Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Soviet communicatin Radio's in tanks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Soviet communicatin Radio's in tanks

    I have a question pertaining to radio equipment in Soviet tanks.

    When,during WWII, were all of the Soviet tankers (both commander and his squad) finally have radio's installed in which all of the tanks in the squad could receive AND transmit communications

    Regards,Kurt
    Last edited by Kurt Knispel; 24 Jan 16, 12:06.
    Theo mir ist die munition ausgegangen ich werde diesen ramman auf wiedersehen uns in walhalla

  • #2
    Originally posted by Kurt Knispel View Post
    I have a question pertaining to radio equipment in Soviet tanks.

    When,during WWII, were all of the Soviet tankers (both commander and his squad) finally have radio's installed in which all of the tanks in the squad could receive AND transmit communications

    Regards,Kurt
    To my mind even in the end of the war not all linear tanks were equipped with transmitters. But I have no exact figures to prove or disapprove this
    If you fire a rifle at the past, the future will fire a cannon at you.....

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by amvas View Post
      To my mind even in the end of the war not all linear tanks were equipped with transmitters. But I have no exact figures to prove or disapprove this

      Thank you for the response.I will always be of the opinion that this was not a good decision by the Soviets not to have total communication between all of the tanks in a squad.

      Regards,Kurt
      Theo mir ist die munition ausgegangen ich werde diesen ramman auf wiedersehen uns in walhalla

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Kurt Knispel View Post
        Thank you for the response.I will always be of the opinion that this was not a good decision by the Soviets not to have total communication between all of the tanks in a squad.

        Regards,Kurt
        It was not decision, it was lack of needed equipment
        If you fire a rifle at the past, the future will fire a cannon at you.....

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by amvas View Post
          It was not decision, it was lack of needed equipment
          Thanks for that response also.Your answer makes more sense.

          Do you know why,the Soviets,with their large industrial and manufacturing plants/factories moved far to the west of the front and operating 24 hours a day producing tanks,planes,guns,ammo ect. ect. never got on board with a radio factory ?

          Regards,Kurt
          Theo mir ist die munition ausgegangen ich werde diesen ramman auf wiedersehen uns in walhalla

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kurt Knispel View Post
            Thanks for that response also.Your answer makes more sense.

            Do you know why,the Soviets,with their large industrial and manufacturing plants/factories moved far to the west of the front and operating 24 hours a day producing tanks,planes,guns,ammo ect. ect. never got on board with a radio factory ?

            Regards,Kurt
            It was the same problem as for auxiliary vehicles. Been focused on tanks, airplanes and other "major" arms some smaller details were in shadow of the overall amounts of vehicles/airplanes produced.
            As for the radio, I guess the deal was in the quality of workers. There were no enough experienced staff to produce such a complicated equipment as radio sets were. You see, many plants were equipped with women and youth 14-16 years old. Obviously they had no enough time to learn.

            Regards
            Alex
            If you fire a rifle at the past, the future will fire a cannon at you.....

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Kurt Knispel View Post
              Thanks for that response also.Your answer makes more sense.

              Do you know why,the Soviets,with their large industrial and manufacturing plants/factories moved far to the west of the front and operating 24 hours a day producing tanks,planes,guns,ammo ect. ect. never got on board with a radio factory ?

              Regards,Kurt
              I recently read an article somewhere that the Soviets mad a very conscious decision to produce tanks for a rather short lifespan.

              The life expectancy of a new tank in 42, was on average apparently 4 to 10 days in the frontlines, mileage some 70 Kilometres before mechanical breakdown when moving on its own power.

              In this regard it may make sense not to make extra cost to install radios in all of them, even though it was presumably technically possible.
              Lambert of Montaigu - Crusader.

              Bolgios - Mercenary Game.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by amvas View Post
                It was the same problem as for auxiliary vehicles. Been focused on tanks, airplanes and other "major" arms some smaller details were in shadow of the overall amounts of vehicles/airplanes produced.
                As for the radio, I guess the deal was in the quality of workers. There were no enough experienced staff to produce such a complicated equipment as radio sets were. You see, many plants were equipped with women and youth 14-16 years old. Obviously they had no enough time to learn.

                Regards
                Alex
                Thanks Alex you have answered a question that has been lingering in my mind for a long time.

                Regards,Kurt
                Theo mir ist die munition ausgegangen ich werde diesen ramman auf wiedersehen uns in walhalla

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post
                  I recently read an article somewhere that the Soviets mad a very conscious decision to produce tanks for a rather short lifespan.

                  The life expectancy of a new tank in 42, was on average apparently 4 to 10 days in the frontlines, mileage some 70 Kilometres before mechanical breakdown when moving on its own power.

                  In this regard it may make sense not to make extra cost to install radios in all of them, even though it was presumably technically possible.
                  Thanks for your input.Both Alex and you have answered my question.

                  Regards,Kurt
                  Theo mir ist die munition ausgegangen ich werde diesen ramman auf wiedersehen uns in walhalla

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Kurt Knispel View Post
                    Thank you for the response.I will always be of the opinion that this was not a good decision by the Soviets not to have total communication between all of the tanks in a squad.

                    Regards,Kurt
                    Well neither did the Germans.
                    See the appendices in Thomas Jentz's Panzertruppen Volume 1. One of them lists which tanks had which radios. IIRC only platoon and company commander's vehicles had radio transmitters and receivers. Most panzers had receive only radios.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post
                      I recently read an article somewhere that the Soviets mad a very conscious decision to produce tanks for a rather short lifespan.

                      The life expectancy of a new tank in 42, was on average apparently 4 to 10 days in the frontlines, mileage some 70 Kilometres before mechanical breakdown when moving on its own power.

                      In this regard it may make sense not to make extra cost to install radios in all of them, even though it was presumably technically possible.
                      Nope, it's not exact.
                      By average data a Soviet tank were used in 3 attacks, (German tank - in 10 attacks).
                      Mechanical breakdowns of tanks 1942-45 years production were much less than those ones of 1940-41 years. Btw, that was one of reasons why about 50% of Soviet tanks couldn't reach battleground in 1941. both KVs and T-34s in mod. 1940/41 were very raw and had lots of defects. Silent about low experience of tankmen fighting on them.
                      But you were correct speaking about less reliability of wartime tanks in comparison with tanks of peace period. First of all this is true to engine's resource. War period tanks had it much less than before the war. So, if such a tank survived for enough long time, changing of engine was much more often routine.
                      Also tanks of war period had much simplifications. For example some T-34 in 1942 had no rubber on wheels due to lack of raw materials. That didn't had any significant affect on their combat facilities (except enourmous noise)

                      And just for your knowledge. Cost of T-34 was reduced by 3 times since the beginning of its production in 1940.
                      If you fire a rifle at the past, the future will fire a cannon at you.....

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by amvas View Post
                        Nope, it's not exact.
                        By average data a Soviet tank were used in 3 attacks, (German tank - in 10 attacks).
                        Mechanical breakdowns of tanks 1942-45 years production were much less than those ones of 1940-41 years. Btw, that was one of reasons why about 50% of Soviet tanks couldn't reach battleground in 1941. both KVs and T-34s in mod. 1940/41 were very raw and had lots of defects. Silent about low experience of tankmen fighting on them.
                        But you were correct speaking about less reliability of wartime tanks in comparison with tanks of peace period. First of all this is true to engine's resource. War period tanks had it much less than before the war. So, if such a tank survived for enough long time, changing of engine was much more often routine.
                        Also tanks of war period had much simplifications. For example some T-34 in 1942 had no rubber on wheels due to lack of raw materials. That didn't had any significant affect on their combat facilities (except enourmous noise)

                        And just for your knowledge. Cost of T-34 was reduced by 3 times since the beginning of its production in 1940.
                        The article was by Boris Kavalerchik, “Once Again about the T-34”, published in the Journal of Slavic military studies, 28.1, 186-214.

                        For some reason it won't let me copy paste - but I'm sure it can be found online.

                        If not PM me for details.

                        If it implies what I think it does - I figure it's a very good idea, rather than have a unit "hugging" their tanks, like the Germans did, production allowing, just ship new tanks by rail to a point in the line of advance,

                        leave broken down ones to be collected by the rear formations and returned to service if possible - but the advancing unit would not depend on them for its operational strength.

                        Note - that in this manner the same, single tank could still participate in 3-4 attacks as you suggest, just not 4 consecutive attacks.

                        Experienced tankers may change tanks a number of times during an attack, much like cavalrymen in days gone by might have used several horses.

                        Below is speculation on my part obviously - not from the article
                        Last edited by Snowygerry; 26 Jan 16, 03:07.
                        Lambert of Montaigu - Crusader.

                        Bolgios - Mercenary Game.

                        Comment

                        Latest Topics

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X