Introduction

To understand which tank is the best, you must first understand what it is intended for. The illiterate majority believes that the main purpose of the tank is to meet the enemy's combat vehicle in an open field and defeat it. In this case, of course, the main characteristics of the tank are the thickness of the armor and the initial velocity of the projectile. In this case, the caliber of the projectile and, accordingly, the gun should not be very much inferior to the caliber battleship... This is how, according to amateurs and fans of electronic games, ideal tanks look like.














Actually the main task a tank is to enter a hole in the enemy's defense (which was provided by artillery or competent reconnaissance) and surround, crush, scare. To accomplish this task, completely different qualities are needed - mobility, reliability of the chassis and engine, a large supply of transported fuel and shells. They may object to me. The enemy will throw his tank troops into the area of ​​the breakthrough and an immediate clash is inevitable.
The answer to this question was found by the German troops in the summer of 1941. If there is a threat of a frontal tank attack, one must run away hiding behind anti-tank weapons. It is from these positions that we will try to determine the best tank of the Second World War.

Required armor thickness

Ideal armor consists of several layers - a hard layer, plastic (to extinguish a cumulative jet), a medium-hard layer, a backing, and a lining. In total, it turns out to be twelve meters. This I mean, it is simply not possible to protect the tank one hundred percent. Now I will express a not much complex but very important idea for further understanding. The armor of the tank must be of SUCH THICKNESS that the enemy would have to use powerful enough and, accordingly, HEAVY AND EXPENSIVE anti-tank guns in order to penetrate it. Concepts that are difficult and expensive for each historical period will be determined by the level of development of industry. For the period of World War II, an anti-tank gun with a high muzzle velocity of an armor-piercing projectile with a caliber of 76.2 mm and above was both heavy and expensive. The most striking example is our ZIS-2 and BS-3 anti-tank guns. The ZIS-2 was not much heavier than a forty-five millimeter anti-tank gun, but ten thousand were produced in three years. And an anti-tank gun of forty-five millimeters caliber, only in the forty-third year, seventeen thousand were released. The situation with BS-3 is even worse. They pierced anything, but the weight of three thousand six hundred kilograms made it difficult to maneuver. And the high cost made it possible to produce only one and a half thousand guns. Another very case example... In the forty-fourth year, they tried to strengthen the booking of the T-34-85. The thickness of the front plate was increased to seventy-five millimeters. The driver's hatch was made a hundred millimeters thick. But as it turned out, a German tank gun of eighty-eight millimeters still penetrates the frontal armor. Therefore, they decided not to overload the suspension and transmission and leave the armor forty-five millimeters thick, although in the forty-fourth year, such armor protected only from fragments.
Powerful and heavy anti-tank guns have low maneuverability and low rate of fire. They are difficult to disguise and in general there are simply few of them. Therefore, it is not possible to reliably cover the ENTIRE front with them.

Knowing the criteria for an ideal tank - optimal armor, large ammunition, mobility, reliability and range, we will analyze the most massive tanks of the Second World War.

M-4 Sherman



The American T-4 Sherman tank was a genuine misunderstanding made on the knee. He was very tall and had a very funny "tractor" suspension. The power of the gun and armor protection were average. Due to the absence of a planetary swing mechanism, its transmission can be called primitive. But this primitive transmission was made in America and had amplifiers and synchronizers where needed. Therefore, the control of the tank was easy, and the design itself was quite reliable. The ammunition load was large enough, the radio station was the best in the world. The shells did not detonate when the tank was hit. And most importantly, it was produced in huge quantities. In an open field against the Tiger, Sherman had no chance. But as a TOOL global war he was much more useful than the Tiger. I strongly advise you to read the memoirs of a veteran who fought almost the entire war on foreign tanks. The book is on the Internet, it is called - "Tanker in a foreign car". Reading these memoirs, I concluded that in the forty-fourth and in the forty-fifth year, our command used tank troops basically CORRECT.

German tanks

I'll start at the end, with Panther and Tiger. Both tanks were typical. They had a very modern and efficient suspension. But from the point of view of production and combat operation, this suspension was the height of idiocy. The weight, especially in the tiger, was catastrophically overestimated. The fuel supply is minimal. Therefore, there is no need to talk about any mobility. Most effectively, these tanks could only act as a mobile firing point.

The T-4 tank had an ancient "tractor" suspension and modern spaced armor. He received a long-barreled 75 mm caliber gun only by the middle of the war. Due to the muzzle brake that appeared, it was often confused with the Tiger.



The most perfect turned out to be german tank T-3. It had a modern torsion bar suspension, plus oil expansion joints on the first and last rollers. He had the highest speed - almost seventy kilometers per hour. Moreover, the speed was measured by our specialists in Kubinka. The truth is, why such a speed is not clear to the tank. Not in a column not on the battlefield with such speed do not drive. A legitimate question arises - why was the best combat vehicle removed from service? The answer is the simplest - the narrow body did not allow the installation of a 75 mm gun.

T-44 is the best fighting machine

I will say right away that the T-44 tank did not have to fight, and it reached its full perfection two years after the end of the war. But on his example, you can show what the ideal combat vehicle of the Second World War should have been.
The history of the design of the T-44 tank began with strong desire to replace Soviet designers with something, or at least improve the legendary T-34 tank. Fundamental changes and improvements in design accumulated, but Stalin was afraid of reduction serial production, prohibited their introduction. After the liberation of eastern Ukraine, the question arose which car to launch in Kharkov? And then they decided that it was time for a new model.
New tank had a simple body with vertical side plates. This made it possible to deliver a large tower. The driver's hatch and the machine gun slot were missing in the frontal plate. It has become monolithic and more durable. The suspension has become a modern torsion bar. And most importantly, the tank designers beat the diesel engine designers badly. Those, in turn, removed to other places all the auxiliary mechanisms of the engine, which stood for its dimensions. As a result, the hull of the tank turned out to be three hundred millimeters lower. In the transmission, the gear ratios of the gears were changed, and this reduced the acting loads and increased reliability. Almost all fuel tanks were located in the engine compartment. I say practically because in the bow of the hull to the right of the driver's mechanic, there is still one tank with fuel. The only thing that prevented the new car from entering the bright future was the side clutches inherited from the T-34.
The new car was fired on at the firing range from German cannons caliber seventy-five and eighty-eight millimeters. Then they added the thickness of the armor and fired again. As a result of the increased weight, the suspension and transmission stopped pulling. The suspension was urgently strengthened and the side clutches were replaced with planetary swing mechanisms. The result is the T-54. It turns out that the T-44 came very close but did not become the best combat vehicle of the Second World War.

Designing the best tank of the Second World War

Of course, we take the T-44 hull as a basis. We put the planetary transmission. It will make it possible to make a sufficiently mobile machine weighing thirty-six tons with an engine power of five hundred and twenty Horse power... We remove the fuel tank from the fighting compartment. And instead of it, we make a vertical tank in the area of ​​the stern sheet. At the same time, the body is lengthened by only twenty centimeters, and we get four hundred liters of diesel fuel. Frontal and side armor eighty millimeters thick. It may be objected that the frontal armor is usually made thicker than the side armor. But our frontal armor is sloped and its PRESENT thickness is equal to one hundred and sixty millimeters. We make the tower welded and with a more developed aft part. This will increase the ammo capacity and improve the balance of the turret. As for weapons, we will restrict ourselves to an eighty-five millimeter gun. Sotka is certainly more powerful, but the ammunition capacity is reduced by almost half. And as we found out during raids on the rear of the enemy, the ammunition load is the main thing. So we got the best tank of the Second World War.

HOW TO DEFINIT A FOOL?

The fool does not read the article (or reads but does not understand the meaning of what he read), but immediately begins to comment. And most importantly, unlike smart person, the fool never doubts.
What am I talking about? Just another comment on the article flew in.
Quote.
Best among which tanks?
The T-44 was just the logical conclusion of the T-34/85. And just like the T-34/85, it had a feeble 85 mm ZIS-S-53 cannon.
For comparison, the main tanks of the Americans of those years, the M26 Pershing, were equipped with a powerful 90 mm cannon.
The British A41 Centurion was equipped with the powerful 76mm QF 17 pounder cannon. And even the lighter A34 Comet (generally light, cruising) was equipped with a powerful 76 mm QF 77 mm HV cannon, next to which the Soviet 85 mm ZIS-S-53 tank gun was nervously smoking on the sidelines.
Therefore, the USSR got out and invented some kind of "medium tanks". The time of which (medium infantry in fact) ended during the SECOND WORLD WAR and the whole world switched to the MAIN BATTLE TANK, PLUS some additionally had auxiliary light tanks. So these auxiliary light tanks are technical specifications somewhere roughly and corresponded to the T-44.
Why, in essence, the auxiliary BTT suddenly became some kind of "better", taking into account the existing main (MBT)?
End of quote.
Let's start at the end. I didn't understand the last sentence. There are some strange abbreviations that, when deciphered, break the logic of the Russian language - taking into account the existing BASIC BATTLE TANK.
Apparently the author wanted to say that the T-44 was an auxiliary tank. But I wonder which tank the author considers the main one?

But the author's main complaint is against the weak cannon of the T-44 tank. Why would he need a more powerful cannon? Fight royal tigers?
That is, my entire article, where I explain that the tank IS A COMPLEX OF QUALITY - mobility, protection, the amount of ammunition and much more, did not enter the author of the comments into the brain. It is practically impossible to explain that the T-44 tank should have been the last to fight the tigers.
Now about tanks with good and powerful guns. The American had a muzzle brake on the cannon, that is, after firing for twenty seconds, he did not see anything in the sight and did not understand where his projectile flew away.
By the way, the installation of a muzzle brake made it possible to install a cannon with a caliber of one hundred millimeters on the T-44.

The photo shows a T-44 with a 100 mm cannon. A shell weighing sixteen kilograms accelerated to a speed of nine hundred meters per second.
Let's compare the power of the guns. American - 3,970,000 joules, ours - 6,400,000 joules. Even somehow it became inconvenient for the Americans.
The author also recalls some MEDIUM infantry tanks. So here we have a role infantry tanks at the end of the war, the SU-152 and IS-2 were carried out. True, they were called breakthrough tanks.

The Soviet T-34 tank is well known to anyone interested in the history of World War II. Books, articles, documentaries and so on represent it as the all-conquering "tank of Victory". It outnumbered all German tanks, had sloping armor, unprecedented mobility and was one of the main reasons why the USSR won on the Eastern Front.

How realistic are these claims? Was the T-34 the tank that really won the war? How is he compared to German and American tanks? If we try to answer these questions, then the usual opinions begin to change. Instead of a mechanical miracle, we get a poorly designed and produced tank, which has suffered horrendous losses in relation to the "weaker" German tanks.

Revolutionary design of the T-34

The T-34 is considered by many to be the first tank to have sloped armor. This means that the tank's protection has been significantly improved compared to conventional armor, at right angles. but french tanks of the time, such as the S-35 and Renault R-35 also had sloped armor.

Sloped armor also has disadvantages. For example, it seriously reduces the interior space. The limited space not only affects the work of the crew, but also turns the T-34 literally into a steel coffin. An American study of the Korean War (analyzing the T-34/85, which was more spacious than the T-34/76) concluded that, due to the limited internal space, the penetration of the tank's armor, as a rule, led to the destruction of the tank and the loss of the crew with 75% chance. For Sherman, this figure was only 18%.

German tanks Pz.III and Pz.IV as a whole had the usual hull design, only partially using the slope in the middle of the frontal armor. The new Panther tank was the first German tank with fully sloped armor at the front and sides, but interior space was not as limited as in the T-34.

The T-34 turret also suffered from a lack of space. American experts who examined the T-34 at the Aberdeen training ground in 1942 noted:

"Its main weakness is that it is very cramped. The Americans could not understand how our tankers could fit inside in winter time wearing sheepskin coats. "

Fuel tanks in the fighting compartment

Due to the limited internal space, the fuel tanks were in engine compartment and along the sides. The presence of fuel tanks inside the tank made any penetration fatal.

"The sloped armor only paints a part of the picture of the tank's protection. The internal location of the fuel tanks plays a significant role in the vulnerability of the tank. The T-34-85 is illustrative example a compromise between the advantages and disadvantages of sloped armor. While this armor reduced the likelihood of penetrating the tank, it also reduced the internal volume of the hull. In the event of a penetration of the T-34, the projectile had a high probability of causing catastrophic damage to the tank by falling into the fuel tanks and ammunition stored in such a small space. "

In addition to the limited internal space, the T-34 also had a serious design flaw in the form of a two-man tower, as a result of which the commander was also forced to act as a gunner. This severely limited combat effectiveness tank, since the commander could not concentrate on commanding the tank, instead he had to fire. The three-man tower was introduced on the T-34/85 in March 1944.

Spalling armor

The T-34 armor had high rating Brinell. This means that it was effective at neutralizing anti-tank shells, but tended to flake off. Combined with manufacturing defects in the tank's design, this meant that the T-34's crew was in danger even if shells hit the tank that did not penetrate the armor.

The Review of Soviet ordnance metallurgy on pages 3-5 reports:

“The armor of the T-34 tank, with a few exceptions, underwent heat treatment, obtaining a very high hardness (430-500 Brinell), probably an attempt to provide maximum protection against armor-piercing shells, even at the expense of breaking the structural integrity of the armor. have surprisingly high strength given the very high hardness, but many parts of the armor are very fragile. Very high hardness is found in most Soviet tanks and its creation is a consequence of the statement that the high hardness of the armor has a high resistance to penetration. "

For projectiles whose caliber is equal to or less than the thickness of the armor, an increase in hardness leads to an increase in the speed required to penetrate or to a decrease in the distance. If the caliber of the projectile exceeds the thickness of the armor, then the greater its hardness, the less projectile speed or greater distance is required.

Technical disadvantages

Christie's pendant

The Christie suspension used on the T-34 had the advantage that the tank could reach high speeds on the roads. Among the shortcomings, it is worth noting that it took up a lot of internal space, and had poor cross-country ability.

German tests at Kummersdorf (1 km of hilly track) showed that the T-34 had poor results compared to the Pz. IV, "Tiger", "Sherman" and "Panther".

According to the study "Engineering analysis of the Russian T34 / 85 tank", the main problem there was a lack of shock absorbers.

Christie's suspension was a technology dead end and the Aberdeen Proving Ground report states: "Christie's suspension was tested many years ago and was unconditionally rejected."

Transmission

Another major problem was the cumbersome gearbox. It had low reliability and required excessive effort to shift gears, which led to driver fatigue. Research "Engineering analysis of the Russian T34 / 85 tank" reports:

"Difficulty shifting gears (which had no synchronizers) and the multi-plate dry clutch undoubtedly made driving this tank very difficult and tedious."

The originally powerful V-2 engine (500 hp) could not be fully utilized due to the 4-speed gearbox. Shifting gears required excessive effort from the driver. On the T-34, it was possible to use 4th gear only on an asphalt road, thus maximum speed theoretically 25 km / h on the crossed, in practice it only reached 15 km / h, because in order to switch from 2nd to 3rd gear, superhuman strength was required.

On later modifications, there was a 5-speed gearbox, which made it possible to raise the speed over rough terrain to 30 km / h. However, even the tanks built at the end of the war did not guarantee that they would have a new 5-speed gearbox. Tanks transferred to the Polish People's Army in late 1944 - early 1945 and tanks used by the army North Korea in 1950 had the old 4-speed gearbox.

A powerful cannon?

The T-34 was armed with a large caliber gun. Initially, he was armed with a 76mm L-11 cannon. It was soon replaced by the F-34 76 mm in 42 caliber, and the T34 / 85 was armed with the 85 mm ZIS S-53 in 54.6 calibers.

The numbers look impressive. After all, the main German tank of 1941-1943, the Pz.III, had a 50mm cannon, and the Pz.IV only in 1943-1945 received a satisfactory 75mm cannon. However, Soviet tank guns suffered from low speed, which led to impaired penetration and accuracy at long ranges.

For example, the initial speed (in m / s) for Soviet guns was: L-11 - 612 m / s, F-34 - 655 m / s (and when using German Pzgr39 shells - 625 m / s), ZIS S-53 - 792 m / s. starting speed for German shells: KwK 38 L / 42 - 685, KwK 39 L / 60 - 835 m / s, KwK 40 L / 43 - 740 m / s, KwK 40 L / 48 - 790 m / s, KwK 42 - 925 m /With.

Thus, the 75mm KwK 40 used for the Pz.IV and StuG since mid-1942 had much better penetration and accuracy than the F-34, and the Panther KwK 42 gun also outperformed the ZIS S-53 in the same areas.

Lack of radio

Initially, only the unit commander had a radio in his tank. Radio was used more widely during the war, but even in 1944, many tanks lacked radios. The lack of communication meant that the Soviet tank units acted with insufficient coordination.

Visibility issues

German reports indicate that the T-34s had serious difficulty navigating the terrain. This problem was partially resolved during the war. The 1941 T-34 version lacked the observation devices that were commonly installed on German tanks. Such equipment allowed the commander to conduct a 360-degree view. The T-34 optics were also of poor quality.

The T-34 version of 1943 was equipped with a new turret of increased dimensions and a new commander's cupola, which had viewing slots around the perimeter and an MK-4 observation device in the flap of the rotating cover.

However, the quality of Soviet optics, combined with limited visibility, still left much to be desired. A report compiled by a German unit using the 1943 T-34 version read:

"The quality of sights in Russian tanks is significantly inferior to German designs. German crews have to get used to Russian sights for a long time. The ability to accurately hit through such a sight is very limited.

In Russian tanks it is difficult to command a tank, let alone a group of them, and at the same time play the role of a gunner, therefore it is hardly possible to effectively control the fire of a group of tanks, as a result of which firepower the group is declining. The commander's cupola on the T 43 simplifies tank command and firing; however, the view is limited to five very small and narrow slits.

Safe driving of T-43 and SU-85 cannot be done with closed hatches. We base this statement on our experience - on the first day of the battle at the Yassy bridgehead, four captured tanks of the division were stuck in a trench and could not free themselves, which led to the destruction of weapons placed in the trenches during an attempt to retrieve them. The same thing happened on the second day. "

Reliability issues

The T-34 was supposed to be a simple and reliable tank that rarely broke down. Many people like to compare it with the more complex German tanks, which, allegedly, often broke down. The concept of the T-34 as a reliable tank is another myth of the Second World War.

Most of the tanks in 1941 were lost due to their technical malfunction. The same reliability problems continued between 1942 and 1944. The evacuation and relocation of industrial facilities, combined with the loss of qualified personnel, only led to a drop in reliability.

In 1941, thirty-fours often had to carry gearbox parts with them. In 1942, the situation worsened as many tanks could cover short distances before failing. In the summer of 1942, Stalin issued an order:

“Our tank forces often suffer more losses due to mechanical breakdowns than in combat. For example, on the Stalingrad front, in six days, twelve of our tank brigades lost 326 out of 400 tanks. Of these, about 260 were lost due to mechanical breakdowns. Many tanks were abandoned on the battlefield. Similar cases can be observed on other fronts. Such a high level of mechanical damage is implausible and, the Supreme Headquarters sees in it hidden sabotage and sabotage by certain elements in tank crews who try to use small mechanical problems to avoid battle. From now on, every tank left on the battlefield due to alleged mechanical breakdowns, and if the crew is suspected of sabotage, its members must be "demoted to the infantry ..."

Constant complaints from the front led the authorities to investigate problems with the production of the T-34. In September 1942, a meeting was held at the Ural Tank Plant. The meeting was chaired by Major General Kotin, People's Commissar of the USSR Tank Industry and Chief Designer of the Kliment Voroshilov heavy tank. In his speech, he said:

"... Having considered the problems of an engineering and technological nature, I would like to discuss another issue that has a direct connection with manufacturing shortcomings. These include: negligence and inaccuracy in the production process of tanks in factories, poor quality control. combat use our tanks fail sometimes before reaching the front line, or the crew is forced to leave tanks in enemy territory because of some trifle ... we must make sure that as a result of this meeting all the shortcomings are identified and corrected as soon as possible ...

Comrade Morozov and I recently visited Comrade Stalin. Comrade Stalin drew our attention to the fact that enemy tanks Many kilometers of our lands freely passed, and although our cars are better, they have a serious drawback: after 50 - 80 kilometers they require repair. This is due to deficiencies in the chassis and also, as comrade Stalin said, due to the drive, comparing the T-34 with the German Pz.III, which is in service German army, which is inferior in armor protection and in others important characteristics, in a crew, and does not have such an excellent engine as that of the T-34, and the Pz.III engine is gasoline, not diesel.

Comrade Stalin gave instructions to engineers, People's Commissar Comrade Zaltsman, and plant managers and ordered them to fix all defects as soon as possible. A special order of the State Defense Committee was issued, as well as directives of the People's Commissariat of the tank industry. Despite all these adopted resolutions government, despite repeated instructions from the army and the main directorate of tank forces, nevertheless, all these shortcomings are still not eliminated ... we must identify all the shortcomings, voice proposals for their elimination and eliminate them as soon as possible, and also make proposals for modification components of the tank that will make it better and faster ... "

The situation was still problematic even in 1943-1944. T-34 had persistent problems with gearbox and air cleaners. Experts at the Aberdeen Proving Ground noted:

“On the T-34, the transmission is also very poor. During its operation, the teeth on all gears on it completely crumbled. Chemical analysis the teeth of the gears showed that their heat treatment is very poor and does not meet any American standards for such parts of mechanisms. Disadvantages of a diesel engine - a criminally bad air cleaner on the T-34 tank. The Americans believe that only a saboteur could create such a device. "

The same problems were identified in the T-34/85, built in 1945. "Engineering analysis of the Russian T34 / 85 tank" notes:

"As a result of completely unsatisfactory performance of engine air purifiers, it can be expected to cause early engine failure due to excess dust and abrasion. After a few hundred miles, there is likely to be a decrease in engine performance as a result."

The German unit that used the 1943 T-34/76 noted:

“Regardless of the fact that our experience is limited, we can confidently say that Russian tanks are not suitable for long march on roads and driving at high speed. high speed that can be reached is between 10 and 12 km / h. It is also necessary on the march, every half hour at least make stops for 15 - 20 minutes, allowing the tank to cool down. Difficulties and breakdowns of the rotary clutch occurred with all captured tanks... In difficult terrain on the march, and during an attack, in which the attacking tank unit must often change direction, within a short time the side clutches overheat and become covered with oil ... "

Soviet tests of the newly built T-34s showed that in April 1943, only 10.1% of the tanks could cover 330 km, in June 1943 this figure dropped to 7.7%. The percentage remained below 50% until October 1943, when it was able to reach 78%, after which in next month it dropped to 57%, and in the period from December 1943 to February 1944 averaged 82%.

A preliminary inspection of tanks manufactured at the Ural Tank Plant No. 183 (a large manufacturer of the T-34) showed that in 1942 only 7% of the tanks had no defects, in 1943 14%, and in 1944 29.4%. In 1943, damaged teeth were the main problem.

The engine also had serious reliability problems. Depending on the manufacturer in 1941 average duration engine operation averaged 100 hours. This figure dropped in 1942, so some T-34s could not travel more than 30-35 km.

T-34s, which were tested at the Aberdeen Proving Ground, were built at the best Soviet plant, materials were used to the maximum good quality but his engine stopped working after 72.5 hours. This did not happen due to American intervention - a Soviet mechanic (engineer Matveyev) was seconded from Moscow with the tanks, who was responsible for operation. The quality of these tanks was much better than that of conventional tanks as it covered a distance of 343 km. According to Fedorenko, head of the Red Army armored department, the average mileage of the T-34 is up to overhaul during the war did not exceed 200 kilometers. This distance was considered sufficient, since the life time of the T-34 at the front was much shorter. For example, in 1942 it was only 66 km. In this sense, the T-34 was indeed "reliable" because it was destroyed before it could break.

T-34s went out of action in the middle and even towards the end of the war. The Fifth Guards Tank Army in 1943 lost 31.5% of its tanks during the march to Prokhorovka. In August 1943, 1st Panzer Army lost 50% of its tanks due to mechanical failures. At the end of 1944, tank units sought to replace engines with more than 30 hours of operation before an attack.

Production and losses during the war

Although the First World War marked by the appearance of tanks, the Second World War showed the real fury of these mechanical monsters. During the fighting they played important role, both among the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition, and among the powers of the "axis". Both warring parties created a significant number of tanks. Below are the ten outstanding tanks of World War II - the most powerful machines this period ever built.
10. M4 "Sherman" (USA)

The second largest tank of the Second World War. It was produced in the United States and some other Western countries of the anti-Hitler coalition mainly due to the American Lend-Lease program, which provided military support to foreign allied powers. Medium tank The Sherman had a standard 75mm gun with 90 rounds of ammunition and was fitted with relatively thin frontal (51mm) armor compared to other vehicles of the period.

Designed in 1941, the tank was named after the famous general. Civil war in the USA - William T. Sherman. The vehicle took part in numerous battles and campaigns from 1942 to 1945. The relative lack of firepower was compensated for by their huge numbers: about 50 thousand Shermans were produced during the Second World War.

9. "Sherman-Firefly" (UK)

The Sherman Firefly was a British variant of the M4 Sherman tank, which was equipped with a devastating 17-pound anti-tank gun, more powerful than the original Sherman's 75 mm cannon. The 17-pounder was destructive enough to damage any known tanks of the time. The Sherman Firefly was one of those tanks that terrified the Axis countries and was characterized as one of the deadliest fighting vehicles of the Second World War. In total, more than 2,000 units were produced.

The PzKpfw V "Panther" is a medium German tank that appeared on the battlefield in 1943 and remained until the end of the war. A total of 6,334 units were created. The tank developed a speed of up to 55 km / h, had solid 80-mm armor and was armed with a 75-mm gun with ammunition from 79 to 82 high-explosive and armor-piercing shells. The T-V was powerful enough to damage any enemy vehicle at the time. It was technically superior to Tiger and T-IV tanks.

And although later, the T-V "Panther" was surpassed by numerous Soviet T-34s, she remained a serious enemy until the end of the war.

5. "Comet" IA 34 (Great Britain)

One of the most powerful military vehicles in Great Britain and probably the best that was used by this country in World War II. The tank was armed with a powerful 77mm cannon, which was a shortened version of the 17-pounder cannon. Thick armor reached 101 millimeters. However, the "Comet" did not have a significant impact on the course of the War due to its late introduction to the battlefields - around 1944, when the Germans were retreating.

But be that as it may, during its short service life, this military machine has shown its effectiveness and reliability.

4. "Tiger I" (Germany)

"Tiger I" - German heavy tank developed in 1942. He possessed a powerful 88-mm gun with 92-120 rounds of ammunition. It was successfully used against both air and ground targets. The full German name for this beast sounds like Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf.E, the allies just called this car "Tiger".

It accelerated to 38 km / h and had armor without tilt with a thickness of 25 to 125 mm. When it was created in 1942, it suffered from some technical problems, but was soon spared them, having turned into a ruthless mechanical hunter by 1943.

The Tiger was a formidable machine that forced the Allies to develop better tanks. It symbolized the strength and power of the Nazi war machine, and until the middle of the war, not a single Allied tank had the strength and power to withstand the Tiger in a direct confrontation. However, during the final stages of World War II, the dominance of the Tiger was often challenged by the better-armed Sherman Fireflies and Soviet tanks IS-2.

3. IS-2 "Joseph Stalin" (Soviet Union)

Tank IS-2 belonged to a whole family of heavy tanks of the "Joseph Stalin" type. It had a characteristic sloped armor 120 mm thick and a large 122 mm gun. The frontal armor was impenetrable for German 88-mm shells. anti-tank guns at a distance of more than 1 kilometer. Its production began in 1944; a total of 2,252 tanks of the IS family were built, of which about half was the IS-2 modification.

During the Battle of Berlin, IS-2 tanks destroyed entire German buildings with high-explosive fragmentation shells. It was a real battering ram of the Red Army on its way to the heart of Berlin.

2. М26 "Pershing" (USA)

The United States created a heavy tank that belatedly took part in World War II. It was developed in 1944, total produced tanks amounted to 2,212 units. Pershing was over complex model in comparison with the "Sherman", it had a lower profile and larger tracks, which provided the car with better stability.
The main gun had a caliber of 90 millimeters (70 rounds were attached to it), powerful enough to pierce the Tiger's armor. "Pershing" possessed the strength and power for a frontal attack of those machines that could be used by the Germans or the Japanese. But only 20 tanks took part in the hostilities in Europe and very few were sent to Okinawa. After the end of World War II, the Pershing took part in Korean War and then continued to be used in the American troops. The M26 Pershing could have been a game changer if it had been thrown onto the battlefield earlier.

1. "Jagdpanther" (Germany)

The Jagdpanther is one of the most powerful tank destroyers in World War II. It was based on the Panther chassis, began operation in 1943, and served until 1945. Armed with an 88mm cannon with 57 rounds and 100mm frontal armor. The gun maintained accuracy at a distance of up to three kilometers and had a muzzle velocity of over 1000 m / s.

During the war, only 415 tanks were built. The Jagdpanthers were baptized by fire on July 30, 1944 near Saint-Martin de Bois, France, where eleven Churchill tanks were destroyed within two minutes. Technical superiority and advanced firepower did not have much impact on the course of the war due to the late introduction of these monsters.

Although the First World War saw the appearance of tanks, the Second World War showed the real ferocity of these mechanical monsters. During the hostilities, they played an important role, both among the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition and among the Axis powers. Both opposing sides created a significant number of tanks. Listed below are ten outstanding tanks of World War II - the most powerful vehicles of this period ever built.


10. M4 "Sherman" (USA)

The second largest tank of the Second World War. It was produced in the United States and some other Western countries of the anti-Hitler coalition mainly due to the American Lend-Lease program, which provided military support to foreign allied powers. The Sherman medium tank had a standard 75 mm gun with 90 rounds of ammunition and was equipped with relatively thin frontal (51 mm) armor compared to other vehicles of the period.

Designed in 1941, the tank was named after the famous American Civil War general, William T. Sherman. The vehicle took part in numerous battles and campaigns from 1942 to 1945. The relative lack of firepower was compensated for by their huge numbers: about 50 thousand Shermans were produced during the Second World War.

9. "Sherman-Firefly" (UK)



The Sherman Firefly was a British variant of the M4 Sherman tank, which was equipped with a devastating 17-pound anti-tank gun, more powerful than the original Sherman's 75 mm cannon. The 17-pounder was destructive enough to damage any known tanks of the time. The Sherman Firefly was one of those tanks that terrified the Axis countries and was characterized as one of the deadliest fighting vehicles of the Second World War. In total, more than 2,000 units were produced.

8.T-IV (Germany)



PzKpfw IV - one of the most widely used and mass-produced (8 696 units) German tanks during the Second World War. It was armed with a 75mm cannon that could destroy a Soviet T-34 at a range of 1200 meters.

Initially, these vehicles were used to support the infantry, but eventually took the role of a tank (T-III), and began to be used in battle as the main combat units.

7.T-34 (Soviet Union)



This legendary tank was the most massive during the War and the second most produced ever (about 84 thousand vehicles). It is also one of the longest-serving tanks ever produced. Until now, many surviving units are found in Asia and Africa.

The popularity of the T-34 is partly due to the sloping 45mm frontal armor, which was not penetrated by German shells. It was a fast, agile and durable vehicle, causing serious concern to the command of the invading German tank units.

6. Т-V "Panther" (Germany)



The PzKpfw V "Panther" is a medium German tank that appeared on the battlefield in 1943 and remained until the end of the war. A total of 6,334 units were created. The tank developed a speed of up to 55 km / h, had solid 80-mm armor and was armed with a 75-mm gun with ammunition from 79 to 82 high-explosive and armor-piercing shells. The T-V was powerful enough to damage any enemy vehicle at the time. It was technically superior to Tiger and T-IV tanks.

And although later, the T-V "Panther" was surpassed by numerous Soviet T-34s, she remained a serious enemy until the end of the war.

5. "Comet" IA 34 (Great Britain)



One of the most powerful military vehicles in Great Britain and probably the best that was used by this country in World War II. The tank was armed with a powerful 77mm cannon, which was a shortened version of the 17-pounder cannon. Thick armor reached 101 millimeters. However, the "Comet" did not have a significant impact on the course of the War due to its late introduction to the battlefields - around 1944, when the Germans were retreating.

But be that as it may, during its short service life, this military machine has shown its effectiveness and reliability.

4. "Tiger I" (Germany)



The Tiger I is a German heavy tank developed in 1942. He possessed a powerful 88-mm gun with 92-120 rounds of ammunition. It was successfully used against both air and ground targets. The full German name of this beast sounds like Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf.E, while the Allies called this vehicle simply "Tiger".

It accelerated to 38 km / h and had armor without tilt with a thickness of 25 to 125 mm. When it was created in 1942, it suffered from some technical problems, but was soon spared them, having turned into a ruthless mechanical hunter by 1943.

The Tiger was a formidable machine that forced the Allies to develop better tanks. It symbolized the strength and power of the Nazi war machine, and until the middle of the war, no Allied tank had sufficient strength and power to withstand the "Tiger" in a direct collision. However, during the final stages of World War II, the Tiger's dominance was often challenged by the better-armed Sherman Fireflies and Soviet IS-2 tanks.

3. IS-2 "Joseph Stalin" (Soviet Union)



Tank IS-2 belonged to a whole family of heavy tanks of the "Joseph Stalin" type. It had a characteristic sloped armor 120 mm thick and a large 122 mm gun. The frontal armor was impenetrable for the shells of German 88-mm anti-tank guns at a distance of more than 1 kilometer. Its production began in 1944; a total of 2,252 tanks of the IS family were built, of which about half was the IS-2 modification.

During the Battle of Berlin, IS-2 tanks destroyed entire German buildings with high-explosive fragmentation shells. It was a real battering ram of the Red Army on its way to the heart of Berlin.

2. М26 "Pershing" (USA)



The United States created a heavy tank that belatedly took part in World War II. It was developed in 1944, the total number of tanks produced was 2,212 units. The Pershing was a more complex model than the Sherman, with a lower profile and larger tracks, which provided the vehicle with better stability.

The main gun had a caliber of 90 millimeters (70 rounds were attached to it), powerful enough to pierce the Tiger's armor. "Pershing" possessed the strength and power for a frontal attack of those machines that could be used by the Germans or the Japanese. But only 20 tanks took part in the hostilities in Europe and very few were sent to Okinawa. After the end of World War II, Pershing took part in the Korean War and then continued to be used in American troops. The M26 Pershing could have been a game changer if it had been thrown onto the battlefield earlier.

1. "Jagdpanther" (Germany)



The Jagdpanther is one of the most powerful tank destroyers in World War II. It was based on the Panther chassis, began operation in 1943, and served until 1945. Armed with an 88mm cannon with 57 rounds and 100mm frontal armor. The gun maintained accuracy at a distance of up to three kilometers and had a muzzle velocity of over 1000 m / s.

During the war, only 415 tanks were built. The Jagdpanthers were baptized by fire on July 30, 1944 near Saint-Martin de Bois, France, where eleven Churchill tanks were destroyed within two minutes. Technical superiority and advanced firepower did not have much impact on the course of the war due to the late introduction of these monsters.

Despite the fact that the First World War marked the emergence of the tank, the Second World War saw the real "grin" of this mechanical war beast. He played a vital role during the war. Most armies produced tanks, and their production increased every day. The USSR, Great Britain, USA, France, Germany, Italy and Japan produced a huge number of tanks, both before and during World War II. Below we will talk about the ten best tanks of World War II - the most powerful combat vehicles of the time.

Tank M4 Sherman - "Sherman" (USA)

One of the most produced combat vehicles of the Second World War. Production was established not only by the United States of America, but also by other allied states. The release of "Sherman" was mainly carried out according to American program Lend-Lease, which provided military aid countries opposing Nazi Germany.

Sherman Firefly - "Sherman Firefly" (UK)

The British variant of the Sherman, despite its affectionate nickname "Firefly", was equipped with a devastating 17-pound anti-tank gun that had more power than the 75-mm cannon. American Sherman... The 17-pound barrel was powerful enough to defeat enemy tanks it encountered in its battlefield.