Tuesday 23 June 2015

Finnish Impressions of the T-34-85

"The new Russian T-34 tank armed with an 85 mm gun has the following differences compared to model 1942 and 1943 tanks:
  1. Armour: the armour is mostly the same design and same thickness. The hull in general has no advantages over the precursor. The turret is roomier. The armour is improved in the front. It resists 47-75 mm guns well at medium and long range. The sharper shape of the front increases the chance that armour piercing shells will ricochet. The quality of armour is higher than on the model 1943 tank.
  2. Power plant: the diesel engine is the same type, but more carefully produced, is 20-30 hp more powerful, and has a longer lifespan under medium loads. The oil system is of the same type, but oil consumption is reduced by 30-40%. The exhaust is less smoky. The air filter does its job. In the summer, the diesel engine overheats less, in the winter, it starts more easily. The electrical equipment has isolated copper wiring.
  3. Armament: the 85 mm gun is a compact tank gun, identical to the German 88 mm tank gun in main parameters, losing out slightly in range and trajectory due to superior quality of German gunpowder. Compared to the 75 mm tank gun, the new Soviet gun has superior armour piercing and high explosive capability. The design of the gun is very good. It is smaller than the German 75 and 88 mm guns. The design is simple. It surpasses the 76 mm gun in flat shot range by 1.5-2 times.
  4. Observation devices: the refractive telescopic sight is greatly superior to the sight of the model 1942-1943 T-34 tank. The clarity of the sight is on the level of the German 75 mm model 1940 gun. The field of view was increased by 15%. The markings are more convenient when firing on tanks up to 1000 meters. Injury during motion is nearly impossible due to comfortable pads. The periscopic observation device is simple, has a clear glass block, and is convenient to use. The commander's cupola allows the commander to observe the battlefield, and the turret traverse mechanism is a positive influence on the gunner's target acquisition. 
  5. Radio: the new radio is very compact and reliable. The quality of communication at short ranges is improved. It is located in the turret and does not require a separate crew member to operate.
Conclusions: the new T-34 tank is significantly different from the previous model, not only in armament, but in terms of general combat characteristics. Drawbacks of this tank include the control system, suspension, and transmission. Currently, this type of tank is one of the best medium tanks, on par with new German tanks."

9 comments:

  1. Good to know they finally fixed the sight glass clarity problem.
    -m

    ReplyDelete
  2. This article is pure crap. I'm a Finn and i can tell you there is no proof that Finns have said anything like this. Just propaganda, don't believe what this article claims. It is even written by a Russian, the biggest enemy of Finns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course, everyone knows that the best propaganda is classified and put into a box where no one can see it for 70 years.

      Delete
  3. Jukka Juutinen11 June 2016 at 14:18

    What is the original Finnish title of the report?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you click on the KDARFA 3404-11-345 link at the bottom of the article it tells you this report was translated from captured Finnish documents

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  4. Holy shit, that comment. Captured T-34s were quite popular with the Finns, and for a good reason. Lue joskus historiaa...

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I sincerely doubt that this report is a) "Finnish" or b) "captured". It seems to be written to either prove a point, or to let somebody hear what they want to hear. For anybody with any actual knowledge of the Finnish Army or Finnish wartime history, it seems to be quite illogical. Some pointers:

    1) Between the start of the Soviet summer offensive in June 1944 and the end of the hostilities in September 1944, the Finnish Army captured and put into use 7 (seven) Soviet T-34-85s. These tanks were placed within the Armoured Division and immediately used against their former owners. I have never heard or seen anything pointing to them being sent away for evaluation, but of course it's possible. What isn't possible, is writing a report describing the "longer lifespan" of the engine, or how the engine starts "in the winter". After less than 4 summer months of use we didn't have any experience nor knowledge of these factors.

    2) The only proper tank guns the Finnish Army had experience of was the 76mm gun from our captured T-34s and the 75mm gun from our StuGs. Comparing the new 85mm gun to these two would be quite logical, but the report compares the 85mm gun's performance and size to the German 88mm and long calibre 75mm guns! Why would this "Finnish" writer compare it to something we didn't have first hand experience of? It makes no sense!

    3) The m1944 T-34-85s the Finnish Army captured didn't have the electric turret traverse system, so I don't understand how the "turret traverse mechanism" could have a "positive influence" for the gunner. Neither do I understand why the writer mentions the commanders cupola, but fails to mention that it was the same as on our m1943 T-34s (and worse than the cupola on our StuGs). Also - like with the gun - why does the writer state that the T-34-85 is "on par with new German tanks" when this is something we didn't know about? The Finnish Army had StuGs and Panzer IVs, neither hardly "new".

    4) And last, how exactly was this report "captured"? Finland wasn't occupied by the Soviets, so they didn't capture any garrisons, command posts or archives. After performing this evaluation (and "winter tests") in the summer of 1944, did we send it to the moving front..? :)

    ReplyDelete