Get PDF T-34/76 & T-34/85

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online T-34/76 & T-34/85 file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with T-34/76 & T-34/85 book. Happy reading T-34/76 & T-34/85 Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF T-34/76 & T-34/85 at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF T-34/76 & T-34/85 Pocket Guide.

T – Global wiki. xokyhidonu.tk

Cost Credits , Experience 27, Crew Commander. Radio Operator. Characteristics Reset Configuration. Tech Tree. T , 11, Medium Tank V. T , 27, Medium Tank VI. Join the community More than ,, players. Join us on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter , subscribers. Watch us on YouTube , subscribers. Select a region. Of the total of 20 Soviet tanks lost in , approximately 2 were Ts and over were mostly KV heavy tanks.

Individual tank commanders lacked situational awareness due to the poor provision of vision devices and preoccupation with gunnery duties. In comparison Soviet tanks had a generally rough and ready finish, and lacked many features which were assumed essential by German tankers and to a large extent by their Western Allied counterparts. There were of course considerably more Soviet tanks, which ultimately helped them to win the war.

Tigers were meant to act as parts of assault groups, accompanied by infantry, assault guns, and tank destroyers. Even if a s. Abt goes off on its own and starts fighting enemy tanks, we run into a different problem. German tank losses were counted much differently than Soviet losses. A German tank is considered lost if it is destroyed, and, more importantly, there is no longer hope of recovering it. That is why losses can show up days, even weeks, after the tanks have actually been destroyed. When looking for German tanks losses, a much more reliable method is to look at dead crew members.

Pretty sneaky. KVs: 1 actually destroyed by the Germans, 4 lost in total. Germans claim 5 KVs. He debunks many of the revisionists myths, but of course there are far more people with an axe to grind against the USSR and its WW2 performance than their are people interested in the real truth. Also if I may add the article here in Tank Encyclopedia is good, but it does include some the details the revisionist who have an axe to grin against the USSR have written. The T was a good tank, but any good tank will perform badly if its crew is only given 3 days of classroom training and then expected to perform, add this the political mess the army was in during the first half of the war and you get what you get.

Then of course the lack of radios on models until meant that every tank sent into battle without a radio was an incomplete tank. The most important part that people seem to have forgotten over the years. A tank is an anti soft target weapon, it often, but not always, is meant to fight infantry and soft vehicles. Anti-tank weapons both stationary and mobile are meant to be used against other tanks. The T is a good example of this.


  • The free-market innovation machine : analyzing the growth miracle of capitalism.
  • Russias Financial Markets Boom, Crisis and Recovery 1995-2001: Lessons for Emerging Markets Investors.
  • Judaism of the Second Temple Period: Qumran and Apocalypticism: 1?
  • The Tank Museum | E.
  • Locality, Regeneration and Divers c ities (Advances in Art and Urban Futures (Vol. 1)).
  • The Political Thought of Joseph Stalin: A Study in Twentieth Century Revolutionary Patriotism?
  • The Heads Of Horror (Superpowers, Book 2);

Hello John, thanks for you insight. The T article will be adressed and probably rewritten in the future, however we do not consider the revisionistic tankarchives to be a reliable, independent source there have been discrepancies between posted material and inquiries which we directed towards the Bovington Tank Museum , neither the WoT forums occassionally, useful information is posted, but usually out of context.

They do not fullfill the criteria of correct research, i. Primary sources are always desireable with 2ndaries supporting the postulate. If WoT or WT would represent the benchmark for tank warfare, then the Soviets would rely on flag communication during 41 and the Germans would have fuel shortages in I do not see how your posts and their content, which is known debunk any of the problems that were present with the vehicle, you have to admit that histography tended to notoriously overglorify its performance.

It has to be pointed out that out of 55, Ts, 46, perished during the war, a testimony to its performance, regardless of the cause. If any German weapon system would have sustained such losses during the war, literature would have titled it as a failure. The T is a victim of wartime propaganda and was used as an alibi for the Wehrmacht or their failures for that matter. The Aberdeen trials were never truly published, the only information is of nuncupative nature.

Accuracy is a relative term, I do not see a big issue with that you cannot do many mistakes with such a gun design anyway, at least regarding the paper characteristics. The problem revolved around the optics which were initially of lower quality besides a FCE penalty and radio insufficiencies up until 43 or a bottleneck of unskilled labour and that is only scratching the surface.

However quality and accuracy are relative terms, German and British guns enjoyed an advantage. Cause of tank losses differed by front and period, in a defensive phase AT guns played a more significant role, if we look at causes of T losses, it is obvious that in the initial phases of Barbarossa many tanks were destroyed by mm fire besides the most common element, operational losses and abandonment and later to It is noteworthy that during evaluations both Soviet and German alike it was observed that it was difficult to determine if a tank has been hit by an AT round from a tank or from an anti-tank gun.

Such a method of fighting against attacking tanks leads to enormous irreparable losses in their ranks. Crew mortality on the eastern front tended to be higher than in the ETO 44, compare Ref. If anything the Panzerkampfwagen VIs role in the war was subsidiary.

Pure Tank vs tank contigencies occured rarely, but If we look on the outcomes of Panzer battles, the Germans frequently sustained lower casualties. This gap can be partially explained by the discrepancy in development levels of both nations, besides direct factors such as recovery and repair, training and control of the battlefield. If we look at combat reports on the eastern front multiple tank engagement samples , it becomes apparent that the Axis forces enjoyed a substantial advantage CEV. Of these, 1, T26 and T70 combat lost, 73 T26 and T70 depot repaired.

Soviet reports do depict a rather grim picture. Kursk is a good example, since both armies were at their Apex strength. The battle marked the prelude to the heavy fighting in 43 and casualty wise it was undecisive. Since these discussions tend to cause emotional upstir, with vanities taking over, this can be discomfortable for certain individuals whenever pointing out the differences, perhaps due to the political incorrect nature of these statements.

Building on the BT-7

TE does not have a personal agenda and there is no intention or personal motivation to specifically discredit any weapon system. It will not participate in intentionally distorting historical facts and attempts to avoid heated debates. I hope the readers can respect this. I hate to be a Grinch buuuuut, WoT tends to make stuff up.

Take a look at the tech tree. Just for the record Wot is still just as fun. Their crummy motors were prone to seizure at any moment. The transmission so hard to shift that the bow gunner kept a sledgehammer nearby to beat on the shifter lever while changing gears. Their Christie suspension used long undamped coil springs which would cause the tank to rock when traveling over uneven ground and continue to rock for several minutes after coming to a stop to fire the main gun. The T had so many problems that there was a constant shortage of replacement parts for years. Stalin believed that many were sabotaging their tanks to avoid being sent into combat so had the units investigated and found out they were issued unreliable junk instead.

The Germans captured huge numbers and wanted to use them, so tried correcting the transmission woes then gave up once it became obvious that the engine was junk, too. They still used them but in a limited fashion and used spares gleaned from knocked out Soviet tanks. On the other hand, the Soviet tankers were very happy with their Lend-Lease Shermans.

One commander mentioned hiding beneath one with the crew after taking a hit which set the tank on fire. Incorrect caption. Such as she with weapons in her hands destroyed murderers and invaders, the enemies of mankind. Remember about them! There is no politics, only gratitude to great people. I see. Her example is one of thousands. Well, official propaganda, well, they have such a task, everyone does their work.

As for the bokovnikov, it really can be placing good pictures, you need to think about the correctness of Russian inscriptions? Is it a good tone to correctly write in foreign languages, agree? Russian language is not so mysterious. Translation: As for the Battle of Kursk, it should be noted that the Germans actively used the T in their attacking orders.

Approximately one Tiger or Panther had one T Unfortunately, there is little to write about this, but there is a photo of the German side and very characteristic, for example, where between the Tigers there are thirty quarters. Or panoramic — where there are at least 20 T It should be noted that practically all German Ts were lost in that battle perhaps some of them were captured by Soviet troops back.

This is by the way about the use of trophy Soviet equipment by the Germans. In general, the arms of various German units consisted of approximately T different modifications. Often these machines do not pass through official records. And it should be noted that really mass use of T by the Germans was possible only in the territory of the USSR, in connection with the available opportunity to replenish fuel reserves.

Soviet Medium Tank T-34/76

In general, I must say that the T was a good tank. Of course, he had inherent flaws, which were mentioned in t. And here perhaps too biased, which is understandable — the resentment to defeat did not go away, although it took so long, the Soviet soldiers won, and the vaunted German, etc. I have a question. So, the T is able to mount the L, the F, and another 76mm gun known as the S Was this ever actually created for the T? If this was actually created, was it created in as the game claiming? By some accounts maybe from the ancient boardgame system Advanced Squad Leader?

Seems the Soviets resisted the use of turret baskets through some JS variants Is this true? Not sure if this is what was referenced, but lack of a turret basket does make traversing more difficult for the crew and less efficient crew performance. The turret can traverse the same range as any other, but it may make them slower to get on target, slower to reload, more likely to trip over each other, etc. This vastly increases the complexity of stopping the enemy attacks. Even when they started building more, it complicated things, because they are a lot more expensive and harder to use than a 37mm AT gun.

Sure, the army has. The best way is to hide in ambush and snipe him in the face when he gets within 50yds of you. It really limits what you can do tactically.

Now that the only tanks that could move about sure of dealing with the enemy were the Tigers, things got a lot harder for the Pz III and IV crews. They called them all Ts. We use these designations because we need a short hand to refer to particular variants. T could be and was destroyed by 7. Of course, you can argue about how effective each of those guns were against the T, but the 75 mm definitely had no problem with the T And there were plenty of those around. Moreover, the commander was also responsible for loading the gun, due to the four men crew.

I was also under the impression that the GUNNER was the commander, and that one of the big problems was that all he could see most of the time is what he saw through his sighting periscope. You only have to send half as many men to training the first way, what training they did give them. In any case, I read you saying one thing, and others saying the opposite.


  1. The Heart of the Warrior (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, No 17).
  2. Through Our Eyes: African American Mens Experiences of Race, Gender, and Violence.
  3. Multi-Hamiltonian Theory of Dynamical Systems!
  4. T/76 Soviet medium tank.
  5. t vs t - Questions&Answers - Heroes & Generals.
  6. Clinical Recognition of Congenital Heart Disease, 5Th Edition.
  7. I was right. Google it.

    Plenty of other places say the same though; only saw one that claimed that the loader was commander, and that was some guy on a WOT forum. Your email address will not be published. Soviet Union Medium tank — 35, built. Captured vehicles Beutepanzer Panzerkampfwagen T r , with the dunkelgrau livery.

    January 5, at pm. Phil says:. February 17, at pm. Shrimpman says:. April 8, at pm. Stan Lucian says:. Stiltzkin says:. June 1, at pm. May 31, at pm. Hyperion says:. March 28, at pm. March 29, at am. Anthony Lathrop says:. DrTankman says:. In firepower, the barrel 76 mm T penetrated any German tank with ease. With the ZIS-5 they could penetrate armor of mm ammunition calibrated at 90 or meters. In , it began to struggle against the scope of the Panther 75 mm or 88 mm of Tiger I. On the other hand it also allowed frontally drilling these with tungsten core ammunition which could penetrate mm at meters, sufficient distance against the Panther and Tiger I.

    Regarding mobility, wide tracks of T, its good suspension and great engine gave them performance in all types of terrain unparalleled German tanks first generation could not achieve this performance, because of their narrow tracks did get stuck and unable to maneuver in places where the T could go with ease. In short, T hardness made it one of the best tanks in the first half of the conflict.

    Moreover their weaknesses. First the very poor ergonomics it had despite the improvements made. In the versions mounting cannon 76 mm turret there was only room for two people it was so narrow. The visibility of the commander in small battle, the terrible hatch opening, which opened frontally, forced it to use a visor and a horizontal periscope to see the ground, in addition to having to handle functions of charger. German, British and American tanks owned turrets for up to three men, so that the commander was only dedicated to that, to command the platoon.