German tanks pz. Mikhail Baryatinsky - Panzer IV medium tank. German tank PzKpfw IV Ausf. G on the march in Normandy

According to the provisions of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was prohibited from building tanks and creating armored forces. However, the Germans did not at all strive to thoroughly implement the points of the agreement, which they considered humiliating for themselves. Therefore, long before the Nazis came to power, the German military began to actively develop a doctrine for the use of tank units in modern warfare. It was more difficult to implement theoretical developments in practice, but the Germans succeeded in this: it is widely known that during exercises and maneuvers, mock-ups built on the basis of cars or even bicycles were used as tanks. And the tanks themselves were developed under the guise of agricultural tractors and tested abroad.

After power passed to the Nazis, Germany refused to comply with the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. By this time, the country’s armored doctrine had already taken shape quite clearly, and it was, figuratively speaking, a matter of translating the Panzerwaffe into metal.

First German serial tanks: Pz.Kpfw I and Pz.Kpfw II - were vehicles that even the Germans themselves perceived as more of a transition to “real” tanks. The Pz.Kpfw I was generally considered a training one, even though it happened to take part in hostilities in Spain, Poland, France, North Africa and the USSR.

In 1936, the first copies of the Pz.Kpfw medium tank entered service with the troops. III, armed with 37 mm anti-tank gun and protected in the frontal and side projections by armor 15 mm thick. This combat vehicle was already a fully-fledged tank that met the requirements of the time. At the same time, due to the small caliber of the gun, it could not fight against fortified enemy firing points and engineering structures.

In 1934, the army issued a task to industry to develop a fire support tank, which was to be armed with a 75-mm cannon with ammunition high explosive shells. This tank was originally developed as a battalion commander's vehicle, which is where its first designation came from - BW (Batallionführerwagen). Work on the tank was carried out by three competing companies: Rheinmetall-Borsig, MAN and Krupp AG. The Krupp project VK 20.01 was recognized as the best, but it was not allowed into mass production due to the fact that the design of the tank used a chassis with spring suspension. The military demanded the use of a torsion bar suspension, which provided smoother movement and better maneuverability of the combat vehicle. Krupp engineers managed to reach a compromise with the Armament Directorate, proposing to use a version of the spring suspension with eight dual road wheels, almost completely borrowed from the experienced multi-turreted Nb.Fz tank.

An order for the production of a new tank, designated Vs.Kfz. 618, received by Krupp in 1935. In April 1936, the vehicle was renamed Pz.Kpfw IV. The first samples of the “zero” series were produced at Krupp factories in Essen, and in the fall of 1937 production was moved to Magdeburg, where production of the Ausf modification began. A.

Pz.Kpfw. IV was a classically designed vehicle with an engine compartment at the rear of the hull. The transmission was located in front, between the driver’s and radio operator’s workstations. Due to the design of the rotating mechanism, the tank's turret was shifted slightly to the left relative to the longitudinal axis. Chassis on each side it consisted of four sprung bogies with four rollers on each of them. The drive wheel was at the front. Note that throughout the entire history of the Pz.Kpfw IV, no significant changes were made to the design of the chassis.

The first modification of the vehicle, Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.A, was equipped with a Maybach HL108TR carburetor engine with a power of 250 hp. s., located closer to the right side of the body.

The armor of the "A" modification hull was 20 mm in the frontal projection and 15 mm in the side and rear projections. The thickness of the turret armor was 30 mm at the front, 20 mm at the side and 10 mm at the rear. The commander's cupola of a characteristic cylindrical shape was located in the rear of the tower in the middle. For observation, it was equipped with six viewing slits covered with armored glass.

Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.A was armed with a 75-mm short-barreled KwK 37 L|24 cannon and two MG34 machine guns of 7.92 mm caliber: coaxial with the cannon and a course gun, located in a ball mount in the frontal armor plate of the hull. The armor plate itself had a broken shape. The presence of this machine gun, along with a cylindrical commander’s cupola, is distinguishing feature first modification of the Pz.Kpfw. IV. In total, until June 1938, 35 A-series vehicles were produced.

Pz.Kpfw. IV was destined to become the main vehicle of the German armored forces. Its last modification was produced from June 1944 to March 1945. The scope of the article does not allow us to dwell in detail on each change in the design of this tank, so we will briefly consider the main modernizations and improvements that were carried out by German engineers throughout the long journey of the “four”.

In May 1938, production of the Pz.Kpfw version began. IV Ausf.B. Its main difference from the previous version was the use of a direct armor plate in the frontal part of the hull and the elimination of the forward machine gun. Instead, an additional viewing slot for the radio operator and an embrasure through which he could fire from personal weapons appeared in the body. The viewing slots of the commander's cupola received armored shutters. Instead of a 5-speed gearbox, a 6-speed one was used. The engine has also changed: now to the Pz.Kpfw. IV began installing a Maybach HL120TR engine with a power of 300 hp. With. The hull armor was strengthened, and now the “four” was protected by 30 millimeters of steel in the frontal projection of the hull and turret. Frontal armor the tower was somewhat thinner, its thickness was 25 mm. By October 1938, 42 vehicles of this modification had been built.

Pz.Kpfw series. IV Ausf.C received a new Maybach HL120TRM engine. This engine, like the previous one, had a power of 300 hp. With. and was installed on all subsequent modifications of the Pz IV. Modification “C” was produced from April 1938 to August 1939. Following it, the “D” series entered the production lines, on which they again began to use a broken-shaped frontal armor plate with a frontal machine gun. Since 1940, the Ausf.D's frontal armor has been reinforced with an additional 30 mm plate. In 1941, some vehicles of this series were equipped with a 50 mm cannon. Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.D was also built in a tropical modification.

In the E series tanks, produced from April 1940 to April 1941, the designers continued to increase the armor. The 30-mm frontal armor of the hull was additionally reinforced with a plate of the same thickness. The course machine gun was now mounted in a ball mount. The shape of the tower also underwent minor changes.

The latest modification of the “four” with a short-barreled 75-mm cannon was the “F” version. Now the frontal armor of the vehicle reached 50 mm on the hull and 30 mm on the turret. Since 1942, tanks of the Ausf.F series began to be equipped with a long-barreled KwK 40 L/43 cannon of 75 mm caliber. In this version the vehicle received the designation Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.F2.

In March 1942, production of the Pz.Kpfw modification began. IV Ausf.G. It did not differ much from the previous version of the tank. Later vehicles in this series used wider “eastern” tracks, additional frontal armor and side screens. About 400 of the last "fours" of the "G" series were armed with a 75 mm KwK 40 L/43 cannon, and from February 1943 they began to be equipped with a 75 mm KwK 40 L/48 cannon. Based on Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.G prototype was developed self-propelled gun Hummel.

In June 1942, work began on the Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.H. The frontal armor of this tank reached 80 mm. Armored screens 5 mm thick were installed on the sides. The commander's cupola housed an anti-aircraft turret for a 7.92 mm machine gun. The tank was coated with zimmerit, a material that made it difficult to attach magnetic mines to the hull. As the main weapon on the Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.H used a 75 mm KwK 40 L/48 gun.

In February 1944, production began of the latest modification of the “four” - Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf.J. This tank did not have a turret rotation motor, and the turning mechanism was operated manually. The design of the support and support rollers has been simplified. Due to the installation of screens, the side viewing slots were removed, rendering them useless. Cars of different series had minor differences in internal equipment.

In general, researchers deservedly consider the Pz.Kpfw. IV was the most versatile German tank of World War II. The designers included in it a modernization potential sufficient for the tank to remain a full-fledged combat unit throughout the entire period of its existence. This is evidenced, among other things, by the fact that this tank was in service with a number of countries until the 60s of the 20th century.

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! Follow in the footsteps of Jane's Guide and skip this one combat vehicle(very interesting in design and fiercely discussed at one time), which formed the basis of the tank fleet of the last quarter of the 20th century, was considered unfair by the authors.

Films about tanks where there is still no alternative to this type of weapon ground forces. The tank was and will probably remain for a long time modern weapons thanks to the ability to combine such seemingly contradictory qualities as high mobility, powerful weapons and reliable crew protection. These unique qualities of tanks continue to be constantly improved, and the experience and technology accumulated over decades predetermine new frontiers in combat properties and achievements of the military-technical level. In the eternal confrontation between “projectile and armor”, as practice shows, protection against projectiles is increasingly being improved, acquiring new qualities: activity, multi-layeredness, self-defense. At the same time, the projectile becomes more accurate and powerful.

Russian tanks are specific in that they allow you to destroy the enemy from a safe distance, have the ability to make quick maneuvers on off-road, contaminated terrain, can “walk” through territory occupied by the enemy, seize a decisive bridgehead, cause panic in the rear and suppress the enemy with fire and tracks . The war of 1939-1945 became the most ordeal for all humanity, since almost all countries of the world were involved in it. It was a clash of the titans - the most unique period that theorists debated in the early 1930s and during which tanks were used in large numbers by almost all belligerents. At this time, a “lice test” and a deep reform of the first theories of the use of tank forces took place. And it is the Soviet tank forces that are most affected by all this.

Tanks in battle 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. 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 soviet tank began to transform from “mechanized cavalry” (in which one of its fighting qualities was emphasized at the expense of others) into a balanced fighting machine, possessing at the same time 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 new boss demanded that the armor of new tanks be strengthened so that at a distance of 600-800 meters (effective range).

The newest tanks in the world, when designing new tanks, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of increasing the level of armor protection during modernization by at least one stage...” This problem could be solved in two ways: Firstly, by increasing the thickness of the armor plates and, secondly, by “using increased armor resistance." It is not difficult to guess that the second way was considered more promising, since the use of specially strengthened armor plates, or even two-layer armor, could, while maintaining the same thickness (and the mass of the tank as a whole), increase its durability by 1.2-1.5 It was this path (the use of especially hardened armor) that was chosen at that moment to create new types of tanks.

Tanks of the USSR at the dawn of tank production, armor was most widely used, the properties of which were identical in all areas. Such armor was called homogeneous (homogeneous), and from the very beginning of armor making, craftsmen sought to create just such armor, because homogeneity ensured stability of characteristics and simplified processing. However, at the end of the 19th century, it was noticed that when the surface of an armor plate was saturated (to a depth of several tenths to several millimeters) with carbon and silicon, its surface strength increased sharply, while the rest of the plate remained viscous. This is how heterogeneous (non-uniform) armor came into use.

For military tanks, the use of heterogeneous armor was very important, since an increase in the hardness of the entire thickness of the armor plate led to a decrease in its elasticity and (as a consequence) to an increase in fragility. Thus, the most durable armor, with other equal conditions It turned out to be very fragile and often pricked even from the explosions of high-explosive fragmentation shells. Therefore, at the dawn of armor production, when producing homogeneous sheets, the task of the metallurgist was to achieve the maximum possible hardness of the armor, but at the same time not to lose its elasticity. Surface-hardened armor with carbon and silicon saturation was called cemented (cemented) and was considered at that time a panacea for many ills. But cementation is a complex, harmful process (for example, treating a hot plate with a jet of illuminating gas) and relatively expensive, and therefore its development in a series required large expenses and improved production standards.

Wartime tanks, even in operation, these hulls were less successful than homogeneous ones, since for no apparent reason cracks formed in them (mainly in loaded seams), and it was very difficult to put patches on holes in cemented slabs during repairs. But it was still expected that a tank protected by 15-20 mm cemented armor would be equivalent in level of protection to the same one, but covered with 22-30 mm sheets, without a significant increase in weight.
Also, by the mid-1930s, tank building had learned to harden the surface of relatively thin armor plates by uneven hardening, known since the end of the 19th century in shipbuilding as the “Krupp method.” Surface hardening led to a significant increase in the hardness of the front side of the sheet, leaving the main thickness of the armor viscous.

How tanks fire video up to half the thickness of the slab, which was, of course, worse than cementation, since while the hardness of the surface layer was higher than with cementation, the elasticity of the hull sheets was significantly reduced. So the “Krupp method” in tank building made it possible to increase the strength of armor even slightly more than cementation. But the hardening technology that was used for thick naval armor was no longer suitable for relatively thin tank armor. Before the war, this method was almost not used in our serial tank building due to technological difficulties and relatively high cost.

Combat use of tanks The most proven tank gun was the 45-mm tank gun model 1932/34. (20K), and before the event in Spain it was believed that its power was quite sufficient to perform most tank tasks. But the battles in Spain showed that a 45-mm gun could only satisfy the task of fighting enemy tanks, since even shelling of manpower in the mountains and forests turned out to be ineffective, and it was only possible to disable a dug-in enemy firing point if direct hit. Firing at shelters and bunkers was ineffective due to the low high-explosive effect of a projectile weighing only about two kg.

Types of tanks photos so that even one shell hit can reliably disable 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 armor protection foreign combat vehicles tend to increase significantly. 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 more 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 general 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, manufacturing work prototypes engines D-180 and D-200 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 a tank under the floor 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.

A new product from Stars- model of a German medium tank Pz.IV ausf.H(T-4N). Manufacturer's own development under number 3620 , scale 1\35.

Packaging and equipment.

Everything is standard here latest models Stars - a colorful cardboard box with photographs of the finished model on back side. The kit includes yellow plastic sprues plus a board with transparent parts, the lower part of the body as a separate part, a sheet with decals, and instructions.

Workmanship, detailing, advantages of the set.

In principle, there are no complaints about the quality of the castings; the technological features of casting are hidden almost (almost!) everywhere on the inner sides of the parts. Minimal flash was found in a couple of places, but this is not critical.

Let's say right away - the level of detail was very pleasing! Judge for yourself.

Excellent detailing of the bottom, suspension and even inside fenders. Technological inscriptions are visible on the suspension bogies and tires of the rollers. Welds are simulated in the right places. A mass of well-drained rivets and bolt heads, which also different types and size. The bolts recessed into the armor also turned out great (look at the photo, everything is clearly visible there). The rest of the little things also came out well, everything was done neatly and is easy to “read” on the surface.

There is a very rich interior of the turret - the breech of the cannon and machine guns, the internal mounting of the gun to the mantlet, the sight, all three crew seats and even the floor. Not bad, not bad! Of course, there is an imitation of the inside of the turret and hull hatches.

The zimmerit on the screens turned out well, not too thick and not entirely clumsy. In any case, when assembled out of the box, it is quite possible to install such screens.

The entrenching tool and its fastenings turned out, let’s say, “standard”, neither bad nor good.

Semi-assembled tracks are a plus and a minus, it depends on the specific modeler. But they are cast without a single hint of traces from the pushers.

The barrel is given in ONE piece, which is very atypical for this manufacturer.

Well, probably the most interesting and unexpected thing in the set is the variability in the assembly of some of the model’s components.

For example, you can make THREE variants of the muzzle brake, two variants of the hub covers of the road wheels, two variants of flangings for the hatches of the driver and radio operator, two types of support rollers (with and without rubber), hatches in the turret screens can be assembled in the open and closed position, periscopes in the turret they can also be made in two versions; the rear guard lamp is of two types.

The kit also includes mortars for smoke exhaust, which are not used during assembly. In general, this kind of equipment suggests that the manufacturer has other modifications of the “four” (at least an early one) in the plans.

The instructions are clearly printed and understandable, and are in book format! Finally, Zvezda realized that their long “foot wraps” were absolutely uncomfortable.

Disadvantages of the set, that it can be improved.

We were very surprised by the fact that on some parts there are traces of pushers on the outside. For example, on the rear armor plate, right in the middle, there is a clearly visible “stump”. Well, this is somehow unacceptable by modern standards, it seems to us.

The division of details is surprising in places. It is not clear why, for example, the return hinges of the transmission access hatches should be made as separate parts, but the stops of the hinged screens should be cast immediately together with the fenders... I also didn’t like the springs of the mud flaps; they need to be replaced immediately.

The manufacturer's tow rope didn't work out at all. It is too thick and very soapy, so it’s definitely worth changing.

Whatever one may say, the holders of the hanging screens are still a bit thick. It's tolerable for assembly out of the box, but those who want to get confused should take photo-etched ones.

I didn’t like the implementation of periscopes in the turret. And there are, in principle, very few transparent details. The open hatches of the gunner and loader just beg for transparent triplexes, but they are given in ordinary plastic...

There is also a question for the leading stars. Experts, of course, will sort this out in more detail on specialized forums, but the width of the outer rim with teeth seems too wide to us.

The star produces tracks with a hollow flange and without chevrons, which is more typical for early cars. It is clear that it could have been different, but for a more “classic” look of this “four” it would still be better to make the tracks with chevrons.

Zimmerit is ONLY present on screens, which is very strange. In theory, the tank should be more “rolled” into it (the entire frontal projection, mud flaps). The manufacturer decided to abandon the option of adding separate sprues with screens without an antimagnetic coating to the box. Apparently, this is where the “legs” of the voiced problem “grow.”

The rest is minor stuff - you can replace the antenna, handrails, wiring.

Conclusions and comparison with analogues.

For the price, the set is simply excellent. Of course, there are a lot of competitors from other manufacturers, but in this price category the model should firmly occupy its niche. Of course, we were very disappointed by some of the “jambs” that such a long-term project should not have. But at the same time, the advantages of this “quartet” are obvious and it is difficult to challenge them. And it's not necessary. Having made this whale, Star showed once again (after “Panther”) that she can make interesting models in terms of detail. In general, the kit is suitable for assembly without modifications without significant reservations. Those who want to chase copies will also find something to work on here.

Our set rating: 4.5 out of 5.

6-04-2015, 15:06

Good day to all! The ACES.GG team is with you, and today we will talk about the German fifth-tier medium tank Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. H. Consider its weak and strengths, we will analyze the performance characteristics, as well as the methods and tactics of using this vehicle in battle.

German medium tank of the fifth level Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. H can be opened using the fourth level medium tank Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. D for 12,800 experience, as well as with the help light tank fourth level Pz.38 nA, but for 15,000 experience. It will cost 373,000 credits at the time of purchase.

Let's look at the performance characteristics of the Pz.Kpfw. IV ausf. H

Pz. IV H has an average strength point at its level of 480. Of course, this is not very much, but if you do not waste them, it is quite enough. The dynamics of the tank are acceptable and do not cause any particular discomfort. The tank reaches its 40 km/h quite well. If we talk about armor, the tank’s armor is not the best, especially in the rear and on the sides. But the tank can easily take a hit, with correct use, from cars of their level and below. The machine also has an acceptable visibility at its level, which is 350 meters.

Pz.Kpfw guns. IV ausf. H

Now let's talk about guns; the tank has three to choose from.

The first is the 7.5 cm Kw.K gun. 40 L/43. It is given to us in the stock configuration of the tank at the time of purchase. This weapon has no special advantages, not counting its rate of fire. But we will have to play with him until we open one of the following weapons.

The second gun is 7.5 cm Kw.K. 40 L/48. This is what can be considered the top tank for this tank, of course, if you are not a fan of high explosives. This weapon has acceptable armor penetration for its level. Not the best, but still good accuracy, as well as a good rate of fire. The average damage per shot is 110 units, which is not too much, but I repeat that for its level this is a completely acceptable indicator.

And the third gun is 10.5 cm Kw.K. L/28. The main advantage of this weapon is its cumulative shells. Penetration is 104 mm, which is quite enough to annihilate most of the enemies that the Pz.Kpfw will encounter. IV Ausf. H. Also, don’t forget about landmines, with their help we can destroy lightly armored targets with one shot. Do not forget that this weapon has very poor accuracy, so it is advisable to always aim until the end.

Equipment on Pz.Kpfw. IV ausf. H

Standard for me and standard for many medium tanks

medium-caliber gun rammer, improved ventilation and reinforced aiming drives.

Skills and abilities of the Pz.Kpfw crew. IV ausf. H

Standard and good choice will:

Commander - Sixth Sense, Repair, Brotherhood.
Gunner - Repair, Smooth rotation of the turret Combat Brotherhood.
Driver - Repair, Smooth ride, Combat brotherhood.
Radio operator - Repair, Radio interception, Combat brotherhood.
Loader - Repair, Non-contact ammo rack, Combat brotherhood.

My choice:

Selection of Pz.Kpfw equipment. IV ausf. H

Here is another standard, namely: a small repair kit, a small first aid kit and a hand-held fire extinguisher. I advise you to use premium equipment, which is quite expensive, but can significantly increase the survivability of your vehicle in battle. So feel free to equip your tank with a large repair kit, a large first aid kit and an automatic fire extinguisher. You can also use a chocolate bar instead of an automatic fire extinguisher.

Tactics and style of play of Pz.Kpfw. IV ausf. H

Tactics for playing Pz. IV H depends on what levels of tanks you have to fight with.

Pz.Kpfw. IV ausf. H in the top

On Pz. IV H in the top is best taken at the beginning of the battle good position at medium or long distance, and shoot enemies caught in the light. You can also take part in a rush, if one is planned. The main thing to consider is that there should be allies next to you who can cover you, as well as shelters behind which you can go after the shot to reload. Thanks to the rate of fire of a 7.5 cm gun, you can inflict quite good damage on the enemy, and with a 10.5 cm gun you can destroy lightly armored tanks with one shot. The main thing with all this is to try not to expose yourself to enemy shots

Pz.Kpfw. IV ausf. H vs sixth levels

In battles against sixth levels, you can also act aggressively or passively. With an aggressive play style, you can support the allied rush by shooting at enemies from behind your allies, or simply start highlighting enemy tanks for allied vehicles. And with a passive style, you will need to take a place in the bushes and shoot damage at enemies caught in the light. Most importantly, we will need to avoid vehicles with high average damage per shot, such as the KV-2, KV-85 with a 122 mm gun and the like. After all, if they don’t kill us with one shot, they will cripple us for the rest of the battle.

Pz.Kpfw. IV ausf. H vs. seventh levels

We will have nothing to do against the seventh levels on the front line, so it would be best to act from behind the backs of our allies on the second or third line. This way we will be able to deal damage to enemies without receiving it ourselves, because many level seven tanks will kill us in one or two shots. Well, if you don’t like this kind of gameplay, then you can try to carefully move forward towards fate, which will decide whether you will bend over or just merge. But seriously, on the first line we will need to act extremely carefully, because if something happens we will simply turn into an easy frag. Therefore, this tactic is extremely risky, but if done correctly, it can bear fruit.

Well, most importantly, in any battle you will need to be able to correctly analyze the map, team compositions, and the travel of your allies. Based on the analysis, it is already worth choosing tactics and the direction in which you will act. Also, do not forget to look at the minimap, so that if something happens, you can promptly move to one direction or another where our help will be needed.

Bottom line

Pz. IV H is a typical representative of medium tanks at its level, which are quite well balanced and provide a lot of pleasant impressions when playing them. The tank has quite good potential, thanks to which it will be possible to influence the outcome of the battle. Also Pz. IV H, like many fifth-level machines, is capable of farming credits quite well and bringing its owner a lot of pleasure from playing on it.

Apparently, we should start with a rather unexpected statement that with the creation of the Pz.IV tank in 1937, the Germans determined a promising path for the development of world tank building. This thesis is quite capable of shocking our reader, since we are accustomed to believe that this place in history is reserved for the Soviet T-34 tank. Nothing can be done, you will have to make room and share laurels with the enemy, albeit a defeated one. Well, so that this statement does not look unfounded, we will provide some evidence.

For this purpose, we will try to compare the “four” with the Soviet, British and American tanks that opposed it in different periods of World War II. Let's start with the first period - 1940-1941; At the same time, we will not focus on the then German classification of tanks by gun caliber, which classified the medium Pz.IV as heavy. Since the British did not have a medium tank as such, they would have to consider two vehicles at once: one infantry, the other cruising. In this case, only “pure” declared characteristics are compared, without taking into account the quality of workmanship, operational reliability, level of crew training, etc.

As can be seen from Table 1, in 1940 - 1941 in Europe there were only two full-fledged medium tanks - T-34 and Pz.IV. The British Matilda was superior to the German and Soviet tanks in armor protection to the same extent that the Mk IV was inferior to them. The French S35 was a tank brought to perfection that met the requirements of the First World War. As for the T-34, while inferior to the German vehicle in a number of important positions (separation of functions of crew members, quantity and quality of surveillance devices), it had armor equivalent to the Pz.IV, slightly better mobility and significantly more powerful weapons. This lag of the German vehicle is easily explained - the Pz.IV was conceived and created as an assault tank, designed to fight enemy firing points, but not his tanks. In this regard, the T-34 was more versatile and, as a result, according to its stated characteristics, the best medium tank in the world for 1941. After just six months, the situation changed, as can be judged by the characteristics of tanks from the period 1942 - 1943.

Table 1

* The commander's cupola counts as one observation device

table 2

* For the Grant I tank, only the 75 mm cannon is taken into account.

Table 3

Table 2 shows how dramatically the combat characteristics of the Pz.IV increased after the installation of a long-barreled gun. Not inferior to enemy tanks in all other respects, the “four” turned out to be capable of hitting Soviet and American tanks out of range of their guns. We are not talking about English cars - for four years of the war the British were marking time. Until the end of 1943, the combat characteristics of the T-34 remained virtually unchanged, with the Pz.IV taking first place among medium tanks. The answer - both Soviet and American - was not long in coming.

Comparing tables 2 and 3, one can see that since 1942 performance characteristics Pz.IV did not change (except for the thickness of the armor) and during two years of the war remained unsurpassed by anyone! Only in 1944, having installed a 76-mm long-barreled gun on the Sherman, did the Americans catch up with the Pz.IV, and we, having launched the T-34-85 into production, overtook it. The Germans no longer had the time or opportunity to give a worthy response.

Analyzing the data from all three tables, we can conclude that the Germans, earlier than others, began to consider the tank as the main and most effective anti-tank weapon, and this is the main trend in post-war tank building.

In general, it can be argued that of all the German tanks of the Second World War, the Pz.IV was the most balanced and versatile. In this car various characteristics harmoniously combined and complemented each other. The "Tiger" and "Panther", for example, had a clear bias towards protection, which led to their overweight and deterioration in dynamic characteristics. The Pz.III, with many other characteristics being equal to the Pz.IV, did not match it in armament and, having no reserves for modernization, left the stage.

The Pz.IV, with a similar Pz.III, but slightly more thoughtful layout, had such reserves to the fullest. This is the only wartime tank with a 75 mm cannon, whose main armament was significantly strengthened without changing the turret. The turret of the T-34-85 and Sherman had to be replaced, and, by and large, these were almost new vehicles. The British went their own way and, like a fashionista, changed not the towers, but the tanks! But “Cromwell,” which appeared in 1944, never reached the “four,” as did “Comet,” released in 1945. Only the post-war Centurion was able to bypass the German tank, created in 1937.

From the above, of course, it does not follow that the Pz.IV was an ideal tank. Let's say it had insufficient engine power and a rather rigid and outdated suspension, which negatively affected its maneuverability. To some extent, the latter was compensated for by the lowest L/B ratio of 1.43 among all medium tanks.

The equipping of the Pz.lV (as well as other tanks) with anti-cumulative screens cannot be considered a successful move by German designers. HEAT ammunition was rarely used en masse, but the screens increased the dimensions of the vehicle, making it difficult to move in narrow passages, blocked most surveillance devices, and made it difficult for the crew to board and disembark. However, an even more pointless and rather expensive measure was coating the tanks with Zimmerit.

Specific power values ​​for medium tanks

But perhaps the biggest mistake the Germans made was trying to switch to a new type of medium tank - the Panther. As the latter, it did not take place (for more details, see "Armor Collection" No. 2, 1997), joining the "Tiger" in the class of heavy vehicles, but it played a fatal role in the fate of the Pz.lV.

Having concentrated all their efforts on creating new tanks in 1942, the Germans stopped seriously modernizing the old ones. Let's try to imagine what would have happened if not for the Panther? The project of installing a “Panther” turret on the Pz.lV is well known, both standard and “close” (Schmall-turm). The project is quite realistic in size - the clear diameter of the turret ring for the Panther is 1650 mm, for the Pz.lV it is 1600 mm. The tower stood up without expanding the turret box. The situation with the weight characteristics was somewhat worse - due to the long reach of the gun barrel, the center of gravity shifted forward and the load on the front road wheels increased by 1.5 tons. However, it could be compensated for by strengthening their suspension. In addition, it must be taken into account that the KwK 42 cannon was created for the Panther, and not for the Pz.IV. For the "four" it was possible to limit ourselves to a gun with smaller weight and dimensions, with a barrel length of, say, not 70, but 55 or 60 calibers. Even if such a weapon would require replacing the turret, it would still make it possible to get by with a lighter design than the Panther one.

The inevitably increasing (by the way, even without such a hypothetical rearmament) weight of the tank required replacing the Engine. For comparison: the dimensions of the HL 120TKRM engine installed on the Pz.IV were 1220x680x830 mm, and the Panther HL 230P30 - 1280x960x1090 mm. The clear dimensions of the engine compartments were almost identical for these two tanks. The Panther's was 480 mm longer, mainly due to the inclination of the rear hull plate. Consequently, equipping the Pz.lV with a higher power engine was not an insurmountable design task.

The results of this, of course, far from complete, list of possible modernization measures would be very sad, since they would nullify the work on creating the T-34-85 for us and the Sherman with a 76-mm cannon for the Americans. In 1943-1945, the industry of the Third Reich produced about 6 thousand “Panthers” and almost 7 thousand Pz.IV. If we take into account that the labor intensity of manufacturing the "Panther" was almost twice as much as that of the Pz.lV, then we can assume that during the same time German factories could produce an additional 10-12 thousand modernized "fours", which would be delivered to the soldiers of the anti-Hitler coalition much more trouble than the Panthers.