pre-war period.

Statistics.

The data obtained are summarized in a table, which requires some explanation.

1. Approximate numbers are highlighted in red. They mainly concern two types - captured French equipment, as well as the number of self-propelled guns produced on the chassis of German armored personnel carriers. The first is due to the impossibility of establishing exactly how many trophies were actually used by the Germans in the army. The second is due to the fact that the production of self-propelled guns on an armored personnel carrier chassis was often carried out by retrofitting already produced armored personnel carriers without heavy weapons, by installing a gun with a machine on the armored personnel carrier chassis.

2. The table contains information about all guns, tanks and armored vehicles. For example, in the line “assault guns” the German self-propelled guns sd.kfz.250/8 and sd.kfz.251/9 are taken into account, which are armored personnel carrier chassis with an installed short-barreled 75 cm caliber gun. The corresponding number of linear armored personnel carriers is excluded from the line “armored personnel carriers” and so on.

3. Soviet self-propelled guns did not have a narrow specialization, and could fight both tanks and support infantry. However, they are classified into different categories. For example, the closest to the German assault guns, as conceived by the designers, were the Soviet breakthrough self-propelled guns SU/ISU-122/152, as well as the infantry support self-propelled guns Su-76. And self-propelled guns such as the Su-85 and Su-100 had a pronounced anti-tank character and were classified as “tank destroyers.”

4. The “self-propelled artillery” category includes guns designed primarily for firing from closed positions beyond the direct line of sight of targets, including rocket-propelled mortars on armored chassis. On the Soviet side, only the BM-8-24 MLRS on the T-60 and T-40 chassis fell into this category.

5. Statistics include all production from 1932 to May 9, 1945. It was this technique, one way or another, that constituted the potential of the warring parties and was used in the war. The technology of earlier production was outdated by the beginning of the Second World War and is not of serious importance.

USSR

The data obtained fit well into the well-known historical situation. The production of armored vehicles in the USSR was launched on an incredible, massive scale, which was fully consistent with the aspirations of the Soviet side - preparation for a war of survival in vast areas from the Arctic to the Caucasus. To a certain extent, for the sake of mass production, the quality and debugging of military equipment was sacrificed. It is known that the equipment of Soviet tanks with high-quality communications equipment, optics and interior decoration was significantly worse than that of the Germans.

The obvious imbalance of the weapons system is striking. For the sake of tank production, entire classes of armored vehicles are missing - armored personnel carriers, self-propelled guns, control vehicles, etc. Not least of all, this situation is determined by the desire of the USSR to overcome the serious gap in the main types of weapons, inherited after the collapse of the Republic of Ingushetia and civil war. Attention was focused on saturating the troops with the main striking force - tanks, while support vehicles were ignored. This is logical - it is stupid to invest effort in the design of bridge laying vehicles and ARVs in conditions where the production of the main weapons - tanks - has not been streamlined.

At the same time, the USSR realized the inferiority of such a weapon system, and already on the eve of the Second World War they were actively designing a wide variety of support equipment. These include armored personnel carriers, self-propelled artillery, repair and recovery vehicles, bridge layers, etc. Most of this equipment did not have time to be introduced into production before the start of the Second World War, and already during the war its development had to be stopped. All this could not but affect the level of losses during the fighting. For example, the lack of armored personnel carriers had a negative impact on infantry losses and their mobility. Making multi-kilometer foot marches, the infantrymen lost strength and part of their combat effectiveness even before contact with the enemy.

Gaps in the weapons system were partially filled by Allied supplies. It is no coincidence that the USSR supplied armored personnel carriers, self-propelled guns and self-propelled guns on the chassis of American armored personnel carriers. The total number of such vehicles was about 8,500, which is not much less than the number of tanks received - 12,300.

Germany

The German side followed a completely different path. Having been defeated in WWII, Germany did not lose its design school and did not lose its technological superiority. Let us remind you that in the USSR there was nothing to lose, in Russian Empire no tanks were produced. Therefore, the Germans did not need to overcome the path from an agricultural state to an industrial one in a wild hurry.

Having begun preparations for war, the Germans were well aware that they could defeat numerous and economically powerful opponents in the form of Great Britain and France, and then the USSR, only by ensuring qualitative superiority, which the Germans traditionally do excellently anyway. But the issue of mass participation for Germany was not so acute - relying on the blitzkrieg strategy and the quality of weapons gave a chance to achieve victory with small forces. The first attempts confirmed the success of the chosen course. Although not without problems, the Germans managed to defeat Poland, then France, and so on. The spatial scope of the fighting in the center of compact Europe was quite consistent with the number of tank forces that the Germans had at their disposal. Obviously, these victories further convinced the German command of the correctness of the chosen strategy.

Actually, this is why the Germans initially paid the closest attention to the balance of their weapons system. Here we see the most different types armored vehicles - ZSU, ammunition transporters, forward observer vehicles, ARVs. All this made it possible to build a well-functioning mechanism for waging war, which went like a steamroller throughout Europe. Such close attention to support technology, which also contributes to achieving victory, can only be admired.

Actually, the first shoots of future defeat were laid in this weapon system. The Germans are Germans in everything. Quality and reliability! But as mentioned above, quality and mass production almost always come into conflict. And one day the Germans started a war where everything was different - they attacked the USSR.

Already in the first year of the war, the blitzkrieg mechanism failed. The Russian expanses were absolutely indifferent to the perfectly tuned, but small number of German technology. A different scope was required here. And although the Red Army suffered defeat after defeat, it became difficult for the Germans to maneuver with the modest forces they had. Losses in the protracted conflict grew, and already in 1942 it became obvious that it was impossible to produce high-quality German equipment in the quantities necessary to make up for losses. Or rather, it is impossible in the same mode of operation of the economy. We had to start mobilizing the economy. However, these actions were very late - it was necessary to prepare for the current situation before the attack.

Technique

When assessing the potential of the parties, it is necessary to clearly separate equipment by purpose. The decisive influence on the outcome of the battle is primarily exerted by “battlefield” vehicles - equipment engaged in the destruction of the enemy by direct fire in the forward echelons of troops. These are tanks and self-propelled guns. It should be recognized that in this category the USSR had absolute superiority, producing 2.6 times more military equipment.

Light tanks with machine gun armament, as well as wedges, are placed in a separate category. Formally being tanks, they were of very low combat value for 1941. Neither the German Pz. I, neither the Soviet T-37 and T-38 dare to be included in the same rank with the formidable T-34 and even light BT or T-26. The enthusiasm for such technology in the USSR should be considered not a very successful experiment.

Self-propelled artillery is listed separately. The difference between this category of armored vehicles and assault guns, tank destroyers and other self-propelled guns is the ability to fire from closed positions. Destruction of troops by direct fire is, for them, an exception to the rule rather than a typical task. In essence, these are ordinary field howitzers or MLRS mounted on armored vehicle chassis. Currently, this practice has become the norm; as a rule, any artillery gun has a towed (for example, the 152-mm MSTA-B howitzer) and a self-propelled version (MSTA-S). At that time this was a novelty, and the Germans were among the first to implement the idea of ​​self-propelled artillery covered with armor. The USSR limited itself to only experiments in this area, and the self-propelled guns built using howitzers were used not as classical artillery, but as breakthrough weapons. At the same time, 64 BM-8-24 rocket systems were produced on the T-40 and T-60 chassis. There is information that the troops were satisfied with them, and it is not clear why their mass production was not organized.

The next category is general-arms armored vehicles, whose task is to support first-line equipment, but are not intended to destroy targets on the battlefield. This category includes armored personnel carriers and self-propelled guns on armored chassis, and armored vehicles. It is important to understand that such vehicles, by design, are not intended to fight in the same formation as tanks and infantry, although they should be located behind them in close proximity. It is mistakenly believed that an armored personnel carrier is a battlefield vehicle. In fact, armored personnel carriers were originally intended to transport infantry in the front line and protect them from artillery shell fragments at the initial lines of attack. On the battlefield, armored personnel carriers, armed with a machine gun and protected by thin armor, could not help either infantry or tanks. Their large silhouette makes them a great and easy target. If in reality they entered into battle, it was forced. Vehicles of this category influence the outcome of the battle indirectly - saving the lives and strength of the infantry. Their importance in battle is significantly lower than that of tanks, although they are also necessary. In this category, the USSR practically did not produce its own equipment, and only by the middle of the war acquired a small number of vehicles supplied under Lend-Lease.

The temptation to classify armored personnel carriers as battlefield equipment is fueled by the presence of very weak tanks in the ranks of the Red Army, for example, the T-60. Thin armor, primitive equipment, weak gun - why is the German armored personnel carrier worse? Why is a tank with such weak performance characteristics a battlefield vehicle, but an armored personnel carrier is not? First of all, a tank is a specialized vehicle, the main task of which is precisely the destruction of targets on the battlefield, which cannot be said about an armored personnel carrier. Even though their armor is similar, the tank’s low, squat silhouette, its mobility, and the ability to fire from a cannon clearly speak of its purpose. An armored personnel carrier is precisely a transporter, and not a means of destroying the enemy. However, those German armored personnel carriers that received specialized weapons, for example, 75 cm or 3.7 cm anti-tank guns, are taken into account in the table in the corresponding lines - anti-tank self-propelled guns. This is fair, since this armored personnel carrier was eventually made into a vehicle designed to destroy the enemy on the battlefield, albeit with weak armor and a high, clearly visible silhouette of a transporter.

As for armored vehicles, they were mainly intended for reconnaissance and security. The USSR produced a huge number of vehicles of this class, and the combat capabilities of a number of models came very close to those of light tanks. However, this applies primarily to pre-war equipment. It seems that the effort and money spent on their production could have been spent with the best benefit. For example, if some of them were intended to transport infantry, like conventional armored personnel carriers.

The next category is special vehicles without weapons. Their task is to provide troops, and armor is needed primarily for protection from random fragments and bullets. Their presence in battle formations should be short-term; they do not have to constantly accompany the advancing troops. Their task is to solve specific problems in time and in the right place, moving forward from the rear, avoiding contact with the enemy if possible.

The Germans produced about 700 repair and recovery vehicles, plus about 200 were converted from previously produced equipment. In the USSR, similar vehicles were created only on the basis of the T-26 and were produced in the amount of 183 units. It is difficult to fully assess the potential of the repair forces of the parties, since the matter was not limited to ARVs alone. Having felt the need for this type of equipment, both Germany and the USSR were engaged in handicraft conversion of outdated and partially faulty tanks into tow trucks and tractors. The Red Army had quite a lot of such vehicles with dismantled turrets based on T-34, KV and IS tanks. It is not possible to establish their exact number, since they were all manufactured in combat units of the army, and not in factories. In the German army, despite the presence of specialized ARVs, they also produced similar homemade vehicles, and their number is also unknown.

The Germans intended ammunition transporters primarily to supply advanced artillery units. In the Red Army, the same problem was solved by ordinary trucks, the security of which, of course, was lower.

Forward observer vehicles were also mainly needed by artillerymen. In the modern army, their analogues are the vehicles of senior battery officers and mobile reconnaissance posts of the PRP. However, in those years the USSR did not produce such machines.

In terms of bridge layers, their presence in the Red Army may be surprising. However, it was the USSR that before the war produced 65 of these vehicles based on the T-26 tank under the designation ST-26. The Germans produced several such vehicles based on the Pz IV, Pz II and Pz I. However, neither the Soviet ST-26 nor the German bridge layers had any influence on the course of the war.

Finally, the Germans produced quite a lot of such specific machines as demolition charge stackers. The most widespread of these machines, “Goliath,” was a remote-controlled disposable wedge. This type machines are difficult to classify into any category, their tasks are so unique. The USSR did not produce such machines.

conclusions

When analyzing the impact of weapons release on the consequences of war, two factors must be taken into account - the balance of the weapons system and the balance of equipment in terms of quality/quantity ratio.

The balance of the German army's weapons system is extremely commendable. In the pre-war period, the USSR was unable to create anything like this, although the need for this was recognized by the leadership. The lack of auxiliary equipment had a negative impact on the combat capabilities of the Red Army, primarily in the mobility of support units and infantry. Of all the wide range of auxiliary equipment, it is worth regretting the absence in the Red Army, first of all, of armored personnel carriers and self-propelled vehicles anti-aircraft installations. The absence of such exotic vehicles as remote demolition charges and artillery observer vehicles could be endured without tears. As for ARVs, their role was quite successfully performed by tractors based on tanks with weapons removed, but there are still no armored ammunition transporters in the army, and the troops generally cope with this task with the help of conventional trucks.

The production of armored personnel carriers in Germany should be considered justified. Knowing the cost of military equipment, it is not difficult to calculate that the production of the entire fleet of armored personnel carriers cost the Germans approximately 450 million marks. For this money, the Germans could build about 4000 Pz. IV or 3000 Pz.V. Obviously, such a number of tanks would not greatly affect the outcome of the war.

As for the USSR, its leadership, overcoming the technological gap from Western countries, correctly assessed the importance of tanks as the main striking force of the troops. The emphasis on improving and developing tanks ultimately gave the USSR an advantage over the German army directly on the battlefield. Despite the high utility of support equipment, the decisive role in the outcome of battles was played by battlefield vehicles, which had the highest development priority in the Soviet army. A large number of In the end, the support vehicles did not help Germany win the war, although they probably saved a considerable number of lives of German soldiers.

But the balance between quality and quantity ultimately turned out to be not in Germany’s favor. The traditional tendency of the Germans to strive to achieve the ideal in everything, even where this should be neglected, played a cruel joke. In preparation for war with the USSR, it was necessary to pay close attention to the mass production of equipment. Even the most advanced combat vehicles in small numbers are not capable of turning the tide of events. The gap between the combat capabilities of Soviet and German technology was not so large that German qualitative superiority could play a decisive role. But the quantitative superiority of the USSR turned out to be capable of not only making up for the losses of the first period of the war, but also influencing the course of the war as a whole. The ubiquitous T-34s, supplemented by small Su-76s and T-60s, were everywhere, while the Germans from the very beginning of the Second World War did not have enough equipment to saturate the huge front.

Speaking about the quantitative superiority of the USSR, it is impossible to avoid discussing the traditional template “filled with corpses.” Having discovered such a striking superiority of the Red Army in technology, it is difficult to resist the temptation to put forward the thesis that we fought with numbers, and not with skill. Such statements must be stopped immediately. No one, even the most talented commander, will give up quantitative superiority over the enemy, even if he can fight with many times fewer troops. Quantitative superiority gives the commander the greatest opportunity to plan a battle and does not at all mean an inability to fight with small numbers. If you have a lot of troops, this does not mean that you will immediately enthusiastically throw them into a frontal attack, in the hope that they will crush the enemy with their mass. Whatever quantitative superiority there is, it is not infinite. Ensuring your troops can operate in greater numbers is the most important task of industry and the state. And the Germans understood this very well, having squeezed everything they could out of their economy in 1943-45 in an attempt to achieve at least not superiority, but parity with the USSR. They did not do it the best way, but the Soviet side did it excellently. Which became one of the many bricks in the foundation of victory.

P.S.
The author does not consider this work exhaustive and final. Perhaps there will be specialists who can significantly supplement the information presented. Any reader can familiarize himself with the collected statistics in detail by downloading from the link below full version statistical table presented in this article.
https://yadi.sk/i/WWxqmJlOucUdP

References:
A.G. Solyankin, M.V. Pavlov, I.V. Pavlov, I.G. Zheltov “Domestic armored vehicles. XX century." (in 4 volumes)
V. Oswald. "Complete catalog of military vehicles and tanks of Germany 1900 - 1982."
P. Chamberlain, H. Doyle, “Encyclopedia of German tanks of the Second World War.”

Modern war will be a war of engines. Motors on the ground, motors in the air, motors on the water and underwater. Under these conditions, the one who has more engines and a larger power reserve will win.
Joseph Stalin
At a meeting of the Main Military Council, January 13, 1941.

During the years of the pre-war five-year plans Soviet designers created new models of small arms, artillery, mortars and aircraft. More and more advanced destroyers, cruisers, patrol ships, special attention was also paid to the development of the submarine fleet.

As a result, before the start of the Great Patriotic War, the USSR had a fairly modern system of weapons and military equipment, and according to some tactical and technical characteristics even surpassed German weapons analogues. Therefore, the main reasons for the defeats of the Soviet troops in the initial period of the war cannot be attributed to miscalculations in the technical equipment of the troops.

TANKS
As of June 22, 1941, the Red Army had 25,621 tanks.
The most popular were the light T-26s, of which there were almost 10 thousand vehicles, and representatives of the BT family - there were about 7.5 thousand of them. A significant proportion were wedges and small amphibious tanks - a total of almost 6 thousand were in service with the Soviet troops. modifications T-27, T-37, T-38 and T-40.
The most modern KV and T-34 tanks at that time numbered about 1.85 thousand units.

Heavy tank KV-1

The KV-1 entered service in 1939 and was mass-produced from March 1940 to August 1942. The tank's mass was up to 47.5 tons, which made it much heavier than existing German tanks. He was armed with a 76 mm cannon.
Some experts consider the KV-1 to be a landmark vehicle for global tank building, which had a significant impact on the development of heavy tanks in other countries.

The Soviet tank had a so-called classic layout - the division of the armored hull from bow to stern successively into a control compartment, a combat compartment and an engine compartment. It also received an independent torsion bar suspension, all-round anti-ballistic protection, diesel engine and one relatively powerful weapon. Previously, these elements were found separately on other tanks, but in the KV-1 they were brought together for the first time.
The first combat use of the KV-1 dates back to the Soviet-Finnish War: a prototype of the tank was used on December 17, 1939 during the breakthrough of the Mannerheim Line.
In 1940-1942, 2,769 tanks were produced. Until 1943, when the German Tiger appeared, the KV was the most powerful tank of the war. At the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, he received the nickname “ghost” from the Germans. Standard shells from the Wehrmacht's 37mm anti-tank gun did not penetrate its armor.

Medium tank T-34
In May 1938, the Automotive and Tank Directorate of the Red Army invited plant No. 183 (now the Kharkov Transport Engineering Plant named after V. A. Malyshev) to create a new tracked tank. Under the leadership of Mikhail Koshkin, the A-32 model was created. The work proceeded in parallel with the creation of the BT-20, an improved modification of the already mass-produced BT-7 tank.

Prototypes of the A-32 and BT-20 were ready in May 1939; based on the results of their tests in December 1939, the A-32 received a new name - T-34 - and was put into service with the condition of modifying the tank: bringing the main armor to 45 millimeters, improve visibility, install a 76-mm cannon and additional machine guns.
In total, by the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, 1066 T-34s were manufactured. After June 22, 1941, production of this type was launched at the Krasnoye Sormovo plant in Gorky (now Nizhny Novgorod), Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant, Uralmash in Sverdlovsk (now Yekaterinburg), plant No. 174 in Omsk and Uralvagonzavod (Nizhny Tagil).

In 1944, serial production of the T-34-85 modification began with a new turret, reinforced armor and an 85-mm gun. The tank has also proven itself well due to its ease of production and maintenance.
In total, more than 84 thousand T-34 tanks were manufactured. This model took part not only in the Great Patriotic War, it was in many armed conflicts in Europe, Asia and Africa in the 1950-1980s. The last documented case of combat use of T-34s in Europe was their use during the war in Yugoslavia.

By the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, Soviet aviation was armed with many types of combat aircraft. In 1940 and the first half of 1941, almost 2.8 thousand modern vehicles entered the troops: Yak-1, MiG-3, LaGG-3, Pe-2, Il-2.
There were also I-15 bis, I-16 and I-153 fighters, TB-3, DB-3, SB (ANT-40) bombers, multi-purpose R-5 and U-2 (Po-2).
The new aircraft of the Red Army Air Force were not inferior to the Luftwaffe aircraft in combat capabilities, and even surpassed them in a number of indicators.

Sturmovik Il-2
The Il-2 armored attack aircraft is the most popular combat aircraft in the world. In total, more than 36 thousand cars were produced. He was called the “flying tank,” the Wehrmacht leadership called him “the Black Death” and “Iron Gustav.” German pilots nicknamed the Il-2 “concrete plane” for its high combat survivability.

First combat units, which were armed with these machines, were created just before the war. Attack aircraft units were successfully used against enemy mechanized and armored units. At the beginning of the war, the Il-2 was practically the only aircraft that, given the superiority of German aviation, fought the enemy in the air. He played a big role in containing the enemy in 1941.
During the war years, several modifications of the aircraft were created. The Il-2 and its further development, the Il-10 attack aircraft, were actively used in all major battles of the Great Patriotic War and in the Soviet-Japanese War.
The maximum horizontal speed of the aircraft at the ground was 388 km/h, and at an altitude of 2000 m – 407 km/h. The ascent time to a height of 1000 m is 2.4 minutes, and the turn time at this height is 48-49 seconds. At the same time, in one combat turn, the attack aircraft gained a height of 400 meters.

MiG-3 night fighter
The design team, headed by A. I. Mikoyan and M. I. Gurevich, worked hard in 1939 on a fighter for combat at high altitudes. In the spring of 1940, a prototype was built, which received the MiG-1 brand (Mikoyan and Gurevich, the first). Subsequently, its modernized version received the name MiG-3.

Despite the significant take-off weight (3350 kg), the speed of the production MiG-3 at the ground exceeded 500 km/h, and at an altitude of 7 thousand meters it reached 640 km/h. This was the highest speed achieved at that time on production aircraft. Due to the high ceiling and high speed at an altitude of over 5 thousand meters, the MiG-3 was effectively used as a reconnaissance aircraft, as well as an air defense fighter. However, poor horizontal maneuverability and relatively weak weapons did not allow it to become a full-fledged front-line fighter.
According to the estimates of the famous ace Alexander Pokryshkin, while inferior in the horizontal direction, the MiG-3 was significantly superior to the German Me109 in vertical maneuver, which could serve as the key to victory in a clash with fascist fighters. However, only top-class pilots could successfully fly the MiG-3 in vertical turns and at extreme overloads.

FLEET
By the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, the Soviet fleet had a total of 3 battleships and 7 cruisers, 54 leaders and destroyers, 212 submarines, 287 torpedo boats and many other ships.

The pre-war shipbuilding program provided for the creation of a “large fleet”, the basis of which would be large surface ships - battleships and cruisers. In accordance with it, in 1939-1940, battleships of the " Soviet Union" and the heavy cruisers "Kronstadt" and "Sevastopol", the unfinished cruiser "Petropavlovsk" was purchased in Germany, but plans for a radical renewal of the fleet were not destined to come true.
IN pre-war years Soviet sailors received new light cruisers of the Kirov type, leaders of destroyers of projects 1 and 38, destroyers of project 7 and other ships. The construction of submarines and torpedo boats was booming.
Many ships were completed during the war, some of them never took part in the battles. These include, for example, the Project 68 Chapaev cruisers and the Project 30 Ognevoy destroyers.
The main types of surface ships of the pre-war period:
light cruisers of the "Kirov" type,
leaders of the "Leningrad" and "Minsk" types,
destroyers of the "Wrathful" and "Soobrazitelny" type,
minesweepers of the "Fugas" type,
torpedo boats "G-5",
sea ​​hunters "MO-4".
The main types of submarines of the pre-war period:
small submarines of the "M" type ("Malyutka"),
medium submarines of the "Shch" ("Pike") and "S" ("Medium") types,
underwater minelayers type "L" ("Leninets"),
large submarines of types "K" ("Cruiser") and "D" ("Decembrist").

Kirov-class cruisers
Light cruisers of the Kirov class became the first Soviet surface ships of this class, not counting the three Svetlana cruisers laid down under Nicholas II. Project 26, according to which the Kirov was built, was finally approved in the fall of 1934 and developed the ideas of the Italian light cruisers of the Condotieri family.

The first pair of cruisers, Kirov and Voroshilov, were laid down in 1935. They entered service in 1938 and 1940. The second pair, "Maxim Gorky" and "Molotov", were built according to a modified design and joined the Soviet fleet in 1940-1941. Two more cruisers were laid down at Far East, before the end of the Great Patriotic War, only one of them, “Kalinin,” was put into operation. Far Eastern cruisers also differed from their predecessors.
The total displacement of the Kirov-class cruisers ranged from approximately 9450-9550 tons for the first pair to almost 10,000 tons for the last. These ships could reach speeds of 35 knots or more. Their main armament was nine 180mm B-1-P guns mounted in three-gun turrets. On the first four cruisers, anti-aircraft weapons were represented by six B-34 100 mm caliber mounts, 45 mm 21-K and 12.7 mm machine guns. In addition, the Kirovs carried torpedoes, mines and depth charges, and seaplanes.
"Kirov" and "Maxim Gorky" spent almost the entire war supporting the defenders of Leningrad with gunfire. "Voroshilov" and "Molotov", built in Nikolaev, took part in fleet operations on the Black Sea. All of them survived the Great Patriotic War - they were destined for a long service. Kirov was the last to leave the fleet in 1974.

Pike-class submarines
“Pikes” became the most popular Soviet submarines of the Great Patriotic War, not counting “Malyutoks”.

Construction of the first series of four submarines began in the Baltic in 1930; the Pike entered service in 1933-1934.
These were medium-class submarines with an underwater displacement of about 700 tons, and their armament consisted of six 533-mm torpedo tubes and a 45-mm 21-K cannon.
The project was successful, and by the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, more than 70 Shchukas were in service (a total of 86 submarines were built in six series).
Submarines of the Shch type were actively used in all naval theaters of war. Of the 44 Shchuk that fought, 31 were lost. The enemy lost almost 30 ships from their actions.

Despite a number of shortcomings, the “Pikes” were distinguished by their comparative cheapness, maneuverability and survivability. From series to series - a total of six series of these submarines were created - they improved their seaworthiness and other parameters. In 1940, two Shch-class submarines were the first in the Soviet fleet to receive equipment that made it possible to fire torpedoes without leaking air (which often unmasked the attacking submarine).
Although only two Shchukas of the latest X-bis series entered service after the war, these submarines remained in the fleet for a long time and were decommissioned in the late 1950s.

ARTILLERY
According to Soviet data, on the eve of the Great Patriotic War the army had almost 67.5 thousand guns and mortars.

It is believed that Soviet field artillery was even superior to German in terms of combat qualities. However, it was poorly equipped with mechanized traction: agricultural tractors were used as tractors, and up to half of the implements were transported using horses.
The army was armed with many types artillery pieces and mortars. Anti-aircraft artillery consisted of guns of 25, 37, 76 and 85 millimeters; howitzer - modifications of caliber 122, 152, 203 and 305 millimeters. The main anti-tank gun was the 45mm model 1937, the regimental gun was the 76mm model 1927, and the divisional gun was the 76mm model 1939.

Model 1937 45mm anti-tank gun
This weapon became one of the most famous representatives Soviet artillery Great Patriotic War. It was developed under the leadership of Mikhail Loginov based on the 1932 45 mm gun.

The main combat qualities of the 45-millimeter included maneuverability, rate of fire (15 rounds per minute) and armor penetration.
By the beginning of the war, the army had more than 16.6 thousand guns of the 1937 model. In total, over 37.3 thousand of these guns were produced, and production was curtailed only by 1944, despite the presence of more modern models of the ZiS-2 and the similar caliber M-42.

Katyusha rocket artillery combat vehicle
The day before the start of the Great Patriotic War, the BM-13 rocket artillery combat vehicle, later called “Katyusha,” was adopted by the Red Army. It became one of the world's first multiple launch rocket systems.

The first combat use took place on July 14, 1941 near the railway station in the city of Orsha (Belarus). A battery under the command of Captain Ivan Flerov destroyed a concentration of German military equipment at the Orsha railway junction with volley fire.
Due to its high efficiency of use and ease of production, by the autumn of 1941 the BM-13 was widely used at the front, having a significant impact on the course of hostilities.
The system made it possible to fire a salvo with the entire charge (16 missiles) in 7-10 seconds. There were also modifications with an increased number of guides and other versions of the missiles.
During the war, about 4 thousand BM-13s were lost. In total, about 7 thousand units of this type were manufactured, and Katyushas were discontinued only after the war - in October 1946.

WEAPON
Despite the widespread introduction of tanks and aircraft and the strengthening of artillery, infantry weapons remained the most widespread. According to some estimates, if in the First world war losses from small arms did not exceed 30% of the total, then in World War II they grew to 30-50%.
Before the Great Patriotic War, the supply of rifles, carbines and machine guns to the troops was growing, but the Red Army was significantly inferior to the Wehrmacht in terms of the number of automatic weapons such as submachine guns.

Mosin rifle
The 7.62 mm Mosin rifle, adopted for service in 1891, remained the main weapon of the Red Army infantryman. In total, about 37 million of these rifles were produced.

Modifications of the 1891/1930 model had to fight during the most difficult months of the beginning of the Great Patriotic War. Thanks to its low cost and reliability, the weapon outperformed its young self-loading rivals.
The latest version of the “three-line” was the 1944 model carbine, distinguished by the presence of a non-removable needle bayonet. The rifle became even shorter, the technology was simplified, and combat maneuverability increased - with a shorter carbine it is easier to conduct close combat in thickets, trenches, and fortifications.
In addition, it was Mosin’s design that formed the basis sniper rifle, adopted for service in 1931 and becoming the first Soviet rifle specifically designed for “sharp shooting and primarily destroying enemy command personnel.”

PPSh
The 7.62 mm Shpagin submachine gun was adopted for service in 1941.

This legendary weapon has become part of the image of a victorious soldier - it can be seen in the most famous monuments. The PPSh-41 fell in love with the soldiers, receiving from them the affectionate and respectful nickname “daddy.” It fired in almost any weather conditions and was relatively inexpensive.
By the end of the war, about 55% of the fighters were armed with PPSh. In total, about 6 million pieces were produced.