Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Russian T34-85

Discussion in 'Eastern Europe' started by denny, Feb 25, 2015.

  1. denny

    denny Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    47
    Location:
    USA, CA, Solano County
    http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/soviet/soviet_T34-85.php
    One of you guys made me hip to this sight earlier. (thanks btw)

    I guess the 34-85 was not (or not really) at The Kursk battle.?
    If I am reading this stuff correctly, it was refined and into production well after the battle was over. I always thought it was there in numbers for some reason.

    They say The Russians were fairly successful fighting the "tank fists" by welding bed frames (or variants of) onto the sides of their tanks. I guess it was rather effective in making the panzerfaust shoot its load (mostly) on the outside of the tank armor...especially the sides.
    I had never seen, or heard of this before. Amazing the things humans will think of, when they are trying to stay alive.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    372
    The Germans had their steel skirts hanging on the sides (originally designed to thwart Soviet AT rifles) and also used steel mesh fencing for protection against HEAT rounds. In the West, you coul find logs railroad ties and sandbags decorating Shermans but I've read somewhere that these weren't very effective against "Fausts". Every HEAT round had an optimum stand-off distance for maximum penetration. Once you get inside or outside this distance penetration falls off.
     
  3. edhunter76

    edhunter76 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    50
    I think that the logs are to help to get the tank moving or off from mud for example if stuck in. I don't think they was attached to tanks in covering purpose at all. If you look pictures of American tanks for example after D-Day, you'll see that there are all kind of things hanging on sides of their tanks. That is because every crew took with them what they felt was necessary, like spare wheels or tracks etc. Of course, some might thought they'll add extra coverage to their tanks, some might have thought that they'll need those things for some other reason.

    Could someone confirm if this is the case or not?
     
  4. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    I'm pretty sure I've seen it mentioned in quite a few places that the logs were intended as armor. Vs shape charges they probably weren't very effective. The bed spring may have been better if they could catch the Panzerfaust round and not detonate it. If it detonated on them they were probably worse than the logs.
     
  5. denny

    denny Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    47
    Location:
    USA, CA, Solano County
    I THINK what the bed frames/springs did was to activate the charge away from the tank...activating it before it hit the armor, and so using up enough of its power between the time it hit the frame and the tank to make a big difference.
     
    Sloniksp likes this.
  6. edhunter76

    edhunter76 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    50
    Now I'm just speculating here, but how about magnetic anti-tank mines? Germans for example put Zimmerit paint/paste to theirs to fight against magnetic anti-tank mines or ammo. Logs or sandbags were cheap and easy way to have protection against magnetic anti-tank mines, but of course logs were used also to get the tank off from mud if stuck and also to get the tracks back on.
     
  7. edhunter76

    edhunter76 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    50
    Yes, you are actually quite right. The meaning of these were to protect against infantry held Panzerfaust weapons and used mainly in urban fights. Look it up from the link. There is one version in the pictures with welded bed frames.

    Great tank btw this T34-85.

    http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/soviet/soviet_T34-85.php
     
  8. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    This was actually counter productive with HEAT rounds of the time however. If you look at modern HEAT rounds they have a fairly long "nose" so that the chage is detonated some distance before it contacts the armor. It turns out that it takes a little while for the slug/jet/whatever to form. To get maximum penetration you want it well formed before it impacts the armor. I haven't actually worked the numbers and I'm not sure I know enough to but for a Panzerfaust, from what I've read, the standoff imposed by a set of bed springs would result in a much better formed jet and grearter penetration.
     
  9. denny

    denny Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    47
    Location:
    USA, CA, Solano County
    Maybe we are all idiots, and the Russians pulled them off at night to have a comfy place to sleep.
    They used them for something.......
     
  10. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Well the effect of stand off wasn't well understood at the time so while it may have been counter productive that doesn't mean that they knew it was. Just like the logs may have been counter productive but they were used for it anyway.
     
  11. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Well, all Heat rounds have some sort of conical nose, so that the detonate at the correct distance from the armor.

    However, regarding a "modern" HEAT round with a "fairly long nose", you are incorrect in the assumption that this is part of the main warhead. The "long nose" on most modern HEAT missiles is a probe with a precursor explosive charge intended to defeat/detonate any ERA/Reactive armor that is placed on the tank. By defeating the ERA charge, the tank's armor is now vulnerable to the missile's main warhead.
     
  12. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
  13. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Seems that the Germans and Soviets were not the only ones using bedsprings and chicken wire near the end of the war.
    [​IMG]
     
  14. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    If you look at the picture of the 3BK14M round here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/125_mm_smoothbore_ammunition
    you will note that it has said probe and the text notes that it entered service in 1968 well before reactive armor was being deployed.
    This image also notes that the "probe" is for standoff:
    http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://64.78.11.86/uxofiles/mulvaney/images/105-HEAT-T-M456A2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://uxoinfo.com/blogcfc/client/includes/uxopages/Mulvaney_Details.cfm?Ord_Id%3DP137&h=400&w=600&tbnid=79JTgmA5sQxsZM:&zoom=1&docid=kXDYnCEjM4NaTM&hl=en&ei=S0nuVKTEB4fksAT6voGgBA&tbm=isch&ved=0CCEQMygEMAQ
    These pictures of the M830 don't mention any precursor charge on their probes either.
    https://www.google.com/search?q=M830+HEAT&safe=active&hl=en&biw=1080&bih=1791&site=imghp&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=oE3uVPKuHpH7sASuhIGQAQ&ved=0CCYQsAQ

    Modern rounds do have precurser charges on their probes but originally the probe was to provide stand off. I will note that the "probe" was not universal and some HEAT rounds did use a concial windshield and possibly other components to provide stand off.

    Found this on Wiki:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-explosive_anti-tank_warhead
    And then it goes on to say in a note at the end.
     
  15. denny

    denny Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    47
    Location:
    USA, CA, Solano County
    "During the battle for the Seelowe Heights on the approaches to Berlin, tankers of the 11th Tank Corps and several other units created improvised anti-panzerfaust screens by taking bed springs from German homes and fasĀ­tening them to the turret and hull side.
    The aim was to detonate the panzerfaust warhead before it struck the armour, weakening its penetration power."

    .....that is what they are saying.....to get the faust head to go off before it hits the tank.
     
  16. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    That was the logic used for the sand bags and logs on Shermans as well. Just turns out that it wasn't correct.
     
  17. von Poop

    von Poop Waspish

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    6,300
    Likes Received:
    1,919
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    Finnish Stug:
    Wall of logs.

    [​IMG]

    That would be rather a lot of unditching beams.
    Definitely armour.

    T34.
    A log or two:

    [​IMG]

    Unditching beams.
    Context, innit.



    There's been some controversy over the years as to whether the 'bedstead' fittings were a field mod, or something officially issued.
    Given the number of photographs of Berlin T34s and the relative scarcity of glimpses of the bedsteads, I think I lean towards the former, though of course that doesn't rule out a trial of some sort; some of them do seem quite professionally done.

    Entering a large city against an enemy with much Panzerschreck/faust & hafthohlladung type stuff... why not give it a whirl.
    I also wonder somewhat at a possible advantage in grenade defence. less chance of a geballte ladung 'bundle' finding a place to lodge.
     
  18. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Ok, my mistake. I believed you were only talking about anti-tank missiles.


    Remember it is Wiki...It often leaves out more than it tells you. The increased penetration was not because the developers simply slapped an extended probe on the nose.

    Both the MILAN II and the BGM-71C Improved TOW(ITOW) utilized new warheads that needed longer distances to form.
    For instance the "old" warhead of the BGM-71B
    http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Weapons/TOW_Warhead.gif

    The "new" warhead of the BGM-71C
    http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Weapons/ITOW_Warhead.gif
     
  19. denny

    denny Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    47
    Location:
    USA, CA, Solano County
    10-4
    It sure sounded like a good idea to me, but I understand what you are saying. Might have been a bit of the Goldie Locks Syndrome.....maybe if those frames had stuck out another 6 inches, the faust would have started to eat itself up before it could get at the steel.
    I did not really do a thorough job of reading, but it sounds like, maybe, they implemented that technique "later" in the war...and the end was near by the time they realized the mistake.......?
     
  20. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    26,461
    Likes Received:
    2,207
    No it was not used in Zitadelle

    Iit seems the mass production started in Jan 1944
     

Share This Page