Yes because UK had much much worse tank industry in 1940-41 than USSR.
No, my argument is that T-34 served the Red Army well from 1941 till 1945, and no new designs or lend-lease options were preferred to it.
Obviously, eventually all tanks get superceded.
T-34 was one of, if not the best tank in the world by 1940-41 standards, and the absolute best solution a country being invaded by the largest force in history, and evacuating all production facilities 2000 km to the East, could do later on.
If the conditions were as lovely as for the other nations like Germany, US or UK where you can design, test and improve your tanks without your cities falling and villages burning day after day, the results could indeed have been different.
And Yuri Gagarin died from crashing a MiG-15. Doesnât mean it was a bad plane.
Yes, as t-34 first saw combat 23/6/1941 against germans. But id say t-34 was fine tank untill before 23.06 could go as far as say it was excellent tank. As long as it wasnt in combat.
After that soviet tank casualties were 1:7 for all kind tanks.
T-34âs casualties are probably around 1:5.
But lets make hypothesis and say it was just 1:3, if any german tank had such staggering losses it would be regarded as absolute failure of tank.
Exactly.
Though not without its design issues, and Pz III was a close competitor.
Then, when you first test your awesome tank in combat, you realize your army is in the middle of reforms, tank commanders are 18 years old, were never allowed to drive the tank and are overloaded with duties inside the tank, you need radios, you need to improve the optics etc, but hey look at that: your factory at Kharkov is about to fall, the country is being slaughtered, bombed and burned to ashes, the economy is at the brink of collapse, and those Germans definitely know what they are doing with their PAKs, Stukas and infantry.
Remember that tank losses depend on a dozen of factors, not just the tank design itself.
The issues with early T-34 were recognized by the Soviets themselves, e.g. in early 1941 it was ordered to change the suspension to torsion bars, install wheels with internal shock absorption, widen the turret ring, increase the crew to 5, increase top speed, install a new engine, install commanderâs cupola, increase the number of roadwheels, etc.
Weâll never know what the final version of T-34 could have been.
However, T-34/85 as well as SU-85 and SU-100 proved how excellent of a base the tank was.
The first patch of T-34âs werent exactly sent to who ever conscript they found from countryside who considered outhouse as most advanced technical marvel.
No you dont, they had none.
They were just fine, not just made for combat.
If I recall 7? Factories made t-34âs.
Quite sure that was least of USSR problems.
Well, either the T-34 isnt exactly the miracle maker you seem to think OR soviets were genuinely retarded and germans were somekind of superhumans.
Make a pick.
Probably the one made in -45 as thats the exact year the production of it was cancelled in favor of other tanks.
Got its ass kicked, just like your biggest crush painter, it seems.
Crews were not allowed to drive their T-34s after factory tests before 22/06 happened.
Yes they did. See Chieftain on T-34s.
They were fine, just needed improvement.
Check where they were all located.
??? you must be the only genius in the world who can make new/improved tank designs without economy.
T-34 was an excellent design which would improve over time. Barbarossa rush made it difficult to improve it. Still it was the perfect solution for the corcumstances USSR found itself in.
How hard is this to understand?
Explains you still canât comprehend tank stats arenât based on 1v1 engagements.
Chieftain video on T-34.
See above.
Thatâs what tanks are designed to do: fight.
And.
Look on the map and see.
Write a PhD on new tank designs in a war of annihilation then.
And.
T-34 was an excellent design which would improve over time. Barbarossa rush made it difficult to improve it. Still it was the perfect solution for the circumstances USSR found itself in.
Depending who you ask, is the best tank ever or the worst tank ever.
It is all a matter of perspective. And either extreme is wrong in this case. Because as a tank made for an specific purpose it worked. The early versions had issues, and Soviet logistics are terrible. But regardless the first 3 king tigers that saw combat, where slaughter by a single T34-85 in some wheat field.
Itâs not good (also, source?) but it could have been much much worse if the tank wasnât good enough.
Cause everyone else was sitting at home drinking tea or cola and not having the bloodiest war of history happen on their soil at the same time while making tanks. Or some just surrendered/got rekt.
And.
Clearly you wouldnât be able to in the first place.
Perfect solution for the circumstances
We donât know what T-34M could have been but we do know that even against insane odds it got to Berlin and then some.
Just like the tigers, in theory they were immune to anything shot at them by the allies.in practice a HE shell would kill most of the crew inside because of the shrapnel generated due to the low quality of the steel used in their manufacturing.
