Oct 4

Marishkin's KV-4


The KV-4 family of tanks were built to rather loose requirements, and therefore had a very large variety of designs submitted. F.A. Marishkin's 85 ton design was one of the more reasonable ones, but it wasn't without an unusual feature. The tank had a second turret carrying a 45 mm gun on top of the main turret with a 107 mm gun.










Turret platform front: 125 mmUpper sloped front: 80 mmLower front: 130 mmRear: 125 mmRoof: 40-50 mmFront floor: 50 mmRear floor: 40 mm

Tactical-technical characteristics:

Mass: 85 tonsFull length: 8.7 metersFull width: 3.8 metersFull height: 3.5 metersWheel base: 3 metersClearance: 0.55 metersContact surface length: 6.15 metersGround pressure: 0.53 cm/kg²Diesel engine type: 17-40Maximum engine power: 1200 hpRange: 12 hoursCrew: 7Armament:

1 107 mm gun1 45 mm gun1 coaxial machinegun (paired with 45 mm gun)2 independent machineguns (rear and front)100 107 mm rounds200 45 mm rounds1000 PPSh rounds for 3 submachineguns107 mm gun elevation: 15 degrees107 mm gun depression: -5 degrees45 mm gun elevation: 20 degrees45 mm gun depression: -5 to -10 degrees45 mm gun arc: 180 degreesMachinegun elevation: -Machinegun depression: -Machinegun range: -Suspension: torsion bar

Road wheels: steel with internal shock absorption

Radio: 10-R

New Posts
  • • Mousetrap • The Maus tank that was recovered by Soviet specialists did not sit idle in the Soviet Union. It was picked apart and its components were sent out for study. The armour composition and hull design were carefully studied. It would be a shame to demolish such a rare exhibit, so only the D-25 was allowed to fire on it, with the performance of other tank guns (the Maus' own 128 mm and the Soviet D-10) being only calculated. Calculations of the anti-shell resistance of main armour components The calculations of resistance to shells of the main hull and turret armour components were performed using the Jacob de Marre formula with Zubrov’s corrections based on the practically obtained limit of complete penetration established by firing at the 160 mm medium hardness armour plate with a 122 mm tank shell. The coefficient K was established to be 1700 and was used to calculate the resistance of the components regardless of the thickness, angle of impact, and type. The results are given in table 5. The table shows that not all components completely protect the tank from being penetrated with armour piercing shells fired from already existing guns. The vertical sides significantly reduce the resistance of the armour and they can be penetrated (at angles of 90 and 270 degrees) with the domestic 100 mm gun. Conclusions 1. The hull of the German Maus tank, composed from large and thick armour plates, is of no significant interest. The only interesting aspect is the method of connecting armoured plates of large dimensions and thicknesses, which can be used on domestic practice. 2. he vertical placement of side armour drastically reduces the protection and makes the tank vulnerable in certain conditions. 3. The large dimensions of the hull and turret, as well as the significant mass of the armour (105 tons) reduce the tank’s maneuverability." � � To give some reference to the velocities, the D-25's sharp tipped shell drops below 740 m/s at about 700 meters and below 700 m/s at 800 meters and the improved blunt tipped shell at about 750 and 1300 meters respectively, so an IS series tank would have been able to punch through the side of a Maus tank from a respectable distance. Several interesting points here. One is that the assumption that K=2400 in everyone's favourite table doesn't hold here. The armour in the Maus turned out to be of much lower quality. In this test, armour with K=2030 is referred to as "reduced quality" armour, but the Maus scored even less than that: 1700. K=1700 means that the 160 mm of armour can be penetrated by the D-25 at roughly 2700 meters. The second is that the "gigantomania" that erupted when the Soviets encountered the Ferdinand turns out to have been justified. The BL-9 gun firing a 122 mm shell at 1000 m/s would have been able to penetrate the Maus in any place other than the upper front plate. TankArchives
  • Rifles and machine guns can take out 20-30 mm of armour no problem. But what about when you're faced with a Tiger? Then, you need to use explosives! CAMD RF 38-11377-12 has us covered. First is the KB-30 Directed Impact Hand Anti-Tank Grenade. This mouthful weighs 1.1 kilograms. The grenades were thrown from behind a T-34 tank at a Tiger from 15 meters. Here are the results: "Target: side. Angle: 50 degrees. Effect: 87 mm deep dent, 30 mm in diameter. Bump with crack on the inside. � � Target: side. Angle: 90 degrees. Effect: breach 25 mm in diameter. On the inside, a fragment 100 mm in diameter and 12 mm thick was knocked out. � � Target: side. Angle: 40 degrees. Effect: 85 mm deep dent, 35 mm in diameter. No damage on the inside. Target: side. Angle: 40 degrees. Effect: breach 20 mm in diameter. On the inside, a 65-90 mm fragment was knocked out, following an existing crack. Target: turret. Angle: 25 degrees. Effect: 65 mm deep dent, 40 mm in diameter." Conclusion: "The grenade can penetrate 65-85 mm of the tank's armour." Obviously, as with any armour piercing device, the closer the grenade hits to 90 degrees, the better. The next device is an anti-track TMD-B mine. The mine weighs 5 kg. The effect is as expected: "The T-VI hull was towed by a KV-1 tank. When the right track hit the mine, the mine detonated. As a result, the track was torn and the right drive wheel pins were damaged. A hole 600 mm deep and 1000 mm in diameter formed underneath." � � The next weapon is a bit unconventional, a jumping mine, developed by factory #627. "Type: rifle grenade with a directed charge. The mine was placed close to the hull and detonated. As a result, the 28 mm thick bottom of the hull was penetrated. The breach was irregularly shaped, with torn edges, 27 mm by 35 mm. The jumping mine produced by factory #627 penetrates the bottom of the T-VI hull." A number of AT rifles were tried, mostly ineffective, except the 43P Blum AT rifle. Firing a 14.5 mm bullet at 1500 m/s, it got some pretty impressive results. At 100 meters it penetrates the lower side hull of the Tiger at every attempt. When shooting at the thicker upper side hull, it penetrated once, and made 3 dents, 43-50 mm. � � Results of shooting the side of the Tiger with various AT rifles. The penetration from the 14.5 mm Blum bullet is #13. Tankarchives
  • Italian M 13-40 Italy resisted entering WWII until June of 1940, as it was not ready. However, Mussolini and the Royal Italian Army understood that it was only a matter of time. The order for 400 M 13-40 tanks was made on November 16th, 1939, even before it was accepted into service. Like with the M 11-39, the order was split between Ansaldo (assembly, armament, and other components) and FIAT (engines, gearboxes, and other transmission components). � � A first series production tank. A batch of 100 tanks was built first. The first vehicles were delivered by Ansaldo in June of 1940. These tanks with registration numbers 2762 and 2781 entered service on August 6th, 1940. Production of the first series ended in the fall of 1940. The first production tanks differed from the prototype. M 11-39 steps on the sides of the hull were removed in favour of a simpler design. The design of the hatch in the left side of the hull changed. The complex observation devices were replaced with simple pistol ports. � � A typical Carro Armato M 13-40 from the second production series. The shorter fenders are the most noticeable change. The second production series of 200 tanks began in the fall of 1940. Production of this series ended in 1941. The tanks did not change much. The biggest difference was the movement of the jack from the front left fender to the rear. The number of spare road wheels was reduced to one. The steps were reinforced. The fenders changed: the middle and rear sections disappeared. Considering that these tanks were fighting in the desert and kicking up huge clouds of dust, this was an odd decision. A number of tanks in this series received radios, unlike the first series. � � One of the first tanks of the second production series. The rear tow hook is not yet reinforced, but a supercharged engine is already installed. Also the air intake on the turret roof is present. The third series, produced in 1941, was the most numerous. Italy was deep in the war by this point and significant losses in vehicles had to be replaced quickly. The order increased to 410 units. This was the ultimate version of the M 13-40. The radio that was tested on the M 13-40 prototype was only installed in large numbers starting in 1941. The engine was also supercharged. Its power increased to 125 hp, increasing mobility, but not top speed. The rear tow hook was strengthened, the exhausts were altered for the new more powerful motor, and an air intake was added to the roof of the turret. � � Hull of the Carro Armato M 13-40. There was a certain inconsistency in the serial number of the vehicles. Only one range of serial numbers can be attributed to it for sure: 2762 to 3797. A small amount of vehicles was built as commander's tanks called Carro Centro Radio. These vehicles can be distinguished by two antennas. The Carro Armato M 13-40 continued to change. Improved vehicles received a new name: Carro Armato M 14-41. The first tank of this type received the registration number 3498. The first M 14-41 had nearly no differences from the late M 13-40. The only difference was the return of full fenders in initial production vehicles. Tankarchives Original article by Yuri Pasholok