Lend-Lease tanks. Volumes and modifications. Tank Mk.III Valentine Engine. Weight. Dimensions. Armament Tank Valentine drawings

Let's move on to the allies. The USSR became the only country where Valentines were delivered under the Lend-Lease program. During the war, we were sent 3,782 tanks, or 46% of all Valentines produced, including almost all of the vehicles produced in Canada.

3332 of them reached their destination, 450 vehicles sank along with the transports carrying them. We were supplied with tanks of seven modifications: 2-7, 9 and 10, and the “Valentines” modifications Mk IX and Mk X continued to be requested by the Soviet side for deliveries under Lend-Lease almost until the very end of the war.

In the Red Army, “Valentines” received different ratings. The command rated the tanks quite highly because of their tactical and technical characteristics and in August 1942 even sent a request to increase their supplies to the USSR. The tankers had their own opinion. "Vali-Tani", like the rest of the British equipment, were difficult to operate and often failed. Especially in hands that had no idea about the proper maintenance of British equipment.

As expected and quite logical, “Valentines” turned out to be completely unadapted to the climatic conditions of our country. The 40-mm cannon was frankly weak, and there were no HE shells for it. This resulted in attempts to install a domestic 45-mm cannon on the Mk.III, but in the end it turned out to be easier to launch production of high-explosive fragmentation shells in 1942.

“Valentines” fought on the entire Soviet-German front, from Murmansk to the Caucasus, where they were transported through the Iranian Lend-Lease canal. Our cavalrymen especially appreciated “Valentine”. For maneuverability and good cross-country ability (when modified with a hammer and file).

The last use of "Valentines" in the Red Army took place already at Far East during the Soviet offensive in Manchuria.

This is the short version. What can you say by examining the tank not from the point of view of numbers, but by touching it with your hands?

There are not enough reviews of them, which is explained by the fact that half of the 8 thousand tanks produced fought with us. British historians noted the excellent reliability of the propulsion system and the tank as a whole, especially in comparison with other British vehicles of that period.

I won’t comment at all; it’s possible that, compared to others, “Valentine” was simply handsome.

What did the British scold?

Surprisingly, the criticism was... overcrowding fighting compartment, bad conditions driver's work, a two-man turret and an insufficiently powerful 40-mm cannon, which in addition did not have fragmentation shells.

I mentioned the gun and shells above. Agree. As for the rest... It was the British who were just going crazy. They didn’t get into the T-34, so they criticize it.

In fact, the tank is very comfortable and roomy. That is, a boar not of tank dimensions fits there.

Probably, the 75-mm gun took up space with pleasure, but nevertheless, its appearance, albeit on a light (if classified by weight) tank after 1943, is quite justified. But there are also some distinctly British things to applaud.

An armored partition (not very impressive, but again - there!) between the engine and fighting compartments significantly reduces crew losses in the event of a fire and preserves the engine-transmission group in the event of a shell explosion.

Surveillance devices are simple and effective.

At the beginning of 1938, the British War Office offered Vickers-Armstrong Ltd. take part in the production of the Mk. infantry tank. II or develop combat vehicle own design according to similar tactical and technical requirements. Drawings of the new combat vehicle were submitted to the War Ministry on February 10, 1938, and its full-size model was made by March 14, but the military was not satisfied with the two-man turret, and for a whole year they debated whether to accept the project or not. The deterioration of the situation in Europe contributed to the fact that on April 14, 1939, an order was issued for the first series of tanks. The contract, signed in June - July of the same year, provided for the supply English army 625 Valentines. Two more companies were involved in their production: Metropolitan-Cammell Carriage and Wagon Co. Ltd. and Birmingham Railway Carriage and Wagon Co. Ltd. In June 1940, the first production tanks began to roll out of the Vickers plant in Newcastle.

Infantry tank "Valentine II" at the NIIBT Test Site in Kubinka. 1947

The Valentine infantry tank had a classic layout with rear-mounted drive wheels. main feature hull and turret structures - lack of frames for their assembly. The armor plates were processed according to appropriate templates so that they were mutually locked during assembly. The plates were then fastened to each other with bolts, rivets and dowels. Tolerances for fitting various parts did not exceed 0.01 inches.

The driver's position was located in the center of the front of the tank. For landing and disembarking, he had two hatches with hinged covers at his disposal. Two more crew members - a gunner and a commander (aka loader and radio operator) - were located in the turret. In its frontal part, a 2-pound cannon and a coaxial 7.92-mm BESA machine gun were installed in a cast mantlet. To the right of them, in a separate mask, is a 50-mm smoke grenade launcher. The armament was supplemented by a 7.69 mm Bren machine gun on anti-aircraft installation Lakeman on the roof of the tower. At the rear of the tower there was a radio station No. 11 or No. 19 and a special hole for ventilation. On the walls of the rotating floor of the turret fighting compartment there was ammunition - 60 rounds and 3150 rounds of ammunition (14 boxes of 225 pieces each) for the BESA machine gun; The seats of the crew members were also attached to the pole. The ammunition of the Bren anti-aircraft machine gun - 600 rounds (6 disc magazines) - was located in a box on the rear outer wall of the turret. 18 smoke grenades were intended for the grenade launcher.

An engine with power, lubrication, cooling and electrical equipment was installed in the spacious engine compartment. To the right of the engine is an oil filter and two batteries, and to the left is a fuel tank. The engine compartment was closed from the fighting compartment by removable blinds. To access the engine components, the armor plates of the engine compartment roof were hinged.

The transmission compartment contained a cooling system tank, two radiators, a single-disc main dry friction clutch, a five-speed gearbox, a transverse gear, two multi-disc dry clutches, semi-rigid connections of the final clutches to the final drives and an oil tank.

The undercarriage of each side consisted of six rubber-coated road wheels, three of them interlocked into two balancing bogies with special springs and hydraulic shock absorbers; drive wheel with removable ring gear and two rubber tires; a guide wheel with a tensioning mechanism and three rubberized support rollers. The track chain had 103 tracks, and their engagement was lantern, in the middle of the track.

Infantry tank MK-III"Valentine IX" at the Kubinka training ground.

The Valentine tanks were produced in 11 modifications, differing in the brand and type of engine, turret design and armament. The Valentine I variant was the only one equipped with an AEC A189 carburetor engine producing 135 hp. Starting with the Valentine II model, only diesel engines were installed on the tank, first the AES A190 with a power of 131 hp. with, then, on the “Valentine IV”, an American GMC 6004, throttled to 138 hp. Since the tankers complained about the overload of the two crew members placed in the turret, a three-man turret was installed on the “III” and “V” variants, increasing the volume of the standard one due to the mantlet moved forward new form. However, the new turret was too cramped for three tankers, and such an improvement was of little use. While the “troika” and “five” were generally identical, they differed from each other only in the engine brand - AEC A190 and GMC 6004, respectively. The weight of the tank increased by exactly a ton and reached 16.75 tons.

Before a rally to mark the transfer of the first British tanks to the Soviet Union. Birmingham, September 28, 1941.

In the fall of 1941, production of Valentine began in Canada, at the plant of the Montreal company Canadian Pacific Co. Until mid-1943, 1,420 tanks of modifications “VI” and “VII” were manufactured here, which were almost no different from the “Valentine IV”. The only difference was the brand of the coaxial machine gun: on the Valentine VI - BESA, and on the Valentine VII - Browning М1919А4. Some Canadian-made vehicles had a cast frontal part of the body.

In an effort to increase firepower tank, the British installed a 6-pounder gun on the Valentine VIII. At the same time, the number of crew members in the tower was again reduced to two. The front-mounted machine gun was also eliminated, which reduced the tank's fire capabilities.

The “Valentine IX” variant was identical to its brother, with the exception of the brand of the power plant: it had a GMC 6004 diesel engine, and the “VIII” had an AEC A190.

The coaxial machine gun was returned to the Valentine X. And due to the fact that the weight of the tank with a 6-pound gun increased to 17.2 tons, a GMC 6004 diesel engine with a power of 165 hp was installed on the “ten”. The 6-pounder guns came in two modifications: Mk III with a barrel length of 42.9 calibers and Mk V with a barrel length of 50 calibers. Ammunition was reduced to 58 rounds.

The last modification of the "Valentine" supplied to the Soviet Union was the "Valentine X".

The latest modification, the Valentine XI, was armed with a 75 mm cannon. At the same time, the coaxial machine gun was removed again - there was simply nowhere to put it. This version was equipped with a GMC 6004 engine, boosted to 210 hp.

On April 14, 1944, the last Valentine tank out of 6,855 combat vehicles manufactured in Great Britain left the factory floor. In addition, from the fall of 1941 to mid-1943, 1,420 of these machines were produced in Canada. Therefore, the total number of Valentines is 8275 units. This is the most produced British tank of the Second World War.

The only country where Valentines were supplied under Lend-Lease was the Soviet Union. Moreover, almost half of the produced vehicles were sent to the USSR: 2394 British and 1388 Canadian, of which 3332 tanks reached their destination.

According to the admissions committees of the GBTU of the Red Army, 216 tanks were accepted in 1941, 959 in 1942, 1943–1776, 381 in 1944. The Red Army received tanks of seven modifications - II, III, IV, V, VII, IX and X. As you can see, cars equipped with GMC diesel engines predominated. Perhaps this was done for the sake of unification: the same engines were installed on Shermans delivered to the USSR. In addition to the line tanks, 25 Valentine-Bridgelayer bridgelayers were delivered - Soviet designation MK.ZM. In wartime documents, “Valentines” are called differently. Most often MK.III or MK.Z, sometimes with the addition of the name "Valentine" or, less commonly, "Valentine". It is not often possible to come across modification designations “Valentine III”, “Valentine IX”, etc. At the same time, in the documents of those years, in addition to MK-3, the designations MK-5, MK-7, MK-9 come across. It is quite obvious that we're talking about about various modifications of this British tank.

The first “Valentines” appeared on the Soviet-German front at the end of November 1941. In the 5th Army, defending in the Mozhaisk direction, the first unit to receive combat vehicles of this type was the 136th separate tank battalion. It was formed by December 1, 1941, and consisted of ten T-34s, ten T-60s, nine Valentines and three Matildas. The battalion received English tanks in Gorky only on November 10, 1941, so the tankers were trained directly at the front. On December 15, the 136th separate tank battalion was assigned to the 329th Infantry Division, and then to the 20th Tank Brigade, together with which it participated in the counteroffensive near Moscow. As in the case of the Matilda, already during the first battles a shortcoming of British tanks was revealed, such as the lack of high-explosive fragmentation shells in the ammunition load of the 2-pound gun. The latter circumstance was the reason for the State Defense Committee's order to rearm the Valentine with a domestic artillery system. This task was carried out in a concise manner at plant No. 92 in Gorky. The vehicle, which received the factory designation ZIS-95, was equipped with a 45-mm cannon and a DT machine gun. At the end of December 1941, the tank was sent to Moscow, but things did not go further than a prototype.

Tank MK-III "Valentine" moves towards the front line. Battle of Moscow, January 1942.

A large number of"Valentine" took part in the battle for the Caucasus. In 1942–1943, tank units of the North Caucasus and Transcaucasian fronts were equipped with almost 70% of imported equipment. This was explained by the proximity to the so-called “Persian Corridor” - one of the routes for supplying goods to the USSR, passing through Iran. But even among the troops of the North Caucasus Front, the 5th Guards Tank Brigade stood out, whose tankers from mid-1942 to September 1943 mastered five types of vehicles: Valentine, MZl, MZs, Sherman and Tetrarch, and this not counting domestic technology!

Fighting In the North Caucasus, the brigade began on September 26, 1942 in the Grozny direction in the Malgobek - Ozernaya area. At that time, the brigade had 40 Valentines, three T-34s and one BT-7. On September 29, tankers attacked German troops in the Alkhanch-urt valley. In this battle, the crew of Captain Shepelkov’s guard on his “Valentine” destroyed five tanks, a self-propelled gun, a truck and 25 enemy soldiers. In total, over several days of fighting in this area, the 5th Guards Tank Brigade destroyed 38 tanks (20 of them burned), one self-propelled gun, 24 guns, six mortars, one six-barreled mortar and up to 1,800 enemy soldiers. Our losses amounted to two T-34s and 33 Valentines (eight of them burned down, and the rest were evacuated from the battlefield and restored), 268 people were killed and wounded.

"Valentine II" in ambush. Battle of Moscow, January 1942.

Tank MK-III "Valentine VII" of the 52nd Red Banner Tank Brigade is heading to the front line. A white diamond is clearly visible on the tower - the tactical sign of the 52nd brigade. Transcaucasian Front, November 1942.

Canadian tank "Valentine VII" from the 52nd Red Banner Tank Brigade, knocked out near the city of Alagir. Northern Caucasus, November 3, 1942. In addition to the War Department number clearly visible on the turret, this vehicle's belonging to the Valentine VII modification can be judged by the barrel of the coaxial Browning machine gun and the cast frontal part of the hull.

Practicing interaction between tanks and infantry. 1942

Since most of the brigades that were armed with imported equipment were distinguished by a mixed composition, already in 1942 the most the right decision- use domestic and foreign tanks in a comprehensive manner so that they complement each other in terms of their combat qualities. So, in the first echelon there were KB and Matilda CS tanks with a 76-mm howitzer, in the second - T-34, and in the third - Valentines and T-70. This tactic often gave positive results.

The 5th Guards Tank Brigade acted in a similar way during the battle to break through the Blue Line, the German defensive line in the North Caucasus in 1943. Then, in addition to the forces of the brigade (13 M4A2, 24 Valentine, 12 T-34), the 14th Guards Breakthrough Tank Regiment (16 KB-1C) was brought in for the attack, and the battle formations were built exactly this way, which ultimately contributed to success of the battle. However, in this regard, it will be interesting to get acquainted with the memories of G. P. Polosin, a participant in this battle:

“Maneuvering among shell explosions (the thirty-minute artillery barrage, of course, did not fully suppress the enemy fire system), my “Valentine” unexpectedly found itself literally in front of the houses of the farm (Gorno-Vesyoly. - Note author). What a success! But how are other tanks?..

I looked around through the viewing slits. I saw that two more “Englishmen” of my platoon - the cars of Poloznikov and Voronkov - were walking a little behind. But heavy KBs are not visible. Maybe they fell behind or were taken to the side... The infantry, of course, had been cut off from the tanks even earlier...

Destroying enemy machine-gun emplacements and bunkers along the way, our platoon tanks entered the ravine. We stopped here. I gave the order over the radio:

Don't shoot without my order! Take care of the shells. It is still unknown how long it will take... And then we will have to fight our way to our own people...

The tank commanders answered briefly: they understood.

Then he tried to contact the guard company commander, Senior Lieutenant Maksimov. And I couldn't. The airwaves were filled to the limit with hysterical teams on German. Apparently, the Nazis were seriously concerned about the unexpected breakthrough of Russian tanks in this sector of their defense.

But our position was also unenviable. It just so happened that they were separated from the main group conducting reconnaissance in force, ammunition and fuel were running out, alone in the rear of the enemy, who, however, had not yet fully understood the situation, but this was a matter of time.

Having crushed a German anti-tank gun along the way, our tank jumped out of the ravine into the open space and saw a strange picture. On Voronkov’s car, which was 30–40 meters to the right, there were Germans. They mistook the Valentines for their equipment, banged their butts on the armor and didn’t understand why the tankers weren’t getting out. After waiting until there were up to a dozen Germans, I ordered a machine gun to hit them. Then, firing smoke grenade launchers (this is where these weapons, which were only on British tanks) and setting up a smoke screen, the vehicles returned through the same ravine to the location of their troops. The battle was still going on near Gorno-Vesely. KB tanks were knocked out. One of them stood without a tower. Another a little further from him buried his gun in the ground. Near its right, flattened track, two tankers were firing pistols at the advancing Germans. Having dispersed the enemy infantry with cannon and machine gun fire, we dragged both wounded men into our Valentine. It immediately became clear that, having failed to penetrate the armor of the KB anti-tank artillery, the Germans used guided mines against them.”

A very interesting episode. It is worth paying attention to one significant detail: the platoon’s successful actions are largely due to the presence of reliable radio communications between the vehicles. Which is not surprising, since radio stations were installed on all Lend-Lease tanks without exception!

"Valentine" shot down on the Eastern Front. Army Group Center, February 1942.

Another example of the use of such tactics was the battle of the 139th Tank Regiment of the 68th Mechanized Brigade of the 5th Mechanized Corps of the 5th Army for the capture of the village of Devichye Pole in November 1943. The regiment had 20 T-34 tanks and 18 Valentine VII tanks. On November 20, 1943, in cooperation with the 56th Guards Breakthrough Tank Regiment, which was armed with KB and T-34s, and the infantry of the 110th Guards Rifle Division, the tanks of the 139th Tank Regiment went forward. The attack was carried out at high speeds (up to 25 km/h) with a landing of machine gunners on armor and attached to tanks anti-tank guns. A total of 30 Soviet combat vehicles were involved in the operation. The enemy did not expect such a swift and massive attack and was unable to provide effective resistance. After breaking through the first line of enemy defense, the infantry dismounted and, unhooking their guns, began to take up positions, preparing to repel a possible counterattack. The remaining units of the 110th Guards Rifle Division were brought into the breakthrough. However, there was no German counterattack - the German command was so stunned by the actions of the Soviet troops that they could not organize a counterattack within 24 hours. During this time, our troops advanced 20 km into the depths of the German defense and captured Devichye Pole, losing one KB, one T-34 and two Valentines!

The geography of the use of "Valentines" was very wide - from the southernmost sections of the Soviet-German front to the northern. In addition to units of the Transcaucasian Front, they were, for example, in service with the 19th Tank Corps of the Southern Front (from October 20, 1943 - the 4th Ukrainian Front) and received Active participation in the Melitopol offensive operation, and then in the liberation of Crimea. MK.III tanks were actively used in positional battles on the Western and Kalinin fronts until the beginning of 1944. It should be noted that in many military units Imported tanks were modified mainly to improve cross-country ability in snow and marshy soil. For example, in the 196th Tank Brigade of the 30th Army of the Kalinin Front, which participated in the capture of Rzhev in August 1942, steel plates were welded to each track, increasing its area.

Until the end of the war, Valentines remained the main tanks of cavalry corps. The cavalrymen especially highly appreciated the maneuverability of the vehicle. Most likely, for the same reason, the “Valentines” were in service with many motorcycle battalions and individual motorcycle regiments. The staff of the latter at the final stage of the war included a tank company of ten T-34s or the same number of Valentine IX.

"Valentine" on the right bank of the Dniester. 1943

Tanks "Valentine V" (with a three-man turret) on the march. 1st Belorussian Front, 1944.

"Valentine VII", hit by German anti-tank artillery. Vitebsk area, January 1944.

Column of "Valentines" on the approaches to Baranovichi. In the foreground is "Valentine V". Belarus, 1944.

Tanks of the Valentine IX and Valentine X modifications, armed with 57-mm cannons, along with Shermans, continued to be requested by the Soviet Union for deliveries under Lend-Lease almost until the end of the war. Largely due to this, mass production of Valentines, which no longer entered the British Army, continued until April 1944.

In the Red Army, “Valentines” were used until the end of World War II. For example, on June 22, 1944, the 5th Guards Tank Army of the 3rd Belorussian Front had 39 Valentine IX tanks, and the 3rd Cavalry Corps had 30 Valentine III units. The Valentine IX tanks were in service with the 1st Mechanized Corps of the 2nd Guards Tank Army during the Vistula-Oder offensive operation in the winter of 1945. Combat vehicles of this type ended their combat career in the Red Army in the Far East in August 1945. The 267th Tank Regiment fought as part of the 2nd Far Eastern Front (41 “Valentine III” and “Valentine IX”), in the ranks of the cavalry-mechanized group of the Trans-Baikal Front there were 40 “Valentine IV” tanks, and, finally, as part of the 1st On the Far Eastern Front, there were two tank bridge companies with i0 Valentine-Bridgelayer bridge layers in each.

It is quite difficult to find a more or less complete assessment of the Valentine tank in foreign literature. Its operation in the English army was too limited in time and scale. It is mainly noted that the tank crews praised the tank for its reliability, but criticized it for the cramped fighting compartment and the lack of high-explosive fragmentation shells in the ammunition loads of 2- and 6-pound cannons.

Since several thousand combat vehicles of this type fought on the Soviet-German front, under extremely harsh operating conditions, let’s try to analyze the reviews that Soviet tank crews gave to the Valentine. However, due to the reasons already mentioned, this will not be easy to do. Memoir literature could not avoid being assessed in an exclusively negative manner. A typical example of a biased and contradictory assessment of the Valentine tank can be found in the memoirs of Major General A.V. Kazaryan.

On the eve of the events described, in the spring of 1942, he completed his training in the 38th training tank regiment. In June he arrived in the 196th Tank Brigade as a tank commander. Here is an excerpt from his memoirs.

What can you say about this episode? A young commander, who had just completed an accelerated (4-5 months) course of training, arrived at the unit. In his own words, he was not familiar with the Valentine tank (the 38th training tank regiment was only transferred to training tank crews for operating foreign equipment in March 1942). For a thorough study of such complex military equipment as a tank, three days are clearly not enough, especially for its commander. However, the company commander gave an objective and completely fair assessment of the battle. With such preparation, the result would be the same regardless of the military equipment involved: be it a T-34 or a Sherman, a KB or a Valentine. About the latter, by the way, in the above passage you can find interesting information. It turns out that the armor is weak (it’s 60 mm!), and the engine is low-power, and the speed “you can’t get more than 25,” although “by technical description must give all 40.” Such “information” can cause nothing but a smile. Behind it lies complete ignorance of the entrusted material part and the features of its use not only by the tank commander, but also by the entire crew. Hence the complaints about low speed, and references to the mythical technical description with a speed of 40 km/h! "Valentine" is an infantry escort tank, and it does not need high specific power and speed. Moreover, average speeds in an attack, as a rule, do not exceed 16–17 km/h (this is the endurance threshold for the crew members of any tank when moving across terrain), and even less with infantry support - it is difficult to imagine an infantryman running into an attack with speed of 40 km/h! As for the maneuverability of the tank, they are ensured not only and not so much by the high power density, but mainly by the L/B ratio. The smaller it is, the more maneuverable the car. For “Valentine” it was 1.4, and in this indicator it was superior to the T-34 (1.5).

Go West! Soviet tanks (Valentine IX) entered Romanian territory. 1944

Tanks "Valentine IX" pass through the streets of Botosani. Romania, April 1944.

Valentine IX tanks of the 5th Guards Tank Army are moving into combat positions. 1st Belorussian Front, summer 1944.

A slightly different assessment of the Valentine is contained in the memoirs of N. Ya. Zheleznov, who was able to get acquainted with this vehicle in the summer of 1942 at the 1st Saratov Tank School:

“For about a month we trained on English Matildas and Canadian Valentines. I must say that the Valentine is a very successful car. The gun is powerful, the engine is quiet, the tank itself is short, literally the height of a man.”

In fairness, it must be said that A.V. Kazaryan later fought quite successfully on the “Valentine” in battles in the Rzhev direction, was awarded, became a platoon commander, and then a company. True, somewhere from July 1942, he called his “Valentine” (by the way, models III or V) “thirty-four”, although, judging by the documents, until November 1942 in the 196th Tank Brigade, tanks of domestic production, except T -60, it wasn't. And the “thirty-four” is kind of strange - with a three-man turret and an anti-aircraft machine gun.

In a word, the given fragment of memories did not add clarity. Let's try to turn to a more impartial source: documents from the war years. In particular, to the “Brief Report on the Actions of MK.III”, dated January 15, 1942, which was compiled by the command of the 136th separate tank battalion, which participated in the counteroffensive near Moscow from December 15, 1941. This report, apparently, can be considered one of the first documents containing an assessment of Lend-Lease equipment.

“The experience of using “Valentines” has shown:

1. The tanks' cross-country ability in winter conditions is good; movement on soft snow 50–60 cm thick is ensured. Ground traction is good, but spurs are required when there is icy conditions.

2. The weapon worked flawlessly, but there were cases of the gun not firing enough (the first five or six shots), apparently due to thickening of the lubricant. Weapons are very demanding in terms of lubrication and maintenance...

3. Observation through devices and crevices is good...

4. The engine group and transmission worked well up to 150–200 hours, after which a decrease in engine power is observed...

5. Armor good quality…

The crew personnel underwent special training and had satisfactory command of tanks. The command and technical staff of the tanks had little knowledge. A great inconvenience was created by the crews’ ignorance of the elements of preparing tanks for winter. As a result of the lack of necessary insulation, cars had difficulty starting in the cold and therefore remained hot all the time, which led to a large consumption of motor resources. In a battle with German tanks (December 20, 1941), three Valentines received the following damage: one had its turret jammed by a 37-mm shell, the gun of another was jammed, the third received five hits on the side from a distance of 200–250 m. In this battle The Valentines knocked out two T-3 medium tanks.

In general, the MK.III is a good combat vehicle with powerful weapons, good cross-country ability, and capable of operating against enemy personnel, fortifications and tanks.

Negative sides:

1. Poor adhesion of the tracks to the ground.

2. Greater vulnerability of the suspension bogies - if one roller fails, the tank cannot move.

3. There are no high-explosive fragmentation shells for the gun.”

There is no reason to doubt the objectivity of this report, compiled in hot pursuit. It is interesting to note that Soviet tank crews, like their English colleagues, noted as a drawback the lack of high-explosive fragmentation shells in the cannon's ammunition load, but did not notice the cramped fighting compartment, apparently because the T-34, for example, still had it closer. Row design features The tank caused criticism exclusively in parts of the Red Army. It goes without saying that in England or Western Europe, and even more so in North Africa or Burma, the water in the tank cooling system did not freeze due to the absence of frost. Most of the shortcomings of “Valentine” (and not just him), mentioned in our documents and memoirs, are associated with climatic factor, which made operation difficult. And here we come to another reason for the negative assessments of this combat vehicle among some of our tankers (usually, however, those who fought on it for only a short time).

Tank "Valentine IX" on the street of Iasi. Romania, August 1944.

Valentine-Bridgelayer bridge layer at the NIIBT Test Site in Kubinka. 1945

There was a lot of trouble! Flushing the cooling system and pouring antifreeze into it is a hassle! At temperatures below -20 °C, tractor kerosene must be added to domestic diesel fuel (we simply did not have diesel fuel required quality, and the “Valentines” had diesel engines) - trouble! To keep the engine warm, you need to cover the radiators with plywood, tarpaulin or an old overcoat (on the Valentine, by the way, for this purpose it was recommended to turn off one of the fans by removing the drive belt) - again trouble! Of course, domestic equipment also required similar measures, but, firstly, it was created taking into account the quality of domestic fuels and lubricants and the level of technical maintenance, and therefore, for these reasons, it broke down less often. In addition, broken domestic equipment was punished less than imported equipment, for which it was “paid in gold.” This circumstance could not cause anything other than persistent hatred of foreign combat vehicles, including the Valentine, among the deputy technicians and technicians. And what feelings might a driver-mechanic experience, for example, when reading the following provisions of the operating instructions:

“If after 4-5 attempts you cannot start the engine of an English tank, you must, if you have a device for starting with ether, load the pistol with an ampoule, press the primer puncture lever and use the starter to start the engine. After starting the engine, do not allow it to run above 800 rpm until the oil temperature reaches 2TC (80°F) and the oil pressure rises to 60–80 psi.

Once these readings are reached, the speed should be increased to 1000 per minute, and after 2–3 minutes work can be carried out at a higher speed.

The movement of the tank can be started only after the engine has completely warmed up and always from first gear in order to avoid damage (due to frozen lubricant) to the gearbox, differential and final drives.”

Like this! Not only do you need to monitor the temperature, but you also need to start only in first gear! (On the T-34, as is known, until the end of 1943, only one second gear was used; the rest simply did not engage while moving.) Indeed, it was some kind of kerosene stove, not a tank! And in general - a phenomenon of a military-technical culture that is deeply alien to us!

True, by the end of the war, as our own military-technical culture grew and the use of many foreign technical solutions on domestic technology, the complaints against “Valentine” became less and less. In any case, regarding complex design and heavy use.

In 1945, in the article “Analysis of the development of foreign tank equipment during the war years and prospects for further improvement of tanks” by Major General of the Tank Engineering Service, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor N.I. Gruzdev, published in the collection of works of the Academy of Armored and Mechanized Forces, “Valentine” deserves the following rating:

“The MK-III, as an infantry (or, following the weight classification, light) tank, certainly has the most dense overall layout and among this type of tank is undoubtedly the most successful, although moving the brake drums outside the hull is certainly incorrect. The experience with the MK-III tank puts an end to the discussion about the possibility of expedient use of automotive units for tank construction.

The armored partition between the engine and fighting compartments significantly reduces crew losses in the event of a fire and preserves the engine-transmission group in the event of a shell explosion. Surveillance devices are simple and effective. The presence of equalizers in MK-III and servomechanisms, despite the low power density, allows for satisfactory average speed tank about 13–17 km/h.

Characteristic of the British tanks MK-III, MK-II and MK-IV is the preference given to armor; speed and weapons seem to be secondary; There is no doubt that if this is tolerable in the MK-III, then in other tanks the disproportion is a clear and unacceptable disadvantage.

It should be noted that the GMC diesel engine works reliably.

Of all the existing light tanks, the MK-III tank is the most successful. We can say that in the conditions of 1940–1943. It was the British who created the type of infantry tank.”

Hello everyone and welcome to the site! Friends, today our guest is perhaps one of the most unusual vehicles in World of Tanks, a Tier 4 Soviet light premium tank. Valentine II guide.

What makes it unique, you ask? Everything is very simple, this device has a very comfortable preferential battle level - 4. This means that Valentine II WoT never fights against the fifth levels, we are thrown only towards classmates and machines at a lower level.

TTX Valentine II

But despite its remarkable benefits, you need to know the parameters of this baby and we will start with the fact that we have at our disposal a very good safety margin by LT-4 standards, as well as a good, but not best review at 350 meters.

At the same time, Valentine II characteristics armor is one of its advantages, although in reality, the armor here is not that strong.

Let's start with the body and in the frontal projection the yellow areas for the fourth level are very thick, the reduction here is 93 millimeters. However, the orange parts of the body, as can be seen on the side of the model, are devoid of slopes, their thickness does not exceed 65 millimeters and here Valentine II tank it breaks through quite easily, only machine guns will not harm us.

Things are more interesting with the tower. Due to the fact that in the frontal projection there is a gun mantlet, various slopes, layers of armor plates and other things, the given armor values ​​​​here range from 41 to 137 millimeters, that is, to catch ricochets and non-penetration light tank Valentine II the forehead of the tower can often.

As for the side projection, you need to take care of it and not expose it sideways to the enemy. Basically, the armor here is 60-65 millimeters thick, but the engine compartment, which Valentine II World of Tanks sticks out above the body, is protected very poorly (40 mm). However, when the tank is positioned in a diamond shape, both the front of the hull and the side begin to hold the blow, this can be used.

But if this baby’s armor is still good, then in terms of mobility it’s definitely not a light tank, rather a heavy one. Valentine II WoT is the owner of a poor maximum speed, very dull dynamics (even 9 horses per ton of weight were not gained), and only with maneuverability everything is fine, but you won’t feel it because of the general slowness.

gun

As often happens, the tank’s armament deserves special attention, but make no mistake, in our case there will be little good, because there is a second-level cannon installed on board.

So, have Valentine II gun has a very small one-time damage and a very high rate of fire. However, even with this, we can only produce about 1250 units of damage per minute, which is not enough. By the way, our ammunition load is also small, for such and such a rate of fire.

Penetration is also bad for us, there are only enough armor-piercing shells to deal damage to third-level vehicles and soft fours, otherwise we will have to load sub-calibers. As an example, if light tank Valentine II will meet German tank destroyer Hetzer, you can’t pierce it in the forehead even with gold.

The only tolerable point in terms of weapons can be considered accuracy. Yes, we have a large field of view and poor stabilization, but thanks to the very fast aiming you will hardly notice this, although it is effective to shoot at long distances Valentine II World of Tanks still can't.

The final note will be the elevation angles, the barrel bends down 6 degrees, this is not very bad, but far from perfect.

Advantages and disadvantages

The naked eye can see that in terms of general characteristics and even more so in armament, this specimen turned out to be rather weak. However, now we will try to highlight the main advantages and disadvantages Valentine II WoT, for clarity.
Pros:
Very comfortable level of fighting;
Good safety margin;
Decent review;
Not bad frontal armor;
High rate of fire.
Minuses:
Very poor mobility;
Little Alphastrike;
Poor damage per minute;
Weak penetration;
Small ammunition.

Equipment for Valentine II

Equipment always gives the tanker a chance to “groom” his tank, make it more comfortable, smooth out the disadvantages and improve the advantages. In our case this also occurs, but for Valentine II equipment presented in a very meager selection, so the picture will be something like this:
1. – will give a pleasant increase to the important characteristics of the machine, in particular, it will improve the DPM, information, and visibility.
2. – the review we have is not bad, so why not make it even better?
3. is the only normal alternative out of all the rest, and increasing the mixing speed even more is not such a bad option.

Crew training

Although we only have three people in the tank, there’s not much you can do, but you can’t leave the crew without proper training, because this is another good way improve the combat vehicle. In our case, on tank Valentine II perks It's better to download it like this:
Commander (gunner) – , , , .
Driver mechanic - , , , .
Loader (radio operator) – , , , .

Equipment for Valentine II

You will see absolutely nothing new in terms of consumables. Despite the fact that our car is premium, you won’t be able to farm a lot on it, and if you don’t have a lot of silver, take , , . For lovers of comfort and reliability, there is a more expensive set; with such preferences, take it to Valentine II equipment as , , . In this case, you can also replace the last element with.

Tactics for playing Valentine II

Before us is a very slow vehicle with frankly weak weapons, but capable of repelling something with armor, so how will it manage such benefits?

The first thing I want to say is for Valentine II tactics combat involves choosing and pushing through one direction; we will not be able to change the flank due to poor mobility. At the same time, take into account the factor of allies; if the team is weak and begins to merge, it is better to start moving towards the base in advance in order to have time to defend it.

Regarding damage, for Valentine II World of Tanks Medium distances are best. In such cases, you can hit the enemy more effectively, and it will also be easier to use your armor, which is not the strongest, but still available.

If we talk about tanking, put your light tank Valentine II diamond, try to dance, but if possible, it is better to drive away to cover between shots.

It’s even better to show only the turret to the enemy; it is armored better than the hull, and also has a compact size.

Otherwise, everything is typical, beware of artillery, watch the mini-map and try to maintain your safety margin. Thanks to the preferential level of battles Valentine II WoT is interesting car, but in view significant shortcomings To play it well, you need to get used to it.

Not so long ago, when mentioning any equipment sent to the USSR under Lend-Lease, the authors always noted the insignificance of foreign supplies in comparison with domestic production, as well as the extremely poor quality and archaic design of these samples. Now that the fight against bourgeois counterfeiters has successfully ended with the victory of the latter, it is possible to more or less objectively analyze the advantages and disadvantages of individual models of armored vehicles of Anglo-American production, which were used in significant quantities in units of the Red Army. This article will focus on English light tank MK.III "Valentine", which became the most popular British armored vehicle used on the Soviet-German front, as well as in battles in the Far East.

MK.III "Valentine" (according to the documents of the Red Army "Valentin" or "Valentina") was developed by Vickers in 1938. Like the Matilda, it was an infantry tank, but in terms of mass - 16 tons - it was rather light. True, the thickness of the Valentine's armor was 60-65 mm, and the armament (depending on the modification) consisted of a 40-mm, 57-mm or 75-mm cannon. The Valentine I used an AEC carburetor engine with 135 hp, which was replaced in subsequent modifications by AEC and GMC diesel engines with 131, 138 and 165 hp. The maximum speed of the tank was 34 km/h.

By Soviet standards, "Valentines" had an archaic design - armor plates were attached to a frame made of corners using rivets. Armor elements were installed mainly almost vertically, without rational angles of inclination. However, “rational” armor was not always used on German vehicles - this approach significantly reduced the working internal volume of the tank, which affected the performance of the crew. But that's all English cars were equipped with radio (radio station No. 19), and also had a diesel engine, which facilitated their operation along with Soviet models.

"Valentines" were produced from 1940 to the beginning of 1945 in 11 modifications, differing mainly in armament and engine type. A total of 8,275 tanks were manufactured by three English and two Canadian firms (6,855 in England and 1,420 in Canada). 2,394 British and 1,388 Canadian Valentines were sent to the Soviet Union (3,782 in total), of which 3,332 vehicles reached Russia. The Valentines were supplied to the USSR in seven modifications:

"Valentine II" - with a 42-mm cannon, AEC diesel engine, 131 hp. and an additional external fuel tank;

"Valentine III" - with a three-man turret and a crew of four;

"Valentine IV" - "Valentine II" with a GMC diesel engine of 138 hp;

"Valentine V" - "Valentine III" with a GMC diesel engine of 138 hp;

"Valentine VII" - a Canadian version of the "Valentine IV" with a one-piece frontal hull part and a coaxial 7.62 mm Browning machine gun (instead of the 7.92 mm BESA machine gun installed on English-made Valentines);

"Valentine IX" - "Valentine V" with a 57-mm cannon with a barrel length of 45 or 42 calibers, mounted in a two-man turret without a coaxial machine gun;

"Valentine X" - "Valentine IX" with a 57-mm cannon with a barrel length of 45 or 42 calibers [most likely a typo. Further in the text - 52 caliber. A.A.], coaxial with a machine gun and a GMC engine with a power of 165 hp.

In addition to the main modifications of the "Valentine", in 1944 the Red Army also received the Mk.III "Valentine-Bridgelaer" - in Soviet terminology "Mk.ZM". Perhaps the Canadian version of the Valentine (modification VII) was even more reliable and technically advanced than its English predecessor. Canadian Valentines were supplied to the Red Army from 1942 to 1944, with the bulk of deliveries occurring in 1943. The most popular modifications in the Red Army were the Valentine IV and its Canadian equivalent, the Valentine VII, as well as the main variant of the final period of the war, the Valentine IX. Moreover, the model IX with an artillery system with a barrel length of 52 calibers was mainly supplied to the Soviet Union, while in british army models with a barrel length of 45 calibers were used. Model "XI" with a 75 mm cannon was not supplied to the USSR.

It should be noted that the designation system for British armored vehicles was quite complex and cumbersome. First, the index assigned to the tank by the War Department was indicated (Mk.II, Mk.III, Mk.IV, etc.), then the name of the vehicle ("Valentine", "Matilda", "Churchill", etc.) and its modification was indicated (in Roman numerals). Thus, the full designation of the tank could look like this; Mk.III "Valentine IX", Mk.IV " Churchill III", etc. To avoid confusion, we will use the designations of English tanks adopted in the Red Army during the war: name indicating the modification, for example: "Valentine IV", "Valentine IX", etc., or without indicating modifications, for example: Mk.III "Valentine".

During the four years of the war, foreign-made tanks and armored vehicles received various units, subdivisions | divisions and units of the armored forces of the Red Army. Therefore, there were many reports on their operational and combat characteristics. Moreover, the assessment of the same car command staff middle and senior management often did not coincide with the opinion of the tank crew. This is understandable; the command was primarily concerned tactical characteristics equipment - weapons, speed on the march, range, etc. - and for the crew, ease of operation, placement of units and the ability to quick repair, as well as other parameters of a household and technical nature. The combination of these two points of view largely determined the conclusion about the presented model of armored vehicles.

In addition, foreign equipment was designed with a higher standard of production and operation in mind. In many ways, it was the technical illiteracy of the crews and the lack of units necessary for maintenance that became the reasons for the failure of allied equipment. However, the “gap” of the gap was not so great, and our tankers very soon became accustomed to foreign vehicles, modifying many of them to suit the specifics of operation on the Soviet-German front.

The first "Valentines" appeared in parts of our active army at the end of November 1941, although in small quantities. At the same time, only part of the 145 Matildas, 216 Valentines and 330 Station Wagons received was used. So, on the Western Front on January 1, 1942, “Valentines” were part of the 146th (2-T-34, 10-T-60, 4-Mk.Sh), 23rd (1-T-34, 5 Mk. .III) and 20th (1-T-34, 1-T-26, 1-T-, 60, 2-Mk.Sh, 1-BA-20) tank brigades operating in battle formations 16, 49 and 3rd Army, as well as as part of the 112th TD (1-KV, 8-T-26, 6-Mk.Sh and 10-T-34), attached to the 50th Army. The 171st separate tank battalion, also equipped with Valentines (10-T-60, 12-Mk.II, 9-Mk.III), fought on the Northwestern Front (4th Contact Army).

German documents of the 4th Panzer Group note the fact of the first use of British tanks "Type 3" (Mk.III "Valentine". - Author's note) against the 2nd Panzer Division on November 25, 1941 in the Peshki area. The document stated: “For the first time, German soldiers were faced with the fact of real help from England, which Russian propaganda had been shouting about for so long. English tanks are much worse than Soviet ones. The crews that German soldiers took prisoner scolded “the old tin boxes that the British handed them.”

Judging by this report, it can be assumed that the crews of the Valentines had a very limited training period and had little knowledge of English materiel. In the units of the 5th Army, which covered the Mozhaisk direction, the first unit to receive “foreign tanks” was the 136th separate tank battalion (tb). The battalion completed its formation on December 1, 1941, having ten T-34, ten T-60, nine Valentine and three Matilda tanks (British tanks were received in Gorky on November 10, 1941, tankers were trained directly at front). By December 10, during crew training, five Valentines, two Matildas, one T-34 and four T-60s were damaged. After putting the equipment in order, on December 15, 1911, 136th detachment. was assigned to the 329th Infantry Division (SD). Then, together with the 20th Tank Brigade, he took part in the counter-offensive near Moscow.

On January 15, 1942, the battalion command compiled a “Brief Report on the Actions. Mk.Sh” - apparently one of the first documents assessing the Allied equipment:

“The experience of using Valentines has shown:

1. The tanks' cross-country ability in winter conditions is good; movement on soft snow 50-60 cm thick is ensured. Ground traction is good, but spurs are required when there is icy conditions.

2. The weapon worked flawlessly, but there were cases of the gun not firing enough (the first five or six shots), apparently due to thickening of the lubricant. Weapons are very demanding in terms of lubrication and maintenance.

3. Observation through instruments and slits is good.

4. The engine group and transmission worked well up to 150-200 hours, after which a decrease in engine power is observed.

5. Good quality armor.

The crew personnel underwent special training and had satisfactory command of tanks. The command and technical staff of the tanks had little knowledge. A great inconvenience was created by the crews’ ignorance of the elements of preparing tanks for winter. As a result of the lack of necessary heating, cars had difficulty starting in the cold and therefore remained hot all the time, which led to a large consumption of motor resources. In a battle with German tanks (December 20, 1941), three Valentines received the following damage: one had its turret jammed by a 37-mm shell, the gun of another was jammed, the third received five hits on the side from a distance of 200-250 meters. In this battle, the "Valentines" knocked out two medium German tank T-3.

In general, the Mk.Sh is a good combat vehicle with powerful weapons, good maneuverability, and capable of operating against enemy personnel, fortifications and tanks.

Negative sides:

1. Poor adhesion of the tracks to the ground.

2. Greater vulnerability of the suspension bogies - if one roller fails, the tank cannot move. There are no high-explosive fragmentation shells for the gun."

Apparently, the latter circumstance was the reason for the order State Committee Defense about the rearmament of "Valentine" with a domestic artillery system. This task and in a short time frame was carried out at plant No. 92 by the design bureau under the leadership of Grabin. In December 1941, within two weeks, one Valen-Tayne was armed with a 45-mm tank gun and a DT machine gun. This car received the factory index ZIS-95. At the end of December, the tank was sent to Moscow, but things did not go further than a prototype.

A large number of Valentine tanks took part in the Battle of the Caucasus. In general, the North Caucasus Front in the period 1942-1943 had a very significant “share” of Anglo-American tanks - up to 70% of the total number of vehicles. This situation was explained primarily by the proximity of the front to the Iranian supply channel for the Red Army with equipment and weapons, as well as the convenience of transporting tanks along the Volga that arrived at the northern ports of the USSR.

Of the armored units of the North Caucasus Front, the 5th Guards Tank Brigade was considered the most eminent and experienced. The brigade began fighting in the Caucasus on September 26, 1942, covering the Grozny direction to the Malgobek, Ozernaya area (at that time the brigade had 40 Valentines, three T-34s and one BT-7). On September 29, the brigade counterattacked German units in the Alkhanch-urt valley. In this battle, the crew of Captain Shenelkov's Guard in his "Valentine" destroyed five tanks, one self-propelled gun, a truck and 25 soldiers. 15 Over the next few days, fighting in this area continued. In total, during the fighting in the Malgobek area, the brigade destroyed 38 tanks (of which 20 were burned), one self-propelled gun, 24 guns, six mortars, one six-barreled mortar, and up to 1,800 enemy soldiers. The brigade's losses were two T-34s, 33 Valentines (eight of them burned out, the rest were evacuated and restored), 268 people were killed and wounded.

Returning to the use of the Valentine tank on the Soviet-German front, we can say that our commanders found the right solution - they began to use these tanks comprehensively, together with Soviet equipment. In the first echelon (according to documents from 1942) there were KV and Matilda CS tanks. (with a 76.2 mm howitzer), in the second echelon there are T-34s, and in the third echelon “Valentine” and T-70. This tactic very often yielded positive results. An example of this is the reconnaissance in force of the fire system of the German defensive zone in the North Caucasus - the Blue Line.

For the attack, forces from the 56th Army were brought in: the 5th Guards Tank Brigade (as of August 1, 1943 it had 13 M4A2, 24 Valentine, 12 T-34) and the 14th Guards Breakthrough Tank Regiment (16 KV- 1C), as well as the battalion of the 417th Infantry Division.

Exactly at six o'clock in the morning on August 6, 1943, a Katyusha salvo was fired at the village of Gorno-Vesely (Object of attack), and immediately behind the barrage of fire, three KV-1S rushed forward, followed by three Valentines under the command of Guard Senior Lieutenant G. P. Polosina. The infantry moved behind the slippers. Next, it is not without interest to cite the memories of battle participant G.P. Polosin:

“Maneuvering among shell explosions (a thirty-minute artillery barrage, of course, did not completely suppress the enemy’s fire system), my “Valentine” unexpectedly found itself literally in front of the houses of the farm. What luck! But what about other tanks?..

I looked around through the viewing slits. I saw that two more "Englishmen" of my platoon - Poloznikov's and Voronkov's vehicles - were walking slightly behind. But heavy HFs are not visible. Maybe they fell behind or were taken to the side: The infantry, of course, had been cut off from the tanks even earlier...

Destroying enemy machine-gun emplacements and bunkers along the way, our tanks reached the ravine. We stopped here. I gave the order over the radio:

Don't shoot without my order! Take care of the shells. It is still unknown how long it will take... And then we will have to fight our way to our own people...

The tank commanders answered briefly:

Then he tried to contact the guard company commander, Senior Lieutenant Maksimov. And I couldn't. The airwaves were filled to the brim with hysterical commands in German. Apparently, the Nazis were seriously concerned about the unexpected breakthrough of Russian tanks in this sector of their defense.

But our position was also unenviable. It just so happened that they were separated from the main group conducting reconnaissance in force, ammunition and fuel were running out, alone in the rear of the enemy, who, however, had not yet fully understood the situation, but this was a matter of time.

Having crushed a German anti-tank gun along the way, our tank jumped out of the ravine into the open space and saw a strange picture. There were Germans on Voronkov’s car, which was 30-40 meters to the right. They mistook the Valentines for their equipment, banged their butts on the armor and did not understand why the tankers did not get out. After waiting until there were up to a dozen Germans, I ordered a machine gun to hit them. Then, having fired smoke grenade launchers (this is where these weapons, which were only on British tanks, came in handy) and, having installed a smoke screen, the vehicles returned through the same ravine to the location of their troops. The battle was still going on near Gorno-Vesely. KV tanks were knocked out. One of them stood without a tower. Another a little further from him buried his gun in the ground. At its right, spread out caterpillar, two tankers fired their pistols away from the advancing Germans. Having dispersed the enemy infantry with cannon and machine gun fire, we dragged both wounded men into our Valentine. It immediately became clear that, having failed to penetrate the KV’s armor with anti-tank artillery, the Germans used guided mines against them.”

During this short raid behind enemy lines, a platoon of guard senior lieutenant G.P. Polosin destroyed five anti-tank guns, crushed five bunkers, 12 machine guns, and shot up to a hundred Nazis. But most importantly, with his unexpected attack from the rear he forced the enemy to fully open his fire system. Which, in fact, was what was needed.

It remains to add that all crew members of Polosin’s platoon were awarded government awards for this. Personally, Georgy Pavlovich Polosin received the Order of the Red Star.

In the 196th Tank Brigade (30th Army of the Kalinin Front), which participated in the capture of the city of Rzhev, in August 1942, steel plates were welded onto each of the tracks of the Valentine tanks, increasing the track area. Shod in such “bast shoes”, the car did not fall through the snow and did not get stuck in swampy ground middle zone Russia. Mk.III were actively used in positional battles on the Western and Kalinin fronts until the beginning of 1944. Cavalrymen were very fond of the Valentine for its mobility and maneuverability. Until the end of the war, the Valentine IV and its further development, the Valentine IX and X, remained the main tank of the cavalry corps. The cavalrymen noted the lack of high-explosive fragmentation shells for the cannon as the main drawback. And one more thing: it was not recommended to make sharp turns on the Valentine, since this would bend the sloth’s crank and cause the caterpillar to jump off.

By the end of the war, modifications of the Valentine IX and X (along with the American Sherman) remained the only types of tanks that the USSR continued to request for delivery to the Red Army. For example, on June 22, 1944, the 5th Guards Tank Army (3rd Belorussian Front) had 39 Valentine IX tanks, and the 3rd Cavalry Corps had 30 Valentine III tanks. These vehicles ended their military career in the Far East in August-September 1945. The 1st Far Eastern Front included 20 Mk.III Valentine-Bridgelayer bridge tanks, the 2nd Far Eastern Front included 41 "Valentine III and IX" (267th Tank Regiment) and another 40 "Valentine IV" were in the ranks of the cavalry -mechanized group of the Transbaikal Front.

Dowry tank brigades armies 15 and 16, tank-bridge companies (10 Mk.IIIM each) marched together with tanks, but were not used, since tanks and self-propelled guns crossed small rivers and streams themselves, and large obstacles (over 8 m) could not be secured Mk.IIIM.

Canadian tanks "Valentine IV" in Soviet terminology were also designated as "Mk.III", so it is quite difficult to determine which are actually English and which are Canadian vehicles. Several Valentine VII vehicles took part in the liberation of Crimea. In the 19th Perekop Tank Corps there was the 91st separate motorcycle battalion, which had a Valentine VII bottom, ten BA-64s, ten Universal armored personnel carriers and 23 motorcycles.

However, this does not in the least diminish the Canadian share of supplies to the USSR. After all, almost half of the Valentines delivered were Canadian-made. These tanks, along with British products, took part in many operations of the Great Patriotic War.

One example of the use of Canadian vehicles was the battle of the 139th Tank Regiment of the 68th Mechanized Brigade of the 5th Mechanized Corps of the 5th Army to capture the village of Devichye Pole in November 1943. 139 TP (68 infantry brigade, 8 Mk, 5th Army) entered operational subordination to the 5th Army on November 15, 1943. With 20 T-34 tanks and 18 Valentine VII tanks, the regiment was fully equipped and was not used in battle until November 20. After the preparation of the material unit for battle was completed, on November 20, 1943, in cooperation with the 57th Guards Breakthrough Tank Regiment, armed with KV and T-34 vehicles, and the infantry of the 110th Guards Rifle Division, the tanks of the 139th Tank Division went forward. The attack was carried out at high speeds (up to 25 km/h) with a landing of machine gunners (up to 100 people) and with anti-tank guns attached to the tanks. 30 Soviet tanks took part in this operation. The enemy did not expect such a massive rapid attack and was unable to provide effective resistance to the advancing units. When the first line of defense was broken, the infantry dismounted and, unhooking their guns, began to occupy enemy positions, preparing to repel a possible counterattack. The remaining units of the 110th Guards Infantry Division were brought into the breakthrough. However, the German counterattack did not take place; the German command was so stunned by the Soviet breakthrough that it was unable to organize resistance within 24 hours. During this day, our troops marched 20 km into the depths of the German defense and captured Maiden Field, losing 4 tanks (KV, T-34, two Valentine VII). At the end of the war, Valentine tanks were used mainly in tank companies of motorcycle reconnaissance regiments (10 tanks per staff), mixed tank regiments (standard M4A2 Sherman staff - 10, Mk.III Valentine (III, IV, VII, IX, X) - 11 vehicles) and various cavalry formations: cavalry corps and mixed cavalry-mechanized groups. In individual tank and motorcycle regiments, modifications "IX" and "X" predominated, and in the cavalry corps, modifications "IV" - "VII" predominated. Mk.III "Valentine" III-IV tanks were used on the Soviet-German front in significantly smaller numbers than other modifications and for some reason(?) prevailed in the Northwestern theater of operations as part of the Baltic fronts.

After the end of World War II, equipment supplied under Lend-Lease had to be returned former owners. However, most of the tanks were presented by the Soviet side as scrap and destroyed, and a smaller part of the repaired tanks was transferred to the National Liberation Army of China to fight against the Kuomintang forces.

KITOGRAPHY

Oddly enough, the 1/35 scale model of the British tank is produced exclusively in Russia. It was developed by the St. Petersburg company Alan, which was later divided into Alan itself and UM. The Tank went to UM. Some of the castings were sold to the Korean Dragon, which packed them in their own boxes. Then the Moscow “Maket” bought the mold from UM. So I dwelled in detail on the fate of the “Valentine IV” Mk.III model so that you are not confused by its diversity boxes - the plastic inside is the same.Recently, "Maket" added a new turret, rollers and accessories to the set, turning the tank into a Mk.Sh "Valentine X" or XI, depending on the gun barrel used (both are given).

Thus, only MK.III "Valentine IV" and "Valentine X/XI" exist in the form of models.

(I’ll add on my own behalf - 1/72 “Valentine Mk. III” was previously made by ESCI, now it seems Italeri will reissue it. A.A.)

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 last one is in his in its original form can still be found in the armies of a number of countries, others have already become museum pieces. And just for 10 years! The authors considered it unfair to follow in the footsteps of the Jane’s reference book and not consider this combat vehicle (very interesting in design and fiercely discussed in its time), which formed the basis of the tank fleet of the last quarter of the 20th century.

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 have become a symbol of the past war, the backbone of the Soviet armored forces? Who created them and under what conditions? How did the USSR, which had lost most of its European territories and had 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 testing days ", from 1937 to the beginning of 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 of the RGVA and RGEA. 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, transfer 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 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, simultaneously possessing powerful weapons, sufficient to suppress most targets, good maneuverability and mobility with armor protection capable of maintaining its combat effectiveness when fired by the most widespread anti-tank weapons probable enemy.

It was recommended that large tanks be supplemented with only special tanks - amphibious tanks, chemical tanks. The brigade now had 4 separate battalions of 54 tanks each and was strengthened by moving 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, all other things being equal, turned out to be very fragile and often chipped 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 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 production 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 according to new technique, specially developed at the insistence of the new head of 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 suspended from work and was in custody and under investigation for several months. In addition, the tank received a new turret with 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 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 D-180 and D-200 engines for reconnaissance tanks are not being carried out, jeopardizing the production of prototypes." Justifying his choice, N. Astrov said that a wheeled-tracked non-floating reconnaissance aircraft (factory designation 101 or 10-1), as well as a variant of an amphibious tank (factory designation 102 or 10-1 2), are a compromise solution, since it is not possible to fully satisfy the requirements of the ABTU. Option 101 was a tank weighing 7.5 tons with a hull-like 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. Combat weight 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 paid to tanks.