Pz 4 modifications. Medium tank T-IV Panzerkampfwagen IV (PzKpfw IV, also Pz
“Panzerkampfwagen IV” (“PzKpfw IV”, also “Pz. IV”; in the USSR it was also known as “T‑IV”) - medium tank armored forces of the Wehrmacht during the Second World War. There is a version that the Pz IV was originally classified by the Germans as a heavy tank, but it is not documented.
The most popular tank of the Wehrmacht: 8,686 vehicles were produced; It was mass-produced from 1937 to 1945 in several modifications. The constantly increasing armament and armor of the tank in most cases allowed the PzKpfw IV to effectively resist tanks of a similar class. French tanker Pierre Danois wrote about the PzKpfw IV (in modification, at that time, with a short-barreled 75-mm cannon): “This medium tank was superior to our B1 and B1 bis in all respects, including armament and, to some extent, armor "
History of creation
Under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany, defeated in World War I, was prohibited from having armored forces, with the exception of a small number of armored vehicles for police use. But despite this, already since 1925, the Reichswehr Armament Directorate had been secretly working on the creation of tanks. Until the early 1930s, these developments did not go beyond the construction of prototypes, both because of the insufficient characteristics of the latter and because of the weakness of German industry of that period. However, by mid-1933, German designers managed to create their first serial tank, the Pz.Kpfw.I, and began mass production during 1933-1934. Pz.Kpfw.I, with its machine gun weapons and a crew of two, was considered only as a transitional model on the way to the construction of more advanced tanks. The development of two of them began back in 1933 - a more powerful “transitional” tank, the future Pz.Kpfw.II, and a full-fledged battle tank, the future Pz.Kpfw.III, armed with a 37-mm cannon, intended mainly to combat other armored vehicles.
Due to the initial limitations of the PzIII's armament, it was decided to complement it with a fire support tank, with a longer-range cannon with a powerful fragmentation shell capable of hitting anti-tank defenses beyond the range of other tanks. In January 1934, the Armament Directorate organized a competition of projects to create a vehicle of this class, whose mass would not exceed 24 tons. Since work on armored vehicles in Germany at that time was still carried out in secret, the new project, like the others, was given the code name “support vehicle” (German: Begleitwagen, usually shortened to B.W.; a number of sources give incorrect names in German: Bataillonwagen and German: Bataillonfuehrerwagen). From the very beginning, the companies Rheinmetall and Krupp began developing projects for the competition, later joined by Daimler-Benz and M.A.N. Over the next 18 months, all companies presented their developments, and the Rheinmetall project under the designation VK 2001 (Rh) was even manufactured in metal as a prototype in 1934-1935.
Tank Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. J (Armored Vehicle Museum - Latrun, Israel)
All presented projects had a chassis with a staggered arrangement of large-diameter track rollers and the absence of support rollers, with the exception of the same VK 2001(Rh), which generally inherited the chassis with small-diameter track rollers interlocked in pairs and side screens from the experimental one heavy tank Nb.Fz. The best of them was eventually recognized as the Krupp project - VK 2001 (K), but the Armament Directorate was not satisfied with its leaf spring suspension, which they demanded to replace with a more advanced torsion bar. However, Krupp insisted on using a chassis with medium-diameter rollers interlocked in pairs on a spring suspension, borrowed from the rejected Pz.Kpfw.III prototype of its own design. To avoid the inevitable delays in the start of production when processing a project for a torsion bar suspension necessary for the army tank, the Armament Directorate was forced to agree to Krupp's proposal. After further refinement of the project, Krupp received an order for the production of a pre-production batch of a new tank, which by that time had received the designation “armored vehicle with a 75-mm gun” (German: 7.5 cm Geschütz-Panzerwagen) or, according to the end-to-end designation system adopted at that time, "experimental sample 618" (German: Versuchskraftfahrzeug 618 or Vs.Kfz.618). Since April 1936, the tank acquired its final designation - Panzerkampfwagen IV or Pz.Kpfw.IV. In addition, it was assigned the index Vs.Kfz.222, which previously belonged to the Pz.Kpfw.II.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf G. Armored Museum in Kubinka.
Mass production
Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausf.A - Ausf.F1
The first few Pz.Kpfw.IV "zero" series were manufactured in 1936-1937 at the Krupp plant in Essen. Serial production of the first series, 1.Serie/B.W., began in October 1937 at the Krupp-Gruson plant in Magdeburg. A total of 35 tanks of this modification, designated Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausführung A (Ausf.A - “model A”), were produced until March 1938. By unified system designation of German armored vehicles, the tank received the index Sd.Kfz.161. Ausf.A tanks were in many ways still pre-production vehicles and carried bulletproof armor that did not exceed 15-20 mm and poorly protected surveillance devices, especially in the commander's cupola. At the same time, the main design features of the Pz.Kpfw.IV had already been determined at Ausf.A, and although the tank was subsequently subjected to modernization many times, the changes mainly came down to the installation of more powerful armor and weapons, or to unprincipled alterations of individual components.
Immediately after the end of production of the first series, Krupp began production of an improved one - 2.Serie/B.W. or Ausf.B. The most noticeable external difference between the tanks of this modification was the straight upper frontal plate, without a prominent “cabinet” for the driver and with the elimination of the course machine gun, which was replaced by a viewing device and a hatch for firing from personal weapons. The design of the viewing devices was also improved, primarily the commander's cupola, which received armored flaps, and the driver's viewing device. According to other sources, the new commander's cupola was introduced already during the production process, so that some Ausf.B tanks carried the old type commander's cupola. Minor changes affected the landing hatches and various hatches. The frontal armor on the new modification was increased to 30 mm. The tank also received a more powerful engine and a new 6-speed gearbox, which significantly increased its maximum speed, and its range also increased. At the same time, the Ausf.B's ammunition load was reduced to 80 gun rounds and 2,700 machine-gun rounds, instead of 120 and 3,000, respectively, on the Ausf.A. Krupp was given an order for the production of 45 Ausf.B tanks, but due to a shortage of components, only 42 vehicles of this modification were actually produced from April to September 1938.
Tank Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.A on parade, 1938.
The first relatively widespread modification was 3.Serie/B.W. or Ausf.C. Compared to the Ausf.B, the changes in it were minor - outwardly, both modifications are distinguishable only by the presence of an armored casing for the barrel of the coaxial machine gun. The remaining changes consisted of replacing the HL 120TR engine with an HL 120TRM of the same power, as well as installing a bumper under the gun barrel on some of the tanks to bend the antenna located on the hull when the turret is rotated. A total of 300 tanks of this modification were ordered, but already in March 1938 the order was reduced to 140 units, as a result of which from September 1938 to August 1939, according to various sources, 140 or 134 tanks were produced, while 6 chassis were transferred for conversion into bridge laying machines.
Museum Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D with additional armor
The next modification, Ausf.D, was produced in two series - 4.Serie/B.W. and 5.Serie/B.W. Most notable external change there was a return to the broken upper frontal plate of the hull and the forward machine gun, which received enhanced protection. The internal mantlet of the gun, which proved vulnerable to lead splashes from bullet hits, was replaced with an external one. The thickness of the side and rear armor of the hull and turret was increased to 20 mm. In January 1938, Krupp received an order for the production of 200 4.Serie/B.W. and 48 5.Serie/B.W., but during production, from October 1939 to May 1941, only 229 of them were completed as tanks, while the remaining 19 were allocated for the construction of specialized variants. Some of the later Ausf.D tanks were produced in a “tropical” version (German tropen or Tp.), with additional ventilation holes in the engine compartment. A number of sources speak of armor reinforcement carried out in units or during repairs in 1940-1941, which was carried out by bolting additional 20-mm sheets onto the upper side and front plates of the tank. According to other sources, later production vehicles were standardly equipped with additional 20 mm side and 30 mm frontal armor plates of the Ausf.E type. Several Ausf.Ds were re-equipped with long-barreled KwK 40 L/48 guns in 1943, but these converted tanks were used only as training tanks.
Tank Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.B or Ausf.C during exercises. November 1943.
The appearance of a new modification, 6.Serie/B.W. or Ausf.E, was caused primarily by the insufficient armor protection of the vehicles early episodes, demonstrated during the Polish campaign. On the Ausf.E, the thickness of the lower frontal plate was increased to 50 mm; in addition, the installation of additional 30 mm plates above the upper front and 20 mm above the side plates became standard, although on a small part of early production tanks additional 30 mm plates were not were installed. The armor protection of the turret, however, remained the same - 30 mm for the front plate, 20 mm for the side and rear plates and 35 mm for the gun mantlet. A new commander's cupola was introduced, with vertical armor thickness from 50 to 95 mm. The slope of the rear wall of the turret was also reduced, which was now made of a single sheet, without a “swell” for the turret, and on late-production vehicles an unarmored box for equipment began to be attached to the rear of the turret. In addition, the Ausf.E tanks were distinguished by a number of less noticeable changes - a new driver's viewing device, simplified drive and guide wheels, an improved design of various hatches and inspection hatches, and the introduction of a turret fan. The order for the sixth series of Pz.Kpfw.IV amounted to 225 units and was completed in full between September 1940 and April 1941, in parallel with the production of Ausf.D tanks.
Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.F. Finland, 1941.
Shielding with additional armor (on average 10-12 mm), used on previous modifications, was irrational and was considered only as a temporary solution, which was the reason for the appearance of the next modification, 7.Serie/B.W. or Ausf.F. Instead of using mounted armor, the thickness of the frontal upper plate of the hull, the frontal plate of the turret and the gun mantlet was increased to 50 mm, and the thickness of the sides of the hull and the sides and rear of the turret was increased to 30 mm. The broken upper front plate of the hull was again replaced with a straight one, but this time with the preservation of the forward-facing machine gun, and the side hatches of the turret received double doors. Due to the fact that the mass of the tank after the changes increased by 22.5% compared to the Ausf.A, wider tracks were introduced to reduce the specific ground pressure. Other, less noticeable changes included the introduction of ventilation air intakes in the middle front plate to cool the brakes, a different location of mufflers and slightly modified viewing devices due to the thickening of the armor and the installation of a directional machine gun. With the Ausf.F modification, companies other than Krupp joined the production of the Pz.Kpfw.IV for the first time. The latter received the first order for 500 vehicles of the seventh series; later orders for 100 and 25 units were received by Womag and Nibelungenwerke. Of this quantity, from April 1941 to March 1942, before production switched to the Ausf.F2 modification, 462 Ausf.F tanks were produced, 25 of which were converted to Ausf.F2 at the factory.
Tank Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E. Yugoslavia, 1941.
Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausf.F2 - Ausf.J
Although the main purpose of the 75-mm Pz.Kpfw.IV cannon was to destroy unarmored or lightly armored targets, the presence of an armor-piercing projectile in its ammunition allowed the tank to successfully fight armored vehicles protected by bulletproof or light anti-ballistic armor. But against tanks with powerful anti-ballistic armor, such as the British Matilda or the Soviet KV and T-34, it turned out to be completely ineffective. Back in 1940 - early 1941, successful combat use"Matilda" intensified work to re-equip the Pz.Kpfw.IV with a weapon with better anti-tank capabilities. On February 19, 1941, by personal order of A. Hitler, work began on arming the tank with a 50-mm Kw.K.38 L/42 cannon, which was also installed on the Pz.Kpfw.III, and subsequently work began on strengthening the Pz.Kpfw's armament. IV also advanced under his control. In April, one Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D was re-equipped with the newer, more powerful, 50 mm Kw.K.39 L/60 cannon for demonstration to Hitler for his birthday, April 20. It was even planned to produce a series of 80 tanks with such weapons from August 1941, but by that time the interest of the Armament Directorate (Heereswaffenamt) had shifted to the 75 mm long-barreled gun and these plans were abandoned.
Since the Kw.K.39 had already been approved as armament for the Pz.Kpfw.III, it was decided to choose an even more powerful gun for the Pz.Kpfw.IV, which could not be installed on the Pz.Kpfw.III with its smaller turret ring diameter . Since March 1941, Krupp, as an alternative to the 50-mm cannon, has been considering a new 75-mm cannon with a barrel length of 40 calibers, intended for re-equipping the StuG.III assault guns. At a distance of 400 meters, it penetrated 70 mm armor at an angle of 60°, but since the Armament Directorate required that the gun barrel not protrude beyond the dimensions of the tank hull, its length was reduced to 33 calibers, which resulted in a decrease in armor penetration to 59 mm under the same conditions. It was also planned to develop a sub-caliber armor-piercing projectile with a separating pan, which would penetrate 86 mm armor under the same conditions. Work to re-equip the Pz.Kpfw.IV with a new gun progressed successfully, and in December 1941 the first prototype with a 7.5 cm Kw.K gun was built. L/34.5.
Tank Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.F2. France, July 1942.
Meanwhile, the invasion of the USSR began, during which German troops encountered T-34 and KV tanks, which were low-vulnerable to the main tank and anti-tank guns of the Wehrmacht and at the same time carried a 76-mm cannon that pierced the frontal armor of German tanks, which were then practically in service with the Panzerwaffe. at any real combat distances. The Special Tank Commission, sent to the front in November 1941 to study this issue, recommended the rearmament of German tanks with a weapon that would allow them to hit Soviet vehicles from long distances, while remaining outside the radius of the latter's effective fire. On November 18, 1941, the development of a tank gun was initiated, similar in its capabilities to the new 75-mm anti-tank gun Pak 40. Such a gun, initially designated Kw.K.44, was developed jointly by Krupp and Rheinmetall. The barrel passed to it from the anti-tank gun without changes, but since the latter's shots were too long for use in a tank, a shorter and thicker sleeve was developed for the tank gun, which entailed reworking the breech of the gun and reducing the overall length of the barrel to 43 calibers. The Kw.K.44 also received a single-chamber spherical muzzle brake, which differed from the anti-tank gun. In this form, the gun was adopted as the 7.5 cm Kw.K.40 L/43.
Pz.Kpfw.IVs with the new gun were initially designated as "converted" (German: 7.Serie/B.W.-Umbau or Ausf.F-Umbau), but soon received the designation Ausf.F2, while the Ausf.F vehicles with the old ones The guns began to be called Ausf.F1 to avoid confusion. The designation of the tank according to the unified system changed to Sd.Kfz.161/1. With the exception of a different gun and associated minor changes, such as the installation of a new sight, new firing positions and slightly modified armor for the gun's recoil devices, the early Ausf.F2s were identical to the Ausf.F1 tanks. After a month's break associated with the transition to a new modification, production of the Ausf.F2 began in March 1942 and continued until July of the same year. A total of 175 tanks of this variant were produced and another 25 were converted from Ausf.F1.
Tank Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. G (tail number 727) of the 1st Panzergrenadier Division "Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler". The vehicle was hit by artillerymen of the 4th battery of the 595th anti-tank artillery regiment in the area of the street. Sumskaya in Kharkov, on the night of March 11-12, 1943. On the frontal armor plate, almost in the center, two entrance holes from 76-mm shells are visible.
The appearance of the next modification of the Pz.Kpfw.IV was not initially caused by any changes in the design of the tank. In June - July 1942, by orders of the Armament Directorate, the designation of Pz.Kpfw.IV with long-barreled guns was changed to 8.Serie/B.W. or Ausf.G, and in October the designation Ausf.F2 was finally abolished for previously produced tanks of this modification. The first tanks, released as Ausf.G, were thus identical to their predecessors, but as production continued, more and more changes were made to the tank's design. Ausf.G of early releases still carried the index Sd.Kfz.161/1 according to the end-to-end designation system, which was replaced by Sd.Kfz.161/2 on vehicles of later releases. The first changes made already in the summer of 1942 included a new two-chamber pear-shaped muzzle brake, the elimination of viewing devices in the front side plates of the turret and the loader's inspection hatch in its frontal plate, the transfer of smoke grenade launchers from the rear of the hull to the sides of the turret, and a system for facilitating launch in winter conditions. .
Since the 50 mm frontal armor of the Pz.Kpfw.IV was still insufficient, not providing adequate protection against 57 mm and 76 mm guns, it was again reinforced by welding or, on later production vehicles, bolting additional 30-mm mm of plates above the upper and lower frontal plates of the hull. The thickness of the front plate of the turret and gun mantlet, however, was still 50 mm and did not increase during further modernization of the tank. The introduction of additional armor began with the Ausf.F2, when 8 tanks with increased armor thickness were produced in May 1942, but progress was slow. By November, only about half of the vehicles were produced with reinforced armor, and only from January 1943 did it become standard for all new tanks. Another significant change introduced to the Ausf.G from the spring of 1943 was the replacement of the Kw.K.40 L/43 gun with the Kw.K.40 L/48 with a 48-caliber barrel length, which had slightly higher armor penetration. Production of the Ausf.G continued until June 1943; a total of 1,687 tanks of this modification were produced. Of this number, about 700 tanks received reinforced armor and 412 received the Kw.K.40 L/48 gun.
Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.H with side screens and zimmerit coating. USSR, July 1944.
The next modification, Ausf.H, became the most widespread. The first tanks under this designation, which rolled off the assembly line in April 1943, differed from the last Ausf.G only in the thickening of the front turret roof sheet to 16 mm and the rear one to 25 mm, as well as reinforced final drives with cast drive wheels, but the first 30 tanks Ausf.H, due to delays in the supply of new components, only received a thicker roof. Since the summer of the same year, instead of additional 30 mm hull armor, solid-rolled 80 mm plates were introduced to simplify production. In addition, hinged anti-cumulative screens made of 5 mm sheets were introduced, installed on most Ausf.H. In this regard, viewing devices on the sides of the hull and turret were eliminated as unnecessary. Since September, tanks have been coated with vertical armor with Zimmerit to protect them from magnetic mines.
Ausf.H tanks of later production received a turret mount for the MG-42 machine gun at the commander's cupola hatch, as well as a vertical rear plate instead of the inclined one that was present on all previous modifications of the tanks. During production, we also introduced various changes, aimed at reducing the cost and simplifying production, such as the introduction of non-rubber support rollers and the elimination of the driver's periscope viewing device. From December 1943, the frontal hull plates began to be connected to the side joints in a “tenon” manner to enhance resistance to shell hits. Production of the Ausf.H continued until July 1944. Data on the number of tanks of this modification produced, given in various sources, vary somewhat, from 3935 chassis, of which 3774 were completed as tanks, to 3960 chassis and 3839 tanks.
The German medium tank Pz.Kpfw destroyed on the Eastern Front. IV lying upside down on the side of the road. Part of the caterpillar in contact with the ground is missing, in the same place there are no rollers with a fragment of the lower part of the hull, a bottom sheet is torn off, and the second caterpillar is torn off. Top part the machine, as far as can be judged, does not have such fatal destruction. A typical picture of a landmine explosion.
The appearance of the Ausf.J modification on assembly lines in June 1944 was associated with the desire to reduce the cost and simplify the production of the tank as much as possible in the conditions of Germany's deteriorating strategic position. The only, but significant, change that distinguished the first Ausf.J from the last Ausf.H was the elimination of the electric drive for turning the turret and the associated auxiliary carburetor engine with a generator. Soon after the start of production of the new modification, the pistol ports in the stern and sides of the turret, which were useless due to the screens, were eliminated, and the design of other hatches was simplified. Since July, an additional fuel tank with a capacity of 200 liters began to be installed in place of the liquidated auxiliary engine, but the fight against its leakage dragged on until September 1944. In addition, the 12-mm hull roof began to be reinforced by welding additional 16-mm sheets. All subsequent changes were aimed at further simplifying the design, the most notable among them being the abandonment of the Zimmerit coating in September and the reduction in the number of support rollers to three per side in December 1944. Production of tanks of the Ausf.J modification continued almost until the very end of the war, until March 1945, but a decrease in production rates associated with the weakening of German industry and difficulties with the supply of raw materials led to the fact that only 1,758 tanks of this modification were produced.
Production volumes of the T-4 tank
Design
The Pz.Kpfw.IV had a layout with a combined transmission and control compartment located in the front, an engine compartment in the rear, and a fighting compartment in the middle part of the vehicle. The tank's crew consisted of five people: a driver and gunner-radio operator, located in the control compartment, and a gunner, loader and tank commander, located in a three-man turret.
Armored hull and turret
The turret of the PzKpfw IV tank made it possible to modernize the tank's gun. Inside the turret there was a commander, gunner and loader. The commander's position was located directly under the commander's cupola, the gunner was located to the left of the breech of the gun, and the loader was located to the right. Additional protection was provided by anti-cumulative screens, which were also installed on the sides. The commander's cupola at the rear of the turret gave the tank good visibility. The tower had an electric drive for rotation.
Soviet soldiers examine the broken german tank Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. H (single-leaf hatch and absence of three-barrel grenade launchers on the turret). The tank is painted in three-color camouflage. Oryol-Kursk direction.
Surveillance and communications equipment
In non-combat conditions, the tank commander, as a rule, conducted observation while standing in the hatch of the commander's cupola. In battle, to view the area, he had five wide viewing slits around the perimeter of the commander's cupola, giving him an all-round view. The commander's viewing slits, like those of all other crew members, were equipped with a protective triplex glass block with inside. On the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.A the viewing slots did not have any additional cover, but on the Ausf.B the slots were equipped with sliding armor flaps; in this form, the commander’s viewing devices remained unchanged on all subsequent modifications. In addition, on tanks of early modifications, the commander's cupola had a mechanical device for determining the target's heading angle, with the help of which the commander could carry out precise target designation to the gunner, who had a similar device. However, due to excessive complexity, this system was eliminated, starting with the Ausf.F2 modification. The gunner's and loader's viewing devices on Ausf.A - Ausf.F consisted of, for each of them: a viewing hatch with an armored cover without viewing slots, in the front plate of the turret on the sides of the gun mantlet; an inspection hatch with a slot in the front side sheets and an inspection slot in the turret side hatch cover. Starting with the Ausf.G, as well as on some of the Ausf.F2 of late production, the inspection devices in the front side plates and the loader's inspection hatch in the front plate were eliminated. On some tanks of the Ausf.H and Ausf.J modifications, due to the installation of anti-cumulative screens, the viewing devices on the sides of the turret were completely eliminated.
The main means of observation for the driver of the Pz.Kpfw.IV was a wide viewing slot in the front hull plate. On the inside, the gap was protected by a triplex glass block; on the outside, on the Ausf.A it could be closed with a simple folding armor flap; on the Ausf.B and subsequent modifications, it could be closed with a Sehklappe 30 or 50 sliding flap, which was also used on the Pz.Kpfw.III. A periscope binocular viewing device K.F.F.1 was located above the viewing slit on Ausf.A, but it was eliminated on Ausf.B - Ausf.D. On Ausf.E - Ausf.G the viewing device appeared in the form of an improved K.F.F.2, but starting with Ausf.H it was abandoned again. The device was brought out into two holes in the front plate of the body and, if there was no need for it, was moved to the right. The radio operator-gunner on most modifications did not have any means of viewing the frontal sector, in addition to the sight of the forward machine gun, but on Ausf.B, Ausf.C and parts of Ausf.D, in place of the machine gun there was a hatch with a viewing slot in it. Similar hatches were located in the side plates on most Pz.Kpfw.IVs, being eliminated only on Ausf.Js due to the installation of anti-cumulative shields. In addition, the driver had a turret position indicator, one of two lights warned about the turret turning to one side or another in order to avoid damage to the gun when driving in cramped conditions.
For external communications, Pz.Kpfw.IV platoon commanders and above were equipped with a Fu 5 model VHF radio station and a Fu 2 receiver. Line tanks were equipped only with a Fu 2 receiver. FuG5 had a transmitter power of 10 W and provided a communication range of 9.4 km in telegraph and 6.4 km in telephone mode. For internal communications, all Pz.Kpfw.IVs were equipped with a tank intercom for four crew members, with the exception of the loader.
Attempts to improve the tank's protection led to the appearance of the "Ausfuhrung G" modification at the end of 1942. The designers knew that the limit of mass that could be withstood chassis, had already been selected, so we had to make a compromise solution - dismantle the 20-mm side screens that were installed on all “fours”, starting with the “E” model, while simultaneously increasing the base armor of the hull to 30 mm, and using the saved weight, install it in the front parts are overhead screens 30 mm thick.
Another measure to increase the tank's security was the installation of removable anti-cumulative screens ("schurzen") 5 mm thick on the sides of the hull and turret; adding screens increased the weight of the vehicle by about 500 kg. In addition, the gun's single-chamber muzzle brake was replaced with a more effective two-chamber one. The appearance of the vehicle also underwent a number of other changes: instead of a rear smoke launcher, built-in blocks of smoke grenade launchers began to be mounted in the corners of the turret, and launch openings were eliminated flares in the driver's and gunner's hatches.
By the end serial production tanks PzKpfw IV "Ausfuhrung G" their standard main weapon became a 75-mm gun with a barrel length of 48 calibers, the commander's cupola hatch became single-leaf. The PzKpfw IV Ausf.G tanks of later production are almost identical in appearance to the early vehicles of the Ausf.N modification. From May 1942 to June 1943, 1687 tanks of the Ausf.G model were manufactured, an impressive figure considering that in five years, from the end of 1937 to the summer of 1942, 1300 PzKpfw IV of all modifications were built (Ausf.A -F2), chassis No. - 82701-84400.
In 1944 it was manufactured tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.G with hydrostatic drive of the drive wheels. The drive design was developed by specialists from the Tsanradfabrik company in Augsburg. The main Maybach engine drove two oil pumps, which in turn activated two hydraulic motors connected by output shafts to the drive wheels. All power point was located in the rear part of the hull, respectively, and the drive wheels had a rear location, rather than the front one that is usual for the PzKpfw IV. The speed of the tank was controlled by the driver, controlling the oil pressure created by the pumps.
After the war, the experimental machine came to the USA and was tested by specialists from the Vickers company from Detroit, this company at that time was engaged in work in the field of hydrostatic drives. The tests had to be interrupted due to material failures and a lack of spare parts. Currently, the PzKpfw IV Ausf.G tank with hydrostatic drive wheels is on display in the US Army Tank Museum, Aberdeen, USA. Maryland.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.H (Sd.Kfz. 161/2)
The installation of a long-barreled 75 mm gun turned out to be a rather controversial measure. The gun led to excessive overload of the front part of the tank, the front springs were under constant pressure, and the tank acquired a tendency to sway even when moving on a flat surface. It was possible to get rid of the unpleasant effect with the “Ausfuhrung H” modification, which was put into production in March 1943.
On tanks of this model, the integral armor of the frontal part of the hull, superstructure and turret was strengthened to 80 mm. The PzKpfw IV Ausf.H tank weighed 26 tons and even despite the use of the new SSG-77 transmission, its characteristics turned out to be lower than those of the “fours” of previous models, so the speed of movement over rough terrain decreased by no less than 15 km, the specific pressure on the ground, the acceleration characteristics of the vehicle dropped. On experimental tank The PzKpfw IV Ausf.H was tested with a hydrostatic transmission, but tanks with such a transmission did not go into mass production.
During the production process, many minor modifications were introduced to the Ausf.H model tanks, in particular, they began to install all-steel rollers without rubber, the shape of the drive wheels and idlers changed, a turret for the MG-34 anti-aircraft machine gun appeared on the commander's cupola ("Fligerbeschussgerat 42" - installation of an anti-aircraft machine gun), the tower embrasures for firing pistols and the hole in the roof of the tower for launching signal flares were eliminated.
Ausf.H tanks were the first "fours" to use Zimmerit antimagnetic coating; Only the vertical surfaces of the tank were supposed to be covered with zimmerit, but in practice the coating was applied to all surfaces that could be reached by an infantryman standing on the ground; on the other hand, there were also tanks on which only the forehead of the hull and superstructure were covered with zimmerit. Zimmerit was applied both in factories and in the field.
Tanks of the Ausf.H modification became the most popular among all PzKpfw IV models, 3,774 of them were built, production ceased in the summer of 1944. Factory chassis numbers - 84401-89600, some of these chassis served as the basis for the construction of assault guns.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.J (Sd.Kfz.161/2)
The last model launched into the series was the modification "Ausfuhrung J". Vehicles of this variant began to enter service in June 1944. From a design point of view, the PzKpfw IV Ausf.J represented a step back.
Instead of an electric drive for turning the turret, a manual one was installed, but it became possible to install an additional fuel tank with a capacity of 200 liters. Increasing the cruising range on the highway from 220 km to 300 km (off-road - from 130 km to 180 km) by placing additional fuel seemed to be an extremely important decision, since panzer divisions increasingly played the role of “fire brigades”, which were transferred from one sector of the Eastern Front another.
An attempt to somewhat reduce the weight of the tank was the installation of welded wire anti-cumulative screens (such screens were called “Tom screens”, after the surname of General Tom). Such screens were installed only on the sides of the hull, and the previous screens made of sheet steel remained on the towers. On tanks of late production, three rollers were installed instead of four, and vehicles were also produced with steel road wheels without rubber.
Almost all modifications were aimed at reducing the labor intensity of manufacturing tanks, including: the elimination of all embrasures on the tank for firing pistols and extra viewing slots (only the driver's, in the commander's cupola and in the frontal armor plate of the tower remained), installation of simplified towing loops , replacing the muffler with an exhaust system with two simple pipes. Another attempt to improve the vehicle's security was to increase the armor of the turret roof by 18 mm and the rear armor by 26 mm.
Production of PzKpfw IV Ausf.J tanks ceased in March 1945; a total of 1,758 vehicles were built.
By 1944, it became clear that the design of the tank had exhausted all reserves for modernization; a revolutionary attempt to increase the combat effectiveness of the PzKpfw IV by installing a turret from the Panther tank, armed with a 75-mm gun with a barrel length of 70 calibers, was not crowned with success - the chassis turned out to be too overloaded. Before installing the Panther turret, the designers tried to squeeze the Panther cannon into the turret of the PzKpfw IV tank. The installation of a wooden model of the gun showed the complete impossibility of crew members working in the turret due to the tightness created by the breech of the gun. As a consequence of this failure, the idea was born to mount the entire turret from the Panther on the Pz.IV hull.
Due to the constant modernization of tanks during factory repairs, it is not possible to accurately determine how many tanks of one modification or another were built. Very often there were various hybrid options, for example, turrets from Ausf.G were installed on the hulls of the Ausf.D model.
Modern battle tanks Russia and the world photos, videos, pictures watch online. This article gives an idea of the modern tank fleet. It is based on the principle of classification used in the most authoritative reference book to date, but in a slightly modified and improved form. And if the latter in its original form can still be found in the armies of a number of countries, then others have already become museum pieces. And just for 10 years! Follow in the footsteps of Jane's Guide and skip this one combat vehicle(very interesting in design and fiercely discussed at one time), which formed the basis of the tank fleet of the last quarter of the 20th century, was considered unfair by the authors.
Films about tanks where there is still no alternative to this type of weapon ground forces. The tank was and will probably remain for a long time modern weapons thanks to the ability to combine such seemingly contradictory qualities as high mobility, powerful weapons and reliable crew protection. These unique qualities of tanks continue to be constantly improved, and the experience and technology accumulated over decades predetermine new frontiers in combat properties and achievements of the military-technical level. In the eternal confrontation between “projectile and armor”, as practice shows, protection against projectiles is increasingly being improved, acquiring new qualities: activity, multi-layeredness, self-defense. At the same time, the projectile becomes more accurate and powerful.
Russian tanks are specific in that they allow you to destroy the enemy from a safe distance, have the ability to make quick maneuvers on off-road, contaminated terrain, can “walk” through territory occupied by the enemy, seize a decisive bridgehead, cause panic in the rear and suppress the enemy with fire and tracks . The war of 1939-1945 became the most ordeal for all humanity, since almost all countries of the world were involved in it. It was a clash of the titans - the most unique period that theorists debated in the early 1930s and during which tanks were used in large numbers by almost all belligerents. At this time, a “lice test” and a deep reform of the first theories of the use of tank forces took place. And it is the Soviet tank forces that are most affected by all this.
Tanks in battle that have become a symbol past war, the backbone of the Soviet armored forces? Who created them and under what conditions? How did the USSR, having lost most of its European territories and with difficulty recruiting tanks for the defense of Moscow, was able to release powerful tank formations onto the battlefields already in 1943? This book is intended to answer these questions, telling about the development of Soviet tanks “during the days of testing”, from 1937 to early 1943. When writing the book, materials from Russian archives and private collections of tank builders were used. There was a period in our history that remained in my memory with some kind of depressing feeling. It began with the return of our first military advisers from Spain, and only stopped at the beginning of forty-three,” said former general designer of self-propelled guns L. Gorlitsky, “some kind of pre-storm state was felt.
Tanks of the Second World War It was M. Koshkin, almost underground (but, of course, with the support of “the wisest of the wise leaders of all nations”), who was able to create the tank that a few years later would shock the German tank generals. And not only that, he not only created it, the designer managed to prove to these military fools that it was his T-34 that they needed, and not just another wheeled-tracked "motor vehicle." The author is in slightly different positions, which formed in him after meeting the pre-war documents from the Russian State Military Academy and the Russian State Academy of Economics. Therefore, working on this segment of the history of the Soviet tank, the author will inevitably contradict something “generally accepted.” this work describes the history of Soviet tank building in the most difficult years- from the beginning of a radical restructuring of the entire activity of design bureaus and people's commissariats in general, during the frantic race to equip new tank formations of the Red Army, the transfer of industry to wartime rails and evacuation.
Tanks Wikipedia, the author would like to express his special gratitude to M. Kolomiets for his assistance in selecting and processing materials, and also thank A. Solyankin, I. Zheltov and M. Pavlov, the authors of the reference publication “Domestic armored vehicles. XX century. 1905 - 1941” , since this book helped to understand the fate of some projects that was previously unclear. I would also like to remember with gratitude those conversations with Lev Izraelevich Gorlitsky, the former chief designer of UZTM, which helped to take a fresh look at the entire history of the Soviet tank during the Great Patriotic War. Patriotic War Soviet Union. For some reason today it is common for us to talk about 1937-1938. only from the point of view of repression, but few people remember that it was during this period that those tanks were born that became legends of the wartime...” From the memoirs of L.I. Gorlinky.
Soviet tanks, a detailed assessment of them at that time was heard from many lips. Many old people recalled that it was from the events in Spain that it became clear to everyone that the war was getting closer and closer to the threshold and it was Hitler who would have to fight. In 1937, mass purges and repressions began in the USSR, and against the backdrop of these difficult events, the Soviet tank began to transform from “mechanized cavalry” (in which one of its combat qualities was emphasized at the expense of others) into a balanced combat vehicle, possessing both powerful weapons, sufficient to suppress most targets, good maneuverability and mobility with armor protection, capable of maintaining its combat effectiveness when fired upon by the most widespread anti-tank weapons of a potential enemy.
It was recommended that large tanks be supplemented with only special tanks - amphibious tanks, chemical tanks. The brigade now had 4 individual battalions 54 tanks each and was strengthened by the transition from three-tank platoons to five-tank ones. In addition, D. Pavlov justified the refusal to form three additional mechanized corps in addition to the four existing mechanized corps in 1938, believing that these formations were immobile and difficult to control, and most importantly, they required a different rear organization. The tactical and technical requirements for promising tanks, as expected, were adjusted. In particular, in a letter dated December 23 to the head of the design bureau of plant No. 185 named after. CM. Kirov, the new boss demanded that the armor of the new tanks be strengthened so that at a distance of 600-800 meters (effective range).
The newest tanks in the world, when designing new tanks, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of increasing the level of armor protection during modernization by at least one stage...” This problem could be solved in two ways: Firstly, by increasing the thickness of the armor plates and, secondly, by “using increased armor resistance." It is not difficult to guess that the second way was considered more promising, since the use of specially strengthened armor plates, or even two-layer armor, could, while maintaining the same thickness (and the mass of the tank as a whole), increase its durability by 1.2-1.5 It was this path (the use of especially hardened armor) that was chosen at that moment to create new types of tanks.
Tanks of the USSR at the dawn of tank production, armor was most widely used, the properties of which were identical in all areas. Such armor was called homogeneous (homogeneous), and from the very beginning of armor making, craftsmen sought to create just such armor, because homogeneity ensured stability of characteristics and simplified processing. However, at the end of the 19th century, it was noticed that when the surface of an armor plate was saturated (to a depth of several tenths to several millimeters) with carbon and silicon, its surface strength increased sharply, while the rest of the plate remained viscous. This is how heterogeneous (non-uniform) armor came into use.
For military tanks, the use of heterogeneous armor was very important, since an increase in the hardness of the entire thickness of the armor plate led to a decrease in its elasticity and (as a consequence) to an increase in fragility. Thus, the most durable armor, with other equal conditions It turned out to be very fragile and often pricked even from the explosions of high-explosive fragmentation shells. Therefore, at the dawn of armor production, when producing homogeneous sheets, the task of the metallurgist was to achieve the maximum possible hardness of the armor, but at the same time not to lose its elasticity. Surface-hardened armor with carbon and silicon saturation was called cemented (cemented) and was considered at that time a panacea for many ills. But cementation is a complex, harmful process (for example, treating a hot plate with a jet of illuminating gas) and relatively expensive, and therefore its development in a series required large expenses and improved production standards.
Wartime tanks, even in operation, these hulls were less successful than homogeneous ones, since for no apparent reason cracks formed in them (mainly in loaded seams), and it was very difficult to put patches on holes in cemented slabs during repairs. But it was still expected that a tank protected by 15-20 mm cemented armor would be equivalent in level of protection to the same one, but covered with 22-30 mm sheets, without a significant increase in weight.
Also, by the mid-1930s, tank building had learned to harden the surface of relatively thin armor plates by uneven hardening, known since the end of the 19th century in shipbuilding as the “Krupp method.” Surface hardening led to a significant increase in the hardness of the front side of the sheet, leaving the main thickness of the armor viscous.
How tanks fire video up to half the thickness of the slab, which was, of course, worse than cementation, since while the hardness of the surface layer was higher than with cementation, the elasticity of the hull sheets was significantly reduced. So the “Krupp method” in tank building made it possible to increase the strength of armor even slightly more than cementation. But the hardening technology that was used for thick naval armor was no longer suitable for relatively thin tank armor. Before the war, this method was almost not used in our serial tank building due to technological difficulties and relatively high cost.
Combat use of tanks The most proven tank gun was the 45-mm tank gun model 1932/34. (20K), and before the event in Spain it was believed that its power was quite sufficient to perform most tank tasks. But the battles in Spain showed that a 45-mm gun could only satisfy the task of fighting enemy tanks, since even shelling of manpower in the mountains and forests turned out to be ineffective, and it was only possible to disable a dug-in enemy firing point if direct hit. Firing at shelters and bunkers was ineffective due to the low high-explosive effect of a projectile weighing only about two kg.
Types of tanks photos so that even one shell hit can reliably disable an anti-tank gun or machine gun; and thirdly, to increase the penetrating effect of a tank gun against the armor of a potential enemy, since in the example French tanks(already having an armor thickness of about 40-42 mm) it became clear that the armor protection of foreign combat vehicles tends to be significantly strengthened. There was a sure way for this - increasing the caliber of tank guns and simultaneously increasing the length of their barrel, since a long gun of a larger caliber fires heavier shells with greater force. initial speed to a greater distance without correcting the aiming.
The best tanks in the world had a large-caliber cannon, and also had big sizes breech, significantly greater weight and increased recoil response. And this required an increase in the mass of the entire tank as a whole. In addition, placing large-sized rounds in a closed tank volume led to a decrease in transportable ammunition.
The situation was aggravated by the fact that at the beginning of 1938 it suddenly turned out that there was simply no one to give the order for the design of a new, more powerful tank gun. P. Syachintov and his entire design team were repressed, as well as the core of the Bolshevik design bureau under the leadership of G. Magdesiev. Only the group of S. Makhanov remained in the wild, who, since the beginning of 1935, had been trying to develop his new 76.2-mm semi-automatic single gun L-10, and the staff of plant No. 8 was slowly finishing the “forty-five”.
Photos of tanks with names The number of developments is large, but mass production in the period 1933-1937. not a single one has been accepted..." In fact, none of the five air-cooled tank diesel engines, work on which was carried out in 1933-1937 in the engine department of plant No. 185, was brought to series. Moreover, despite the decisions the highest levels about the transition in tank building exclusively to diesel engines, this process was constrained by a number of factors. Of course, diesel had significant efficiency. It consumed less fuel per unit of power per hour. Diesel fuel was less susceptible to fire, since the flash point of its vapor was very high.
New tanks video, even the most advanced of them, the MT-5 tank engine, required a reorganization of engine production for serial production, which was expressed in the construction of new workshops, the supply of advanced foreign equipment (they did not yet have their own machines of the required accuracy), financial investments and strengthening of personnel. It was planned that in 1939 this diesel would produce 180 hp. will go to serial tanks and artillery tractors, but due to investigative work to determine the causes of tank engine failures, which lasted from April to November 1938, these plans were not implemented. The development of a slightly increased six-cylinder gasoline engine No. 745 with a power of 130-150 hp was also started.
Brands of tanks had specific indicators that suited tank builders quite well. The tanks were tested using a new technique, specially developed at the insistence of the new head of the ABTU D. Pavlov in relation to combat service in war time. The basis of the tests was a run of 3-4 days (at least 10-12 hours of daily non-stop movement) with a one-day break for technical inspection and restoration work. Moreover, repairs were allowed to be carried out only by field workshops without the involvement of factory specialists. This was followed by a “platform” with obstacles, “swimming” in water with an additional load that simulated an infantry landing, after which the tank was sent for inspection.
Super tanks online, after improvement work, seemed to remove all claims from the tanks. And the overall progress of the tests confirmed the fundamental correctness of the main design changes - an increase in displacement by 450-600 kg, the use of the GAZ-M1 engine, as well as the Komsomolets transmission and suspension. But during testing, numerous minor defects again appeared in the tanks. Chief designer N. Astrov was removed from work and was under arrest and investigation for several months. In addition, the tank received new tower improved protection. The modified layout made it possible to place on the tank more ammunition for a machine gun and two small fire extinguishers (previously there were no fire extinguishers on small tanks of the Red Army).
US tanks as part of modernization work, on one production model of the tank in 1938-1939. The torsion bar suspension developed by the designer of the design bureau of plant No. 185 V. Kulikov was tested. It was distinguished by the design of a composite short coaxial torsion bar (long monotorsion bars could not be used coaxially). However, such a short torsion bar did not show good enough results in tests, and therefore the torsion bar suspension did not immediately pave the way for itself in the course of further work. Obstacles to be overcome: climbs of at least 40 degrees, vertical wall 0.7 m, covered ditch 2-2.5 m."
YouTube about tanks, work on the production of prototypes of the D-180 and D-200 engines for reconnaissance tanks is not being carried out, jeopardizing the production of prototypes." Justifying his choice, N. Astrov said that the wheeled-tracked non-floating reconnaissance aircraft (factory designation 101 or 10-1), as well as the amphibious tank variant (factory designation 102 or 10-2), are a compromise solution, since it is not possible to fully satisfy the ABTU requirements. Option 101 was a tank weighing 7.5 tons with a hull according to the type of hull, but with vertical side sheets of cemented armor 10-13 mm thick, since: “The inclined sides, causing serious weighting of the suspension and hull, require a significant (up to 300 mm) widening of the hull, not to mention the complication of the tank.
Video reviews of tanks in which the tank’s power unit was planned to be based on the 250-horsepower MG-31F aircraft engine, which was being developed by industry for agricultural aircraft and gyroplanes. 1st grade gasoline was placed in the tank under the floor of the fighting compartment and in additional onboard gas tanks. The armament fully corresponded to the task and consisted of coaxial machine guns DK 12.7 mm caliber and DT (in the second version of the project even ShKAS is listed) 7.62 mm caliber. The combat weight of the tank with torsion bar suspension was 5.2 tons, with spring suspension - 5.26 tons. Tests took place from July 9 to August 21 according to the methodology approved in 1938, with special attention being paid to tanks.
Medium tank T-IV Panzerkampfwagen IV (PzKpfw IV, also Pz. IV), Sd.Kfz.161
Production of this tank, created by Krupp, began in 1937 and continued throughout the Second World War. Tells
Like the T-III- (Pz.III) tank, the power plant is located at the rear, and the power transmission and drive wheels are located at the front. The control compartment housed the driver and gunner-radio operator, firing from a machine gun mounted in a ball joint. Combat compartment was located in the middle of the body. A multifaceted welded turret was mounted here, which housed three crew members and installed weapons.
T-IV tanks were produced with the following weapons:
- modifications A-F, assault tank with 75 mm howitzer;
- modification G, tank with a 75-mm cannon with a 43-caliber barrel;
- modifications N-K, a tank with a 75 mm cannon with a barrel length of 48 calibers.
Due to the constant increase in the thickness of the armor, the weight of the vehicle during production increased from 17.1 tons (modification A) to 24.6 tons (modifications NK). Since 1943, to enhance armor protection, armor screens were installed on tanks for the sides of the hull and turret. The long-barreled gun introduced on modifications G, NK allowed the T-IV to withstand enemy tanks of equal weight (a 75-mm sub-caliber projectile at a range of 1000 meters penetrated armor 110 mm thick), but its maneuverability, especially the overweight latest modifications, was unsatisfactory. In total, about 9,500 T-IV tanks of all modifications were produced during the war.
Tank PzKpfw IV. History of creation.
In the 20s and early 30s, the theory of the use of mechanized troops, in particular tanks, developed through trial and error; the views of theorists changed very often. A number of supporters of tanks believed that the appearance of armored vehicles would make positional warfare in the style of battles of 1914-1917 tactically impossible. In turn, the French relied on the construction of well-fortified long-term defensive positions, such as the Maginot Line. A number of experts believed that the main armament of a tank should be a machine gun, and the main task of armored vehicles is to fight enemy infantry and artillery; the most radically thinking representatives of this school considered a battle between tanks pointless, since, supposedly, neither side would be able to cause damage to the other. There was an opinion that the victory in the battle would be won by the side that could destroy the largest number of enemy tanks. Special guns with special shells were considered as the main means of fighting tanks - anti-tank guns with armor-piercing shells. In fact, no one knew what the nature of hostilities would be in a future war. Experience civil war in Spain also did not clarify the situation.
The Treaty of Versailles prohibited Germany from having tracked combat vehicles, but could not prevent German specialists from working on studying various theories of using armored vehicles, and the creation of tanks was carried out by the Germans in secrecy. When Hitler threw away the restrictions of Versailles in March 1935, the young Panzerwaffe already had all the theoretical developments in the field of application and organizational structure tank regiments.
In mass production under the guise of “agricultural tractors” there were two types of light armed tanks, PzKpfw I and PzKpfw II.
The PzKpfw I tank was considered a training vehicle, while the PzKpfw II was intended for reconnaissance, but it turned out that the “two” remained the most popular tank of the panzer divisions until it was replaced by the PzKpfw III medium tanks, armed with a 37 mm cannon and three machine guns.
The development of the PzKpfw IV tank dates back to January 1934, when the army issued a specification to industry new tank fire support weighing no more than 24 tons, the future vehicle received the official designation Gesch.Kpfw. (75 mm)(Vskfz.618). Over the next 18 months, specialists from Rheinmetall-Borzing, Krupp and MAN worked on three competing designs for the battalion commander's vehicle (Battalionführerswagnen, abbreviated as BW). The VK 2001/K project, presented by the Krupp company, was recognized as the best, with a turret and hull shape similar to the PzKpfw III tank.
However, the VK 2001/K did not go into production, since the military was not satisfied with the six-wheel chassis with medium-diameter wheels on a spring suspension; it needed to be replaced with a torsion bar. The torsion bar suspension, compared to the spring one, ensured smoother movement of the tank and had a greater vertical travel of the road wheels. Krupp engineers, together with representatives of the Arms Procurement Directorate, agreed on the possibility of using an improved design of spring suspension on the tank with eight small-diameter road wheels on board. However, the Krupp company largely had to revise the proposed original design. In the final version, the PzKpfw IV was a combination of the hull and turret of the VK 2001/K with a chassis newly developed by Krupp.
The PzKpfw IV tank is designed according to the classic layout with a rear engine. The commander's position was located along the axis of the turret directly below the commander's cupola, the gunner was located to the left of the breech of the gun, and the loader was to the right. In the control compartment, located in the front part of the tank hull, there were workstations for the driver (to the left of the vehicle axis) and the radio operator (to the right). Between the driver's and gunner's seats there was a transmission. Interesting feature The design of the tank was to shift the turret approximately 8 cm to the left of the longitudinal axis of the vehicle, and the engine - 15 cm to the right to allow passage of the shaft connecting the engine and transmission. This design decision made it possible to increase the internal reserved volume on the right side of the hull to accommodate the first shots, which could be most easily reached by the loader. The turret rotation drive is electric.
The suspension and chassis consisted of eight small-diameter road wheels grouped into two-wheeled bogies suspended on leaf springs, drive wheels, sloths installed in the rear of the tank, and four rollers supporting the track. Throughout the entire history of operation of the PzKpfw IV tanks, their chassis remained unchanged, only minor improvements were introduced. The prototype of the tank was manufactured at the Krupp plant in Essen and was tested in 1935-36.
Description of the PzKpfw IV tank
Armor protection.
In 1942, consulting engineers Mertz and McLillan conducted a detailed examination of the captured PzKpfw IV Ausf.E tank, in particular, they carefully studied its armor.
— Several armor plates were tested for hardness, all of them were machined. The hardness of the machined armor plates on the outside and inside was 300-460 Brinell.
— The 20 mm thick applied armor plates, which reinforce the armor of the hull sides, are made of homogeneous steel and have a hardness of about 370 Brinell. The reinforced side armor is unable to "hold" 2 pound shells fired from 1000 yards.
On the other hand, shelling of a tank carried out in the Middle East in June 1941 showed that a distance of 500 yards (457 m) can be considered as the limit for effectively hitting a PzKpfw IV in the frontal area with fire from a 2-pounder gun. A report prepared in Woolwich on a study of the armor protection of a German tank notes that “the armor is 10% better than similar machined English armor, and in some respects even better than homogeneous armor.”
At the same time, the method of connecting armor plates was criticized; a specialist from Leyland Motors commented on his research: “The welding quality is poor, the welds of two of the three armor plates in the area where the projectile hit came apart.”
Power point.
The Maybach engine is designed to operate in moderate climatic conditions, where its performance is satisfactory. At the same time, in tropical or highly dusty conditions, it breaks down and is prone to overheating. British intelligence, after studying the PzKpfw IV tank captured in 1942, concluded that engine failures were caused by sand getting into the oil system, distributor, dynamo and starter; air filters are inadequate. Celebrated frequent cases sand getting into the carburetor.
The Maybach engine operating manual requires the use of only 74 octane gasoline with a complete lubricant change after 200, 500, 1000 and 2000 km. The recommended engine speed under normal operating conditions is 2600 rpm, but in hot climates (southern regions of the USSR and North Africa) this speed does not provide normal cooling. Using the engine as a brake is permissible at 2200-2400 rpm; at a speed of 2600-3000 this mode should be avoided.
The main components of the cooling system were two radiators installed at an angle of 25 degrees to the horizontal. The radiators were cooled by an air flow forced by two fans; The fans are driven by a belt from the main engine shaft. Water circulation in the cooling system was ensured by a centrifuge pump. Air entered the engine compartment through an opening on the right side of the hull, covered by an armored damper, and was exhausted out through a similar opening on the left side.
The synchro-mechanical transmission proved efficient, although pulling force in high gears was low, so 6th gear was used only for highway driving. The output shafts are combined with the braking and turning mechanism into a single device. To cool this device, a fan was installed to the left of the clutch box. The simultaneous release of the steering control levers could be used as an effective parking brake.
On tanks of later versions, the spring suspension of the road wheels was heavily overloaded, but replacing the damaged two-wheeled bogie seemed to be a fairly simple operation. The track tension was regulated by the position of the idler mounted on the eccentric. On the Eastern Front, special track extenders known as "Ostketten" were used, which improved the maneuverability of tanks in winter months of the year.
German medium tank PzKpfw IV Ausf. B on the training ground during an exercise.
An extremely simple but effective device for putting on a slipped track was tested on an experimental PzKpfw IV tank. It was a factory-made tape that had the same width as the tracks and was perforated to engage with the drive wheel ring gear. One end of the tape was attached to the slipped track, and the other, after it was passed over the rollers, to the drive wheel. The motor turned on, the drive wheel began to rotate, pulling the tape and the tracks attached to it until the rims of the drive wheel entered the slots on the tracks. The whole operation took a few minutes.
The engine was started by a 24-volt electric starter. Since the auxiliary electric generator saved battery power, it was possible to try to start the engine more times on the “four” than on the PzKpfw III tank. In case of starter failure, or when the lubricant thickened in severe frost, an inertial starter was used, the handle of which was connected to the engine shaft through a hole in the rear armor plate. The handle was turned by two people at the same time; the minimum number of turns of the handle required to start the engine was 60 rpm. Starting the engine from an inertia starter has become commonplace in the Russian winter. The minimum temperature of the engine at which it began to operate normally was t = 50 degrees C with a shaft rotation of 2000 rpm.
To facilitate engine starting in the cold climate of the Eastern Front, a special system was developed known as the “Kuhlwasserubertragung” - a cold water heat exchanger. After starting and warming up to normal temperature engine of one tank, warm water from it was pumped into the cooling system of the next tank, and cold water came to an already running motor - an exchange of coolants between the running and non-running motors took place. After the warm water warmed up the engine somewhat, you could try starting the engine with an electric starter. The Kuhlwasserubertragung system required minor modifications to the tank's cooling system.
Guns and optics.
The 75 mm L/24 howitzer installed on early models of the PzKpfw IV tank had a barrel with 28 rifling 0.85 mm deep and a semi-automatic vertical sliding bolt. The gun was equipped with a clinometric sight, which, if necessary, allowed the tank to conduct targeted fire from closed positions. The barrel recoil cylinder protruded beyond the gun mantlet and covered most of the gun barrel. The gun cradle was heavier than required, resulting in a slight imbalance in the turret.
The tank gun's ammunition included high-explosive, anti-tank, smoke and grapeshot shells. The gunner aimed the cannon and the coaxial machine gun at the elevation angle, rotating a special steering wheel with his left hand. The turret could be deployed either electrically by switching a toggle switch, or manually, for which a steering wheel mounted to the right of the weapon vertical guidance mechanism was used. Both the gunner and the loader could deploy the turret manually; maximum speed manual rotation of the turret by the efforts of the gunner was 1.9 g/s, and by the gunner - 2.6 g/s.
The electric drive for turning the turret is mounted on the left side of the turret, the turning speed is controlled manually, the maximum turning speed using an electric drive reaches 14 g/s (about two times lower than on British tanks), the minimum is -0.14 g/s. Since the motor responds to control signals with a delay, it is difficult to track a moving target while rotating the turret using an electric drive. The gun is fired using an electric trigger, the button of which is mounted on the steering wheel of the manual drive for turning the turret. The barrel recoil mechanism after a shot has a hydropneumatic shock absorber. The tower is equipped with various instruments and devices that provide safe working conditions for crew members.
German tank PzKpfw IV Ausf. G on the march in Normandy.
The installation of long-barreled L/43 and L/48 guns instead of the short-barreled L/24 led to an imbalance in the turret gun mount (the barrel outweighed the breech), and a special spring had to be installed to compensate for the increased weight of the barrel; the spring was installed in a metal cylinder in the right front segment of the tower. More powerful guns also had stronger recoil when fired, which required redesigning the recoil mechanism, which became wider and longer, but despite the modifications, the recoil of the barrel after a shot still increased by 50 mm compared to the recoil of the barrel of a 24-caliber gun. When making marches under their own power or when transporting by rail, in order to slightly increase the free internal volume, 43- and 48-caliber guns were raised at an angle of 16 degrees and fixed in this position with a special external folding support
The telescopic sight of the long-barreled 75 mm gun had two rotating scales and for its time had enough high level integration. The first scale, the distance scale, rotated around its axis; aiming marks for firing from a cannon and machine gun were applied to the scale in different quadrants; the scale for firing high-explosive shells (Gr34) and for firing from a machine gun was graduated within the range of 0-3200 m, while the scales for firing armor-piercing shells (PzGr39 and PzGr40) were graduated, respectively, at distances of 0-2400 m and 0-1400 m The second scale, the sighting scale, shifted in the vertical plane. Both scales could move simultaneously, the sight scale raised or lowered, and the distance scale rotated. To hit the selected target, the distance scale was rotated until the required mark was positioned opposite the mark at the top of the sight, and the sight scale mark was superimposed on the target by turning the turret and pointing the gun in the vertical plane.
German medium tanks PzKpfw IV Ausf H during an exercise to practice crew interaction. Germany, June 1944
In many respects, the PzKpfw IV tank was a perfect fighting vehicle for its time. Inside the commander's turret of the tank, a scale was applied, graduated in the range from 1 to 12, in each sector it was divided by divisions into another 24 intervals. When the turret rotated, due to a special gear transmission, the commander's cupola rotated in reverse side at the same speed so that the number 12 constantly remained on the center line of the machine body. This design made it easier for the commander to find the next target and point the direction towards it to the gunner. An indicator was installed to the left of the gunner's position, repeating the breakdown of the scale of the commander's cupola and rotating in the same way. After receiving a command from the commander, the gunner turned the turret in the indicated direction (for example, 10 o’clock), checking the repeater scale, and after visually detecting the target, he aimed the gun at it.
The driver had a turret rotation indicator in the form of two blue lights, indicating in which direction the gun was deployed. It was important for the driver to know in which direction the gun barrel was pointed, so as not to catch it on any obstacle while moving. On PzKpfw IV tanks of the latest modifications, warning lights were not installed for the driver.
The tank's ammunition load, armed with a cannon with a 24-caliber barrel, consisted of 80 cannon shells and 2,700 machine gun rounds. On tanks with long-barreled guns, the ammunition load was 87 shells and 3,150 rounds of ammunition. It was not easy for the loader to get to most of the ammunition. The ammunition for the machine guns was in drum-type magazines with a capacity of 150 rounds. In general, the German tank was inferior to the British in terms of ease of placement of ammunition. The installation of the course machine gun on the “four” was unbalanced; the barrel was outweighed; to correct this shortcoming it was necessary to install a balancing spring. For emergency escape from the control compartment, there was a round hatch with a diameter of 43 cm in the floor under the radio operator’s seat.
On early versions of the PzKpfw IV, guides for smoke grenades were mounted on the rear armor plate; each guide carried up to five grenades held by springs. The tank commander could launch grenades, either individually or in series. The launch was carried out by means of a wire rod, each jerk of the rod caused a rotation of the rod by 1/5 full turn and released another spring. After the appearance of smoke grenade launchers of a new design, which were mounted on the sides of the turret, the old system was abandoned. The commander's cupola was equipped with armored shutters that covered observation glass blocks; the armored shutters could be installed in three positions: completely closed, fully open and intermediate. The driver's inspection glass block was also closed with an armored shutter. German optics of that time had a slight greenish tint.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.A (Sonderkraftfahrzeug - Sd.Kfz.161)
The first model to go into mass production at the Krupp plant in Magdeburg-Bukkau in 1936 was the “Ausfurung A”. Structurally and technologically, the vehicle was similar to the PzKpfw III tank: chassis, hull, hull superstructure, turret. The Ausf.A tanks were equipped with 12-cylinder Maybach HL108TR internal combustion engines with a power of 250 hp. The ZF Allklauen SFG 75 transmission had five forward gears and one reverse gear.
The tank's armament consisted of a 75 mm gun and a coaxial 7.92 mm machine gun; another 7.92 mm machine gun was installed in the tank's hull; ammunition - 122 rounds for the cannon and 3000 rounds for two machine guns. Observation devices covered by armored shutters were located in the frontal plate of the turret, to the left and right of the gun mantlet and in the side turret hatches; in addition, there was one embrasure on the sides of the turret (also closed by an armored shutter) for firing from personal weapons.
A commander's cupola of a simple cylindrical shape, which had eight viewing slots, was mounted at the rear of the tower roof. The turret had a single-leaf hinged hatch. The turn of the turret was controlled by the gunner; the electric turn drive was powered by a two-stroke auxiliary electric generator “DKW” installed in the left side of the engine compartment. The electric generator made it possible not to waste battery power on turning the tower and saved the life of the main engine. The engine compartment was separated from the combat compartment by a fire partition, which had a hatch for access to the engine from inside the tank. Three fuel tanks with a total capacity of 453 liters were located under the floor of the fighting compartment.
The positions of the radio operator and driver were located in the front of the tank; in the roof of the hull above the seats of both crew members there were double hatches with holes in the covers for launching signal flares; the holes were closed with armored flaps. The thickness of the Ausf.A tank's hull armor was 14.5 mm, the turret was 20 mm, the tank's weight was 17.3 tons, and its maximum speed was 30 km/h. A total of 35 vehicles of the Ausf.A modification were manufactured; Chassis no. 80101 - 80135.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.B
The production of cars of the Ausfurung B model began in 1937, a large number of changes were made to the design of the new modification, the main innovation was the installation of a 320-horsepower Maybach HL120TR engine and a transmission with six forward speeds and one reverse. The thickness of the armor in the frontal part was also increased to 30 mm; on some tanks they began to install commander's turrets of a more advanced form with observation devices covered by armored shutters.
The installation of a course machine gun at the radio operator's gunner was eliminated; instead of a machine gun, a viewing slot and an embrasure for firing a pistol appeared; embrasures for firing from personal weapons were also made in the side turret hatches under the observation devices; The driver's and radio operator's hatches became single-leaf. The weight of the Ausf.B tank increased to 17.7 tons, but due to the use of a more powerful engine, the maximum speed also increased to 40 km/h. A total of 45 PzKpfw IV Ausf.B tanks were built; Chassis no. 80201-80300.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.S
In 1938, the “Ausfurung C” modification appeared; 134 copies of this model were already built (chassis no. 80301-80500). Externally, the Ausf.A, B and C tanks were practically no different from each other, perhaps the only external difference between the Ausf.C tank and the Ausf. B became an armored mantlet for a coaxial machine gun, which was absent on previous models of tanks.
On tanks PzKpfw IV Ausf. From later releases, a special frame was mounted under the gun barrel, which served to deflect the antenna when the turret was turned to the right; similar deflectors were mounted on Ausf.A and Ausf.B vehicles. The armor protection of the frontal part of the turret of the Ausf.C tank was increased to 30 mm, and the weight of the vehicle increased to 18.5 tons, although the maximum speed on the highway remained the same - 35 km/h.
The tank was equipped with a modernized Maybach HL120TRM engine of the same power; this engine became standard for all subsequent variants of the PzKpfw IV.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.D
The turret armament of the Ausf.A, B and C tanks was mounted in an internal mantlet, which could easily be jammed by shell fragments; Since 1939, the production of Ausfurung D tanks began, which had an external mantlet; tanks of this modification again had a front-facing machine gun; the embrasure for firing a pistol through the frontal armor plate of the hull was shifted closer to the longitudinal axis of the vehicle.
The thickness of the armor on the sides and rear of the hull was increased to 20 mm; tanks of later production were fitted with overhead armor, which was bolted to the hull and superstructure or welded on.
As a result of various modifications, the weight of the tank increased to 20 tons. Before the start of World War II, only 45 Ausfurung D tanks were produced; a total of 229 vehicles of this modification were built (chassis no. 80501-80748) - more than Ausf.A, B and C tanks combined. Some PzKpfw IV Ausf.D tanks were subsequently equipped with 75-mm cannons with a barrel length of 48 calibers; these vehicles were used mainly in training units.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.E
The next step in the development of tanks of the PzKpfw IV family was the Ausfurung E model, with increased armor in the frontal part of the hull due to the installation of 30 mm screens (total thickness - 50 mm), the sides of the hull were increased with 20 mm thick screens. The weight of the Ausf.E tank was already 21 tons. During factory repairs, applied armor began to be installed on the “fours” of earlier modifications.
On the PzKpfw IV Ausf.E tanks, the commander's cupola was moved slightly forward, and its armor was increased from 50 mm to 95 mm; New design support rollers and simplified drive wheels were installed. Other innovations include a driver's observation device with a larger glass area, an installation for launching smoke grenades mounted in the rear of the hull (similar installations began to be installed on cars of previous models), hatches for inspecting the brakes are made flush with the upper armor plate of the hull (on Ausf.A-D hatches protruded above the armor plate and there were cases when they were torn off by anti-tank rifle bullets). Serial production of Ausf.E model tanks began in December 1939. 224 vehicles of this modification were manufactured (chassis numbers 80801-81500), before production in April 1941 switched to the release of the next version - “Ausfurung F”.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.F1
The PzKpfw IV Ausf.F tanks had a thickness of integral frontal armor of the hull and turret of 50 mm, and sides of 30 mm; overhead armored screens were absent. The turret's armor was 50 mm thick at the front, 30 mm thick at the sides and rear, and the gun mantlet was also 50 mm thick. The increased armor protection did not leave its mark on the mass of the tank, which again increased to 22.3 tons. As a result, the specific load on the ground went beyond the permissible limits; instead of tracks with a track width of 380 mm, it was necessary to use a caterpillar with tracks 400 mm wide and carry out the appropriate modifications to drive wheels and idlers.
On early production vehicles, new tracks were installed after inserting expansion inserts into the drive wheels and idlers. Instead of a single-leaf hatch, the commander's turrets of the Ausf.F tanks received double-leaf hatches, and a large box for equipment began to be mounted on the rear walls of the turrets at the factory; The course machine gun was mounted in a Kugelblende-50 ball mount of a new design. A total of 462 PzKpfw IV Ausf.F tanks were produced.
In addition to the Krupp company, the Ausf.F model vehicles were produced by the Vomag (64 tanks assembled, chassis nos. 82501-82395) and Nibelungwerke (13 vehicles 82601-82613) factories. Tank chassis numbers produced by the Krupp plant in Magdeburg are 82001-82395. Later, the Austrian company Steyr-Daimler-Puch joined the production of PzKpfw IV tanks, and the Vomag company (Vogtiandischie Maschinenfabrik AG) in 1940-41. built a new plant in Plauen specifically for the production of fours.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.F2 (Sd.Kfz.161/1)
In the months leading up to the start of Operation Barbarossa, the possibility of arming the PzKpfw IV tanks with a 50-mm gun with a 42-caliber barrel length, similar to that installed on the PzKpfw III tanks, was considered. Hitler was extremely interested in this project, since it was possible to transfer the “four” from the category of fire support vehicles to the category of main battle tanks. However, the experience of the war in Russia made obvious not only the fact that the German 50-mm gun was inferior to the 76-mm Soviet one, but also the complete inability of a 50-mm cannon with a 42-caliber barrel to penetrate the armor of Soviet tanks. Arming PzKpfw IV tanks with 50-mm guns with a barrel length of 60 calibers was seen as more promising; one such experimental vehicle was built.
The history of tank armament has fully demonstrated Germany’s unpreparedness for waging a long war, and the absence of finished projects second generation tanks. The morale of the Panzerwaffe soldiers and officers was greatly affected by the unpleasant discovery of the overwhelming superiority in the characteristics of the tanks in service with the Red Army.
The problem of restoring parity has acquired exceptional importance. PzKpfw III tanks began to be armed with guns with a barrel length of 60 calibers, since the turret ring of the “four” had a larger diameter than the shoulder strap of the “troika”, then if a 50-mm gun with a barrel length of 60 calibers was installed on the PzKpfw IV, the result was too large a chassis with too much small gun. The Quartet's turret could withstand a recoil impulse greater than that of a short-barreled 75 mm gun, and it was possible to install a 75 mm gun with high pressure in the barrel bore on the tank.
The choice was made in favor of the 75-mm KwK40 cannon with a 43-caliber barrel length and a muzzle brake, the projectile of which could penetrate armor up to 89 mm thick at an impact angle of 30 degrees. After such guns began to be installed on the PzKpfw IV, the designation of the vehicle changed to “Ausfuhrung F2”, while vehicles of the same modification, but armed with short-barreled guns, received the designation “Ausfuhrung F1”.
The gun's ammunition consisted of 87 shells, 32 of which were placed in the hull superstructure, 33 in the tank hull. Among the smaller external differences of the Ausfuhrung F2 tanks is the absence of observation devices in the side turret hatches and an enlarged armored casing of the recoil mechanism.
The Ausfuhrung F2 tanks entered service at the beginning of 1942 and proved in practice their ability to fight the Soviet T-34 and KB, although the armor of the “fours” was still insufficient by the standards of the Eastern Front. The tank's weight, which increased to 23.6 tons, somewhat worsened its characteristics.
25 PzKpfw IV Ausf tanks were converted into the “Ausfuhrung F2” variant. F, about 180 more vehicles were built from scratch, production ceased in the summer of 1942. Chassis no. of tanks built by Krupp - 82396-82500, chassis no. of tanks built by Vomag - 82565-82600, chassis no. of tanks built Nibelungwerke - 82614-82700.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.G (Sd.Kfz.161/1 and 161/2)
Attempts to improve the tank's protection led to the appearance of the "Ausfuhrung G" modification at the end of 1942. The designers knew that the weight limit that the chassis could withstand had already been chosen, so they had to make a compromise solution - dismantling the 20-mm side screens that were installed on all “fours”, starting with the “E” model, while simultaneously increasing the base armor of the hull to 30 mm, and due to the saved weight, install 30 mm thick overhead screens in the frontal part.
Another measure to increase the tank’s security was the installation of removable anti-cumulative screens (“schurzen”) 5 mm thick on the sides of the hull and turret; adding screens increased the weight of the vehicle by about 500 kg. In addition, the gun's single-chamber muzzle brake was replaced with a more effective two-chamber one. The appearance of the vehicle also underwent a number of other changes: instead of the aft smoke launcher, built-in blocks of smoke grenade launchers began to be mounted in the corners of the turret, and the openings for launching flares in the driver and gunner hatches were eliminated.
By the end of the serial production of the PzKpfw IV "Ausfuhrung G" tanks, their standard main weapon became a 75-mm gun with a barrel length of 48 calibers, and the commander's cupola hatch became single-leaf. The PzKpfw IV Ausf.G tanks of later production are almost identical in appearance to the early vehicles of the Ausf.N modification. From May 1942 to June 1943, 1687 tanks of the Ausf.G model were manufactured, an impressive figure considering that in five years, from the end of 1937 to the summer of 1942, 1300 PzKpfw IV of all modifications were built (Ausf.A -F2), chassis No. - 82701-84400.
In 1944 it was manufactured tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.G with hydrostatic drive of the drive wheels. The drive design was developed by specialists from the Tsanradfabrik company in Augsburg. The main Maybach engine drove two oil pumps, which in turn activated two hydraulic motors connected by output shafts to the drive wheels. The entire power plant was located in the rear of the hull; accordingly, the drive wheels had a rear location, rather than the front one, which is usual for the PzKpfw IV. The speed of the tank was controlled by the driver, controlling the oil pressure created by the pumps.
After the war, the experimental machine came to the USA and was tested by specialists from the Vickers company from Detroit, this company at that time was engaged in work in the field of hydrostatic drives. The tests had to be interrupted due to material failures and a lack of spare parts. Currently, the PzKpfw IV Ausf.G tank with hydrostatic drive wheels is on display in the US Army Tank Museum, Aberdeen, USA. Maryland.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.H (Sd.Kfz. 161/2)
The installation of a long-barreled 75 mm gun turned out to be a rather controversial measure. The gun led to excessive overload of the front part of the tank, the front springs were under constant pressure, and the tank acquired a tendency to sway even when moving on a flat surface. It was possible to get rid of the unpleasant effect with the “Ausfuhrung H” modification, which was put into production in March 1943.
On tanks of this model, the integral armor of the frontal part of the hull, superstructure and turret was strengthened to 80 mm. The PzKpfw IV Ausf.H tank weighed 26 tons and even despite the use of the new SSG-77 transmission, its characteristics turned out to be lower than those of the “fours” of previous models, so the speed of movement over rough terrain decreased by no less than 15 km, the specific pressure on the ground, the acceleration characteristics of the vehicle dropped. A hydrostatic transmission was tested on the experimental PzKpfw IV Ausf.H tank, but tanks with such a transmission did not go into mass production.
During the production process, many minor modifications were introduced to the Ausf.H model tanks, in particular, they began to install all-steel rollers without rubber, the shape of the drive wheels and idlers changed, a turret for the MG-34 anti-aircraft machine gun (“Fligerbeschussgerat 42” - installation of an anti-aircraft gun) appeared on the commander’s cupola. machine gun), the tower embrasures for firing pistols and the hole in the roof of the tower for launching signal flares were eliminated.
Ausf.H tanks were the first “fours” to use Zimmerit antimagnetic coating; Only the vertical surfaces of the tank were supposed to be covered with zimmerit, but in practice the coating was applied to all surfaces that an infantryman standing on the ground could reach; on the other hand, there were also tanks on which only the forehead of the hull and superstructure were covered with zimmerit. Zimmerit was applied both in factories and in the field.
Tanks of the Ausf.H modification became the most popular among all PzKpfw IV models, 3,774 of them were built, production ceased in the summer of 1944. Factory chassis numbers - 84401-89600, some of these chassis served as the basis for the construction of assault guns.
Tank PzKpfw IV Ausf.J (Sd.Kfz.161/2)
The last model launched into the series was the modification “Ausfuhrung J”. Vehicles of this variant began to enter service in June 1944. From a design point of view, the PzKpfw IV Ausf.J represented a step back.
Instead of an electric drive for turning the turret, a manual one was installed, but it became possible to install an additional fuel tank with a capacity of 200 liters. Increasing the cruising range on the highway from 220 km to 300 km (off-road - from 130 km to 180 km) by placing additional fuel seemed to be an extremely important decision, since panzer divisions increasingly played the role of “fire brigades”, which were transferred from one sector of the Eastern Front another.
An attempt to somewhat reduce the weight of the tank was the installation of welded wire anti-cumulative screens; such screens were called “Tom screens”, after the surname of General Tom). Such screens were installed only on the sides of the hull, and the previous screens made of sheet steel remained on the towers. On tanks of late production, instead of four rollers, three were installed, and vehicles were also produced with steel road wheels without rubber
Almost all modifications were aimed at reducing the labor intensity of manufacturing tanks, including: the elimination of all embrasures on the tank for firing pistols and extra viewing slots (only the driver's, in the commander's cupola and in the frontal armor plate of the tower remained), installation of simplified towing loops , replacing the muffler with an exhaust system with two simple pipes. Another attempt to improve the vehicle's security was to increase the armor of the turret roof by 18 mm and the rear armor by 26 mm.
Production of PzKpfw IV Ausf.J tanks ceased in March 1945; a total of 1,758 vehicles were built.
By 1944, it became clear that the design of the tank had exhausted all reserves for modernization; a revolutionary attempt to increase the combat effectiveness of the PzKpfw IV by installing a turret from the Panther tank, armed with a 75-mm gun with a barrel length of 70 calibers, was not crowned with success - the chassis turned out to be too overloaded. Before installing the Panther turret, the designers tried to squeeze the Panther cannon into the turret of the PzKpfw IV tank. The installation of a wooden model of the gun showed the complete impossibility of crew members working in the turret due to the tightness created by the breech of the gun. As a consequence of this failure, the idea was born to mount the entire turret from the Panther on the Pz.IV hull.
Due to the constant modernization of tanks during factory repairs, it is not possible to accurately determine how many tanks of one modification or another were built. Very often there were various hybrid options, for example, turrets from Ausf.G were installed on the hulls of the Ausf.D model.
Tactical and technical characteristics of Pz IV tanks
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
| PzKpfw IV | |
| Crew | |
| Length (mm) | |
| Width | |
| Height | |
| Track | |
| Clearance | |
| Combat weight (kg) | |
| Ground pressure | |
| Cruising range: highway (km) | |
| along the country road | |
| Speed (km/h) | |
| Fuel consumption (l/100 km) | |
| Armor (mm): | |
| Body: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern | |
| Tower: forehead | |
| board | |
| stern |
Apparently, we should start with a rather unexpected statement that with the creation of the Pz.IV tank in 1937, the Germans determined a promising path for the development of world tank building. This thesis is quite capable of shocking our reader, since we are accustomed to believe that this place in history is reserved for the Soviet T-34 tank. Nothing can be done, you will have to make room and share laurels with the enemy, albeit a defeated one. Well, so that this statement does not look unfounded, we will provide some evidence.
For this purpose, we will try to compare the “four” with the Soviet, British and American tanks that opposed it in different periods of World War II. Let's start with the first period - 1940-1941; At the same time, we will not focus on the then German classification of tanks by gun caliber, which classified the medium Pz.IV as heavy. Since the British did not have a medium tank as such, they would have to consider two vehicles at once: one infantry, the other cruising. In this case, only “pure” declared characteristics are compared, without taking into account the quality of workmanship, operational reliability, level of crew training, etc.
As can be seen from Table 1, in 1940 - 1941 in Europe there were only two full-fledged medium tanks - T-34 and Pz.IV. The British Matilda was superior to the German and Soviet tanks in armor protection to the same extent that the Mk IV was inferior to them. The French S35 was a tank brought to perfection that met the requirements of the First World War. As for the T-34, while inferior to the German vehicle in a number of important positions (separation of functions of crew members, quantity and quality of surveillance devices), it had armor equivalent to the Pz.IV, slightly better mobility and significantly more powerful weapons. This lag of the German vehicle is easily explained - the Pz.IV was conceived and created as an assault tank, designed to fight enemy firing points, but not his tanks. In this regard, the T-34 was more versatile and, as a result, according to its stated characteristics, the best medium tank in the world for 1941. After just six months, the situation changed, as can be judged by the characteristics of tanks from the period 1942 - 1943.
Table 1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
* The commander's cupola counts as one observation device
table 2
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
* For the Grant I tank, only the 75 mm cannon is taken into account.
Table 3
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table 2 shows how dramatically the combat characteristics of the Pz.IV increased after the installation of a long-barreled gun. Not inferior to enemy tanks in all other respects, the “four” turned out to be capable of hitting Soviet and American tanks beyond the range of their guns. We are not talking about English cars - for four years of the war the British were marking time. Until the end of 1943, the combat characteristics of the T-34 remained virtually unchanged, with the Pz.IV taking first place among medium tanks. The answer - both Soviet and American - was not long in coming.
Comparing tables 2 and 3, one can see that since 1942 performance characteristics Pz.IV did not change (except for the thickness of the armor) and during two years of the war remained unsurpassed by anyone! Only in 1944, having installed a 76-mm long-barreled gun on the Sherman, did the Americans catch up with the Pz.IV, and we, having launched the T-34-85 into production, overtook it. The Germans no longer had the time or opportunity to give a worthy answer.
Analyzing the data from all three tables, we can conclude that the Germans, earlier than others, began to consider the tank as the main and most effective anti-tank weapon, and this is the main trend in post-war tank building.
In general, it can be argued that of all the German tanks of the Second World War, the Pz.IV was the most balanced and versatile. In this car, various characteristics were harmoniously combined and complemented each other. The "Tiger" and "Panther", for example, had a clear bias towards protection, which led to their overweight and deterioration in dynamic characteristics. The Pz.III, with many other characteristics being equal to the Pz.IV, did not match it in armament and, having no reserves for modernization, left the stage.
The Pz.IV, with a similar Pz.III, but slightly more thoughtful layout, had such reserves to the fullest. This is the only wartime tank with a 75 mm cannon, whose main armament was significantly strengthened without changing the turret. The turret of the T-34-85 and Sherman had to be replaced, and, by and large, these were almost new vehicles. The British went their own way and, like a fashionista, changed not the towers, but the tanks! But “Cromwell,” which appeared in 1944, never reached the “four,” as did “Comet,” released in 1945. Only the post-war Centurion was able to bypass the German tank, created in 1937.
From the above, of course, it does not follow that the Pz.IV was an ideal tank. Let's say it had insufficient engine power and a rather rigid and outdated suspension, which negatively affected its maneuverability. To some extent, the latter was compensated for by the lowest L/B ratio of 1.43 among all medium tanks.
The equipping of the Pz.lV (as well as other tanks) with anti-cumulative screens cannot be considered a successful move by German designers. HEAT ammunition was rarely used en masse, but the screens increased the dimensions of the vehicle, making it difficult to move in narrow passages, blocked most surveillance devices, and made it difficult for the crew to board and disembark. However, an even more pointless and rather expensive measure was coating the tanks with Zimmerit.
Specific power values for medium tanks
But perhaps the biggest mistake the Germans made was trying to switch to a new type of medium tank - the Panther. As the latter, it did not take place (for more details, see "Armor Collection" No. 2, 1997), joining the "Tiger" in the class of heavy vehicles, but it played a fatal role in the fate of the Pz.lV.
Having concentrated all their efforts on creating new tanks in 1942, the Germans stopped seriously modernizing the old ones. Let's try to imagine what would have happened if not for the Panther? The project of installing a “Panther” turret on the Pz.lV is well known, both standard and “close” (Schmall-turm). The project is quite realistic in size - the clear diameter of the turret ring for the Panther is 1650 mm, for the Pz.lV it is 1600 mm. The tower stood up without expanding the turret box. The situation with the weight characteristics was somewhat worse - due to the long reach of the gun barrel, the center of gravity shifted forward and the load on the front road wheels increased by 1.5 tons. However, it could be compensated for by strengthening their suspension. In addition, it must be taken into account that the KwK 42 cannon was created for the Panther, and not for the Pz.IV. For the "four" it was possible to limit ourselves to a gun with smaller weight and dimensions, with a barrel length of, say, not 70, but 55 or 60 calibers. Even if such a weapon would require replacing the turret, it would still make it possible to get by with a lighter design than the Panther one.
The inevitably increasing (by the way, even without such a hypothetical rearmament) weight of the tank required replacing the Engine. For comparison: the dimensions of the HL 120TKRM engine installed on the Pz.IV were 1220x680x830 mm, and the Panther HL 230P30 - 1280x960x1090 mm. The clear dimensions of the engine compartments were almost identical for these two tanks. The Panther's was 480 mm longer, mainly due to the inclination of the rear hull plate. Consequently, equipping the Pz.lV with a higher power engine was not an insurmountable design task.
The results of this, of course, far from complete, list of possible modernization measures would be very sad, since they would nullify the work on creating the T-34-85 for us and the Sherman with a 76-mm cannon for the Americans. In 1943-1945, the industry of the Third Reich produced about 6 thousand “Panthers” and almost 7 thousand Pz.IV. If we take into account that the labor intensity of manufacturing the "Panther" was almost twice as much as that of the Pz.lV, then we can assume that during the same time German factories could produce an additional 10-12 thousand modernized "fours", which would be delivered to the soldiers of the anti-Hitler coalition much more trouble than the Panthers.
