Experienced heavy tank T34 USA. Location of internal modules

Official designation: T34 Heavy Tank
Alternative designation:
Start of design: 1944
Date of construction of the first prototype: 1946
Completion stage: one prototype has been built.

In the history of world tank building, there were three tanks with the T-34 index of different classes and periods of construction. They were two Soviet tanks (“mobilization” model 1932 and medium model 1940-1945) and one American heavy tank. The latter had the T34 index and belonged more to the “assault” class, having a very wide range actions, from fighting enemy armored vehicles to suppressing long-term fortifications.
The history of this combat vehicle, which never made it out of the experimental stage, began in March 1944, when the Ordnance Department issued a specification for a heavy tank that was superior to the then-available M26 in armament and armor. A year later, one prototype of the T29 and T30 tanks was assembled, mostly differing only in the type of gun, but neither one nor the other could fully satisfy the requirements of the military. Then a proposal was made to equip one of the prototypes T29 with a T53 type gun of 120 mm caliber.

As experimental firing showed, this artillery system had better armor penetration compared to the 105 mm T5E1 and 155 mm T7. For example, the T20E3 armor-piercing projectile (total mass 23 kg) with an initial speed of 945 m/s at a distance of 914 meters pierced an armor plate 198 mm thick, installed at an angle of 30°; As the distance increased to 1829 meters, this figure decreased to 173 mm, but even in this case, the projectile was guaranteed to penetrate the armor of any German tank. The HVAP-type sub-caliber round, developed for the 120-mm T53 gun, had even more impressive characteristics. Having an initial speed of about 1249 m/s, under the above conditions, the projectile penetrated armor with a thickness of 381 mm and 318 mm, respectively. True, with an increase in the slope of the armor to 60°, armor penetration seriously deteriorated and was already 112 mm and 76 mm. However, the performance looked impressive and in mid-1945 work began on installing the T53 gun on the T29 tank. After the changes, the new car began to be designated as T-34. It was originally planned that the tank would be equipped with a Ford GAC engine, but these plans were soon changed.

Structurally, both models were almost identical, with the exception of details regarding the new artillery system. Externally, the T34 differed from the T29 only in the gun barrel. The tank hull was made of homogeneous armor sheets. Priority in protection was given to the frontal part, where the armor thickness was 70-102 mm. The sides were made of 51-76 mm armor plates, the stern - 19-51 mm. The thickness of the bow of the bottom was increased to 38 mm - the hull roof had a similar thickness. The body layout is classic.
The chassis, for one side, consisted of the following elements:

— 8 rubberized road wheels, individual suspension, torsion bar, tire size 26x6 inches;

— 7 supporting wheels;

— front guide wheel, bandage size 26x6 inches;

— rear drive wheel with 15 rims with a diameter of 28.89 inches (734 mm);

— rubber-metal double-ridge caterpillar track with T80E3 type tracks with a width of 711 mm and a pitch of 152 mm, total tracks – 204 pcs.

A Continental AV-1790-3 V-shaped 12-cylinder gasoline engine was installed in the engine-transmission compartment, developing a maximum power of 810 hp at 2800 rpm. and nominal 704 hp. The engine displacement was 1791.7 cubic inches. Fuel (80 octane gasoline) was stored in a tank with a capacity of 320 gallons (1211 liters).

The CD-850-1 type transmission had two forward speeds, one reverse speed and disc brakes. Gear ratios were 12.761, 6.2:1 and 20.6:1 respectively. The main gear was spur-cut, cylindrical, with a gear ratio of 6.31:1. The tank was controlled using a joystick-type steering lever.

The electrical system used two 28.5-volt generators, producing a nominal voltage of 24 volts direct current. The main generator was powered by the main engine, and the auxiliary generator by the spare one. The tank was also equipped with two 12-volt batteries. Electricity was supplied to interior lighting devices, phases, side lights and communications equipment. As standard, the tank was equipped with a radio station SCR 508 or SCR 528 and an intercom for 6 subscribers with an external output of the RC-298 type. The fire extinguishing system used three 10-pound stationary and two 5-pound portable fire extinguishers filled with a mixture of carbon monoxide.

The viewing devices were very diverse. For direct shooting, the gunner could use the T143E2 telescopic sight and the M10E10 periscopic sight. For firing from closed positions, the following sighting equipment was used: T19 azimuth indicator, M9 vertical guidance quadrant and M1 gunner's quadrant. The driver and assistant driver were equipped with M13 periscope devices. The commander's cupola had six prismatic viewing devices. In addition, the commander had at his disposal an M15 periscope installed in the turret hatch.

The main armament, which, as mentioned earlier, consisted of a 120-mm T53 gun with separate case loading on a T125 carriage, was placed in a cast turret with a shoulder strap of 2.032 meters. Vertical guidance angles varied from -10° to +15°; The turret could be rotated using an electro-hydraulic or manual system. It turned 360° in 20 seconds. The maximum rate of fire was 5 rounds per minute.

As usual, the turret armor was particularly strong and varied along vertical surfaces from 127 to 203 mm. The thickness of the gun mantlet armor was 203-279 mm. To the left of the gun, two 12.7-mm Colt-Browning M2HB machine guns were mounted, and another similar machine gun was mounted on the roof of the turret as an anti-aircraft gun. On the right, one 7.62-mm Colt-Browning М1919А4 machine gun was installed in the frontal plate of the hull. The package carried six Thompson submachine guns of 11.43 mm caliber. The total ammunition included:

— 34 shots for a 120 mm cannon

— 2090 rounds for 12.7 mm machine guns

— 1080 rounds for 11.43 mm Thompson assault rifles

— 2050 rounds for a 7.62 mm machine gun.

The tank's crew consisted of 6 people: the driver and assistant driver were located in the control compartment in the front part of the hull, and the positions of the commander, gunner and two loaders were in the turret.

It would seem that no difficulties should have arisen when converting the T29 into the T34, but problems began immediately after the attempt to install the gun. As it turned out, to balance it was necessary to add a counterweight - this task was completed quickly, but while the work was underway, the war ended. Testing of the T34 prototype began only in 1946. The tank was transferred to the training ground at Fort Knox, where it was “tested” by military tank crews.

During the fire tests, it turned out that after a shot there was a big problem with gas contamination in the fighting compartment. Two fans could no longer cope with the powder gases of the powerful weapon. Then, such an unpleasant thing as a “reverse flash” was discovered - for this reason, two people were hospitalized in Fort Knox alone, and during tests in Aberdeen, several tankers had their eyebrows and hair burned. As you might guess, the reason for this was the same unburnt completely powder gases, which were drawn into the turret during the extraction of the cartridge case and, mixing with oxygen, caused re-ignition. First attempt to install fighting compartment The compressor for blowing the barrel turned out to be unsuccessful, and then a smoke suction device was installed on the gun barrel, as was done previously for the 90-mm T15E4 and M3E4 guns. The solution turned out to be very successful and was subsequently used on other American tanks, but the fate of the experimental T34 was already sealed. At the end of the 1940s. The Ordnance Department has revised plans for tanks based on the T29, significantly reducing their construction program. In fact, the matter was limited to only “pilot” and experimental models, after which almost all manufactured samples were scrapped. The only prototype of the T34 tank has not survived to this day and was cut into metal.

Sources:
“British and American tanks of the Second World War” by P. Chamberlain and K. Alice. AST\Astrel. Moscow. 2003
P.Chamberlen and C.Ellis "British and American Tanks of World War Two", Silverdale Books, 2004
R.P. Hunnicutt "A History Of The American Heavy Tank" Feist Publications, 1987
R.J.Icks "A History Of The American Heavy Tank", AFV Weapons Profile, No. 41
Para Bellum: T34 heavy tank
Armored site: American heavy tanks

TACTICAL AND TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF A HEAVY TANK
T34 model 1945

The T34 is equipped with a powerful weapon with a long aiming time and large dispersion. The turret's armor is one of the best in the game, but it comes at the cost of weak hull armor. Due to its large dimensions, the tank becomes an attractive target for artillery.

Elite equipment

Advantages

• High damage per shot
• Good penetration with BB shell
• strong tower
• Excellent UVN

Flaws

• Long mixing and reloading
• Slow rotation of the turret and hull
• Low top speed
• Weak hull armor
• Large dimensions

Crew skills and abilities

Equipment

Increasing reload speed

100% crew = 14.38 sec
100% crew + Rammer = 12.94 sec
100% crew + Rammer + Improved ventilation = 12.66 sec
100% crew + Rammer + Improved ventilation + Coke box = 12.12 sec

Application

Well suited for offensive actions or shooting at someone else's light. In close combat without the support of allies, the tank becomes defenseless due to the long reload time.

The huge dispersion of the gun on the move, combined with the low aiming speed, does not make it possible to quickly open fire after stopping or moving out from behind cover.

T34 can be used as a tank destroyer. We have enough for this precision weapon with high armor penetration and a thick turret through which you can successfully tank. The T34 is most effective in a group of allied tanks at medium-long range.

The clinch is especially worth noting. Unlike the T32, the small size of the gun mantlet and the height of the T34 make this type of close combat ineffective. At close range, the enemy can easily hit the thin body.

The accuracy of the gun allows you to shoot at distant targets, and high damage will make it possible to destroy most targets in 2-3 shots.

Historical reference

At the beginning of 1945, in order to increase the firepower of tanks military leadership The USA has studied the possibility of using 120 mm anti-aircraft gun. During test firing, it turned out that this gun was superior in armor-piercing capabilities to guns that were no longer in service. As a result, the 120 mm gun was installed on the T30 and renamed heavy tank T34.

Externally, the T34 heavy tank did not differ from the T29 and T30 tanks, except for the longer 120 mm barrel. Like the T29 tank, there were two coaxial machine guns to the left of the gun. The increased weight of the gun forced a counterweight in the form of armor to be welded to the rear wall of the turret basket for balance.

The T34 tank received a Continental engine, just like the T30. Before this, they intended to install a modified aircraft engine Allison V-1710, however new recommendation was based on the desire to reduce the cost of development new car, using a T34 housing.

The end of World War II had an immediate impact on the project. Since there was no longer any question of purchasing the T34 heavy tank for the army, it was simply closed.

Like almost everything in the USSR in the first half of the 20th century, this tank consisted of “improved” Western technologies and details.

“What happened was this: first, the industry got hold of some German or American engine, then it was difficult to master it in production, “modernized” and “improved” as best they could.
The V-2 diesel engine was developed for the new T-34 and KV-1 tanks. It was created on the basis of an Austrian Maybach engine and an American tractor engine.
In turn, Soviet tractors at the Stalingradskolm and Chelyabinsk factories, built by the Americans, borrowed a lot from American tanks. It is no coincidence that, for example, the suspension of the Soviet STZ-5 tractor was made on the basis of the American Sherman M4A3E8 tank."

However, things didn’t work out with the serial diesel engine for the T-34, and it was decided to use the M-17 aircraft engine on the tank. But he had a significant "flaw". “It was designed to work in conditions of strong blowing with cold and clean air, which is not present in the tank. Here, on the contrary, there is heat and dust, which causes overheating of the oil, increased wear” (from a note by the head of the 3rd department of the armored department of the GABTU of the Red Army, military engineer 1- rank Afonin).
In addition, this engine ran on high-octane AI-92 gasoline, and there was a catastrophic shortage of it. Therefore, they even poured kerosene and technical alcohol into gas tanks.

In the end, the T-34 designers settled on a “converted” German BMW-VI engine.

As usual, there were a lot of defects during production. For example, in a letter dated November 1942 from the BTU GABTU of the Red Army to plant No. 112 it was stated that in 39% of cases the armor was defective (“did not fall into the analysis”). Perhaps it is precisely the high rate of defects that explains the fact that German sub-caliber shells easily pierced the T-34 armor from 400-500 meters at an angle of 20 degrees, and 75-mm cumulative shells, which began to enter the Wehrmacht at the beginning of 1942, penetrated through the 120-mm armor of the T-34 from 1000 meters.

According to the repair services of the Red Army for the summer of 1943, 76% of T-34 combat losses were generally from 50 mm anti-tank guns Pak38 and similar guns of Pz.III tanks. “This once again debunks the myth that it was difficult for German tankers to fight the thirty-fours.”

Gearboxes, optics, etc. were also defective and useless on the T-34.

The poor technical and tactical characteristics of the T-34 forced the Soviet leadership to turn to the Americans for help. In December 1941, the T-34 and KV-1 tanks were handed over to the Americans for a comprehensive analysis and development of recommendations and technologies for eliminating defects in them.

Next, Zefirov and Dyogtev give dry excerpts from the analysis of the Americans.
"Soviet tanks Tests showed extremely low reliability of the chassis and engine. The T-34 failed and could not be repaired after 343 km.

Due to an extremely poor air cleaner on a diesel engine, a lot of dirt accumulated in the engine. As a result, the pistons and cylinders were destroyed to such an extent that they could not be repaired. The tank has been removed from testing and it is planned to shoot it with the KV cannon and its “3” - from the M-10 tank, after which it will be sent to Aberdeen (Great Britain), where it will be dismantled and left as an exhibit.

Chemical analysis of the armor showed that on both tanks the armor plates were shallow hardened and the rest of the armor was mild steel. In connection with this, we believe that by changing the hardening technology, it is possible to reduce its thickness while maintaining the same resistance to penetration. This will reduce the weight of the T-34 by 8-10%.

The welding quality turned out to be poor. The T-34 has increased water permeability of both the lower part when overcoming water obstacles and the upper part during rain. A lot of water flows into the cracks, which leads to failure of electrical equipment and ammunition.

The F-34 cannon has a low initial speed - 385 m/s compared to the 75-mm M-3 cannon of our Sherman (560 m/s).

Very poor tower design. The main drawback is that it is very cramped. We cannot understand how tankers can fit in it in winter when they wear sheepskin coats. Very poor electric mechanism for turning the turret. The motor is weak, overloaded and sparks strongly, as a result of which the resistances and rotation speed adjustments burn out, and the gear teeth crumble.

Checking the tracks. I really liked the idea of ​​a steel track. But we believe that until feedback is received on the comparative results of using steel and rubber tracks on American tanks in Tunisia, there is no reason to abandon our idea - rubber ones.

The pins on the T-34 tracks turned out to be poorly hardened and made of poor steel, as a result of which they quickly work and the track often breaks. We think the tracks should be made heavier.

The T-34 suspension was borrowed from the American Christie tank. On our tank, due to poor steel on the springs, it sags very quickly and therefore the ground clearance decreases.

We checked the air purifier. Only a saboteur could construct such a device.
From a mechanical point of view, the filter is made extremely primitively: in places where electric welding is done, the metal is burned through, which leads to oil leakage.

Low quality starters - low-power and unreliable design.

Transmission. The technician who worked on it was amazed that it was very similar to the ones she worked with 12-15 years ago. A company was requested to send drawings of their A-23 transmission. To everyone's surprise, the transmission drawings turned out to be an exact copy of those sent. What struck us was not that it was copied from our designs, but that we abandoned it 15 years ago as outdated.

We believe that the Russian designer who put it in the tank showed inhuman cruelty towards the drivers (it’s difficult to work with).
During operation, the teeth on the gears completely crumbled out. Their chemical analysis showed that the teric treatment was very poor and did not meet any American standards.

The cars turned out to be very slow. Both the T-34 and the KV-1 were worse at climbing slopes than either American tank.

Very indignant bad job gearboxes It can only be switched by 2 people. We will send our gearbox to Russian designers to replace the standard ones on the T-34."

As a result, the Americans sent a lot of their own technology to the USSR, which replaced the Russians.

“It is not surprising that German light tanks PZ.II covered an average of 11,500 km, and medium Pz.IV - 11,000 km. The average mileage of the T-34 before complete failure was no more than 1,000 km.

The T-34 was a “hodgepodge” of components and assemblies assembled all over the world: chassis from the American Christie tank, the engine from German aircraft, many units from the Austrians and Italians, etc. Moreover, almost all of these components and assemblies were from prototypes from the late 20s - early 30s, such as the BMW-VI engine, which was installed on biplanes back in the mid-20s.

* The Germans nicknamed the T-34 “Mickey Mouse” because the upper turret hatches, which had round shape, in combat conditions, Soviet trunkers were not closed in order to improve ventilation and fear of their jamming.

The American T 34 is a heavy tank developed in the USA in 1945. It is a modernization of the T-30 tank. The history of this model began when the US military decided to equip one of the T-29 prototypes with the 120 mm cannon used in the T 53 model. The resulting hybrid was given the designation T 34, but later, after the end of World War II, work on modernization slowed down extremely. As a result, the T 34 prototype was never released.

The history of the creation of the American T-34 tank

By decision of the US Artillery Department, in the same 1945, tanks of the T 30 modification were supplemented with a 120 mm cannon from the T 53, as expected at the beginning, only the prototype would have been the T 29. This gun could provide an armor-piercing projectile speed of up to 1100 m/s , and a sub-caliber projectile 1300 m/s, which allowed superlatives outperform the 105mm T5E1(T29) and 155mm T7 guns in terms of impenetrability. The gun also had a high rate of fire, namely 4 rounds per minute, and had an armor penetration of 198 millimeters with an armor-piercing projectile against homogeneous armor at an angle of 30 degrees. from the vertical at a distance of 914 meters (for comparison, the armor penetration indicator for D-25T armor-piercing shells under similar conditions is 140mm) and 381 millimeters with a sub-caliber on homogeneous armor at an angle of 30 degrees. from the vertical. In addition, if an armor-piercing projectile hit point blank, the armor penetration would be 258 mm, and if it were a sub-caliber projectile, the armor penetration could reach 512 mm. Such results can be considered incredibly high for the Second World War.

The appearance of the new American T 34 was practically no different from the prototypes T 29 and T 30. The only difference that could be noticed was the longer 120 mm barrel with a length of about 7.7 meters in the new model. However, the increased weight of the T 34 forced the developers to add a counterweight to the rear wall of the turret basket - 10.16 cm of armor.

120mm gun

The T 52 120 mm tank gun had separate loading. The ammunition rack in the T 34 was located in the same way as in the T 29, T 30, but the baud caliber was slightly changed bigger size. The mass of the test shot was 50 kg, the weight of the projectile was 23 kg. The entire ammunition load was designed for 34 rounds. The gun's rate of fire was 5 rounds per minute. In addition, the gun was equipped with a T143E2 telescopic sight and an M10E10 periscope sight. For firing from closed positions, the gun was equipped with a T19 azimuth, an M9 quadrant and an M1 gunner's quadrant. The only drawback of the new tank was the lack of gun stabilization.

Why the American T-34 tank did not receive mass production

After the end of hostilities, the T 34 development project was practically stopped. At this time, there was no longer any question of purchasing a heavy tank, so the first thing they did was shut down the production of ammunition, and then the project itself.

Tests of the model at the Aberdeen Proving Ground showed some problems, in particular the problem of gas contamination in the tower. After several shots, the concentration of toxic substances in the cabin reached a level dangerous to the life and health of crew members. However, even this was not the most serious problem. During the tests, a backfire was detected when fired, as a result of which the tank crews who took part in the tests were injured and hospitalized. The cause was unburned powder gases in the barrel, which were drawn into the cabin and, mixing with oxygen, led to a reverse flash. In order to eliminate these phenomena, the designers developed a system for blowing the barrel with compressed air, but in the end the required result was not achieved. Compressor and container compressed air took up too much space in the armored space.

Then American developers found another solution - installing a special device on the barrel that would pump out smoke. Previously, such a device was tested on models T15E4 and M3E4 with 90 mm guns. The design principle was as follows: a cylindrical chamber was installed near the base of the barrel, and holes were made in the walls of the barrel leading into the chamber. When the projectile left the barrel, the pressure in its channel quickly dropped, and high pressure in the chamber, which created a powerful gas thrust through the evacuation ports. The thrust was directed towards the barrel cut and removed toxic gases before the bolt opened. Tests of this system, which took place in Fort Knox and Aberdeen, showed positive result- Subsequently, such a smoke removal system became the standard for all tanks developed in the USA.

The end of World War II also marked the end for the American T 34. The military was no longer interested in developing heavy tanks, including the T 29, T30 and T 32. The budget for the development and purchase of new vehicles was significantly reduced. However, it is worth noting that the main design solutions of the T 34 were used to develop later American tanks.

Technical characteristics of the American T-34

Heavy Tank T34 in video games

The T34 was not adopted into service or saw combat, but it is actively used on the battlefield in tank video games. He was present as a Tier 9 heavy tank, later promoted to Tier 8 as a premium tank.

At the beginning of 1945, in order to increase the firepower of tanks, the Artillery Department studied the possibility of using 120mm anti-aircraft gun T53. It turned out that this gun was superior in armor-piercing capabilities to the already used guns - 105mm T5E1 and 155mm T7. During the test firing, a test 120mm armor-piercing projectile T20E3 was used, which, weighing 23 kg, had an initial speed of 945 m/s. In addition, HVAP sub-caliber ammunition with initial speed 1 249.68m/s. As a result, according to OSM 27662 of May 17, 1945, the Artillery Department recommended installing 120mm guns on two T30 pilot tanks and renaming them the T34 heavy tank. On May 31, 1945, this recommendation was approved.

Initially, the T34 was supposed to inherit the Ford GAC engine from its predecessors T29 and T30. However, after the victory over Japan, the program for creating new tanks changed towards testing new power plants. The T30 tank received a Continental AV-1790 engine. On November 7, 1946, a recommendation appeared that pilot T34s should use the T30 base and, accordingly, the Continental engine, as on the T30. Previously, the intention was to install a modified Allison V-1710 aircraft engine on the T34, but the new recommendation was based on the desire to reduce the cost of developing a new machine using the T30 body.

Externally, the T34 heavy tank did not differ from the T29 and T30 tanks, not counting the longer 120mm barrel (7.67588m). Like the T29 tank, there were two .50cal coaxial machine guns to the left of the gun. The increased weight of the gun forced a counterweight in the form of armor 10.16 cm thick to be welded to the rear wall of the turret basket for balance.

The 120mm T53 tank gun inherited separate loading from the anti-aircraft gun. The placement of the ammunition rack in the T34 remained the same as in the T29 and T30 with the necessary changes for a larger caliber. The total weight of the test shot was 50 kg, the projectile - 23 kg. The ammunition consisted of 34 rounds. The rate of fire with two loaders is 5 rounds per minute. The 120mm T53 cannon on the T125 carriage had vertical guidance angles from +15 to -10 degrees. A full rotation of the tower 360 degrees was carried out in 20 seconds. Gun stabilizer, such as on the M26 Pershing, new tank didn't have. The gun was equipped with a telescopic sight T143E2 and a periscope sight M10E10, and for firing from closed positions - azimuth T19, quadrant M9 and gunner's quadrant M1.

The end of hostilities immediately affected the project. Since there was no longer any question of purchasing the T34 heavy tank for the army, the creation of new ammunition was curtailed even before the closure of the T34 project.

Test firing at the Aberdeen Proving Ground and Fort Knox revealed big problems with gas contamination of the tower. After several shots, smoke and carbon dioxide concentrations reached dangerous levels. More was discovered serious problem- reverse flash when fired. At Fort Knox, at least two people were hospitalized, and in Aberdeen, it was noted that tank crews had their eyebrows and hair burned. The reason was that the powder gases that were not burned in the barrel were drawn back into the turret when the cartridge case was extracted. In the tower, these gases mixed with oxygen, which led to a backfire and injury to the crew. To eliminate these negative phenomena, the designers developed a system for purging the barrel with compressed air even before opening the bolt. However, the desired result did not work out. The compressor and compressed air tank took up much-needed armor space, and all sorts of connections were leaking. American designers found a very simple solution - a smoke-suction device, previously tested on 90mm T15E4 and M3E4 guns, was installed on the barrel. Near the cut of the gun, a cylindrical chamber was installed around the barrel. Holes were made in the walls of the barrel, which led into the chamber at an angle towards the cut of the gun. As soon as the projectile left the barrel, the pressure in the bore quickly dropped, and the high pressure in the chamber created a strong draft of gas through the evacuation ports.

This thrust, directed towards the barrel cut, removed the remaining powder gases from the channel before the bolt opened. Tests in Aberdeen and Fort Knox showed the high effectiveness of this very simple device. Subsequently, such a smoke extractor became standard on new American tanks. The end of World War II quickly cooled military interest in the development of heavy tanks T29, T30, T32 and T34. In addition, the military budget was severely cut, the previously approved purchase of new tanks was canceled, so the pilot vehicles were used mainly for testing new and various power plants. Technical and design solutions obtained during post-war tests were subsequently used on later American tanks.

TTX:
Combat weight, t: 65.05
Crew, people: 6
Overall dimensions, mm:
length 7610
length with gun 11773
width 3802
height 3223
ground clearance 478
Armor, mm:
body forehead 102
hull side 76
tower forehead 178
side of tower 127
gun mask 279
Armament: 120 mm T53 cannon
two 12.7 mm M2NV machine guns
one 7.62 mm M1919A4 machine gun
one 12.7 mm anti-aircraft machine gun M2HB
Ammunition: 34 rounds
2090 rounds of 7.62 mm
2500 rounds of 12.7 mm
Engine: carburetor, "Continental" AV-1790-3
power 810 hp
Highway speed, km/h: 35.2