BA-3: Soviet medium cannon armored vehicle

BA-3 is a cannon medium armored vehicle created in the Soviet Union in the first half of the 30s. In fact, this vehicle was a further development of the BAI armored car, which was adopted by the Red Army in 1932. The design of the BA-3 used the chassis of one of the modifications of the famous Ford Model AA truck with a 6x4 wheel arrangement.

The development of the BA-3 armored car was carried out by specialists from the design bureau of the Izhora plant.

The BA-3 armored car was used by the Red Army until the very beginning of the war, as well as at its initial stage. Most of them were lost in the summer or autumn of 1941. True, there is evidence that some BA-3s survived until the victorious year of 1945, and were used by Soviet troops. After the war, the last copies of the BA-3 were written off and disposed of. Serial production of the machine continued until 1936.

Armored car BAI

In 1932, the Izhora plant created the BAI armored car (BronéAvtomobil Izhora) on a three-axle Ford-Timken chassis. The project manager was A.D. Kuzmin. The BAI was the first armored car in the Soviet Union with a completely welded body. The vehicle had three doors for the crew to board; a cylindrical turret with a 37-mm PS-1 tank gun (34 rounds) and a DT machine gun in a ball mount were installed on the roof. The second DT machine gun was located in the front plate of the hull to the right of the driver.

Due to the variable height of the hull roof (the turret plate was located noticeably below the roof of the driver's cabin), it was possible to significantly reduce the overall height of the combat vehicle. The mass of the BAI was 5 tons, the armor thickness was 4-8 mm, the speed was 60 km/h, and the cruising range was 150 km. The BAI armored car was largely an experimental design, so in 1933-1934 very few of them were produced - 90 vehicles.

Literature

The first mass-produced medium cannon armored vehicle of the Red Army. It was a development of the BA-I with more powerful weapons. Developed at the Izhora plant design bureau in 1934. Serially produced at the Izhora and Vyksa plants. From 1934 to 1938, 554 units were manufactured. Medium armored vehicles BA-Z/BA-6 entered service with reconnaissance units of tank, cavalry and rifle formations of the Red Army. In 1937, a motorized armored regiment was formed in the Trans-Baikal Military District, which was soon deployed into a brigade. It included a battalion of medium armored vehicles, a reconnaissance battalion (medium and light armored vehicles) and a rifle and machine gun battalion. In total, the brigade had up to 80 medium and 30 light armored vehicles. In 1935, 60 BA-6 armored vehicles were sold to Turkey, about 100 armored cars of both modifications were sent to Spain, and some were delivered to Mongolia, China and Afghanistan. A small number of armored vehicles of this type remaining in units participated in the Great Patriotic War until mid-1942. On the basis of the BA-6 armored car, BA-6zhd armored trolley cars were produced. included in the staff of armored trains.

Year of development: 1934 Year of production: 1934-1938 Combat weight: 5.82 tons Length: 4.8 mm Width: 1.9 mm Height: 2.4 mm Speed: 70 km/h Cruising range: 248 km Radio: no Armor Forehead: 9 mm Side: 9 mm Stern: 9 mm Cabin: 9 mm Hull: (top) 5 mm Hull: (bottom) 2.5 mm Roof/Bottom: 5/2 mm Crew: 4 people Armament: 1 20K 45 mm cannon, 2 DT 7.62 mm machine guns.

Construction of the series began in 1939. The lead destroyer “Ognevoy” (project 30) entered service in May 1945, the remaining 10 were completed according to the “adjusted” project 30-K. Project 30-bis destroyers (70 units) are the largest series of destroyers in the entire history of the Russian fleet. Development of the 30-K project

They were built according to the military shipbuilding program for 1933-1938. The prototype was Italian. EM type "Maestrale"

Initially they were conceived as unarmed submarine targets for training the crews of escort ships. After the project was approved, it was decided to arm them with torpedo tubes

Further development of the "U" type. The bulkheads are welded, the thickness of the riveted strong hull plating has been increased, due to which the working immersion depth has increased to 90 m

Characteristics of medium armored vehicles BAI, BA-3, BA-6

A country:USSRType:Medium armored carDate of issue:1936Length:4.9 mWidth:2.07 mHeight:2.36 mArmor, forehead:8 mmArmor, side:8 mmArmor, tower:8 mmCrew:4 peopleEngine:No informationTravel range:190 kmMaximum speed:43 km/hWeight:5120 kgWeapons:1× 45 mm 20K cannon (60 rounds), 2× 7.62 mm DT machine gun (3276 rounds).

Characteristics are given for BA-6

Combat use of medium armored vehicles

The exact number of medium armored vehicles available in the Red Army units by June 22, 1941 is almost impossible to establish. The only reliable document on this topic is information about the availability of armored vehicles in the Red Army on June 1, 1941, although there are many questions about this statement. But since there is no other general data on armored cars at the beginning of the war, we will be based on this document. According to him, by June 1, 1941, the Red Army had 3,345 medium armored vehicles, of which 92% were armed with 45-mm cannons, and BA-10s made up 80% of the entire fleet.

By June 1941, the majority of medium armored cars in the mechanized corps were BA-10s, although there were also other types of vehicles. For example, as of June 17, 1941, there were 3345 BA-10s in the mechanized corps of the Western Special Military District (ZapOVO) (6th MK - 127, 11th MK - 96, 13th MK - 29, 14th MK - 21, 17th MK - 31, 20th MK - 6), while by June 1, ZAPOVO had 590 vehicles, of which 10 BA-27M, 29 BA-ZM and 10 BA-6. A similar picture was observed in other mech corps, although there were exceptions.

In the 1st tank division of the 1st mechanized corps by June 22 there were 49 BA-10 and 4 BA-6, in the 3rd tank division of the same corps - 43 BA-10 and 7 BA-6, in the 5th mechanized corps from 131 armored vehicles were 82 BA-10, 11 BA-6, 16 BA-3M and 22 BAI-M (the corps was formed in Transbaikalia - Author's note), and in the 7th mechanized corps out of 101 - 6 BA-6, and the rest BA-10.

During the summer campaign of 1941, medium armored vehicles were used very actively, and often, along with reconnaissance, communications and combat security tasks, they were often used for attacks together with infantry and supporting their units directly on the battlefield, which led to unreasonably large losses. However, if used correctly, Soviet armored cars could successfully fight German tanks. Here is one example.

At 5.00 on June 22, 1941, the commander of the tank regiment of the 5th Tank Division of the 3rd Mechanized Corps, Colonel Bogdanov, assigned the task of conducting reconnaissance to a platoon of 6 BA-10 armored vehicles of Senior Lieutenant Surovtsev. The vehicles left the unit's location at 6.25. When approaching the town of L., the platoon commander organized an ambush in the forest, on both sides of the highway. The vehicles are camouflaged in such a way that it was difficult to notice them from a distance of 200 meters.

At 10.00 a platoon of German motorcyclists appeared, who were destroyed by BA-10 fire from a distance of 200 - 300 m. After 40 minutes, a light tank appeared on the road, moving at high speed. The commander of one of the armored vehicles set it on fire with the first shot from a gun. After 7 minutes, two more tanks approached the ambush, which were also destroyed by BA-10 fire. Ten minutes later, a column of 15 tanks and motorcyclists approached the place where the destroyed tanks and motorcycles stood. With their sudden fire, the BA-10 disabled 3 tanks and a large number of motorcycles, which forced the remaining German vehicles to turn back. As the main forces of the 7th Tank Division of the 39th Tank Corps of the Germans approached the town of L., the platoon of Senior Lieutenant Surovtsev retreated to their own. Thus, as a result of a well-organized ambush, 6 BA-10 armored vehicles knocked out and destroyed 6 German tanks and a large number of motorcycles.

But despite individual cases of successful use, in the first two months of the war most of the medium armored vehicles of the border districts were lost. Thus, according to the report on the combat operations of the 21st Tank Division (10th Mechanized Corps), dated July 19, 1941, of the 22 BA-10s available at the beginning of the war, 5 remained in the division. The fate of the remaining 17 was as follows: “Lost on the Karelian Isthmus in the 23rd Army - 10, left in winter quarters (under repair) - 1, taken by the commandant of Leningrad from the commander of the 42nd Tank Regiment - 1, burned on the battlefield in the Vsheli area - 4, a total of 17 to be written off." .

At the beginning of the war, the 19th Tank Division of the 22nd Mechanized Corps had 163 tanks and 58 BA-10 armored vehicles (29 linear and 29 radial). The vehicles were part of the 37th and 38th tank regiments (17 BA-10 each), 14 armored cars were in the 19th reconnaissance battalion and the 5th in the 19th communications battalion. In the first two weeks of fighting, almost all of these armored vehicles were lost, and by July 7, 1941, the 19th Panzer Division had only 7 tanks and 6 BA-10s. The nature of the losses of armored vehicles is visible from the report of the 19th separate reconnaissance battalion, dated July 18, 1941. By this time, out of the available 14 BA-10s, only 3 vehicles remained, 5 were shot down in battle, 1 was blown up by the crew due to lack of spare parts and the impossibility of repair, 5 were sent to the headquarters of the 22nd Mechanized Corps.

The 13th Tank Division of the 5th Mechanized Corps, which carried out a counterattack in the Lepel area on July 8, 1941, had 78 medium armored vehicles (44 BA-10.5 BA-6.7 BA-ZM and 22 BAI-M), by August 8 There were only 3 left (one each of BA-10, BA-6 and BAI-M), which required repairs. The rest were lost for the following reasons:

“Burn and destroyed - 54 (BA-10 - 31, BA-ZM - 3, BA-6 - 4, BAI-M - 16);

Lost unknown where - 7 (BA-10 - 2, BAI-M - 5);

Left with the enemy - 14 (BA-10 - 10, BA-3 - 4).”

In the 18th Tank Division of the 7th Mechanized Corps, which also operated near Lepel, at the beginning of the counterattack on July 6, 1941, there were 18 BA-10s and 6 BA-6s. and after 20 days only 2 vehicles remained in service, 2 more were transferred to other units and 2 were handed over to SPAM (assembly point for emergency vehicles). Of the 18 armored cars lost, 1 was destroyed and 2 were burned by aircraft, 9 were destroyed by artillery, 3 were left stuck and 15 were lost in an unknown location.

By June 22, 1941, the 10th Tank Division of the 15th Mechanized Corps had 56 BA-10s, of which 53 were withdrawn on alert and 3 were left in a military camp for repairs. By August 1, of the 53 armored vehicles of the division that participated in the battles, only 2 remained in service. The fate of the remaining BA-10s can be traced in a document with information about the losses of the division’s materiel:

“Broken and burned on the battlefield - 13;

Failure to perform a combat mission and remained in territory occupied by the enemy - 4;

Did not return with their crews from the battlefield after the attack - 7;

Burned as a result of bombing - 4;

Destroyed at collection points for emergency vehicles due to the inability to evacuate during departure - 6;

Abandoned during unit withdrawal due to technical faults and impossibility of restoration and evacuation - 14;

Stuck on obstacles with inability to extract and evacuate – 3;

Total - 51."

Quite a lot of cars were abandoned due to breakdowns or lack of fuel. Thus, the order of the commander of the 7th Mechanized Corps No. 7 dated July 14, 1941 “On the criminal attitude towards the collection of damaged and faulty tanks from the battlefield and along the routes” cited facts of unsatisfactory evacuation of combat vehicles: “EV 3 km east of Rudnya in in the ditch there are two BT-7 and two BA-10, 27th tank regiment, in the Liozno metro area there are two KV tanks and a BA-10 armored vehicle.”

By the end of 1941, due to heavy losses, the number of medium armored vehicles in the army was significantly reduced. But, despite this, in some cases, due to the absence or small number of tanks, they could form the basis of the armored vehicles of some formations and formations. For example, by December 4, 1941, all units of the Northwestern Front had 27 tanks (6 KV, 8 BT, 5 T-26, 8 T-37/38) and 50 armored vehicles (22 BA-10 and 28 BA-20). As can be seen from the document, BA-10s made up 53% of all cannon armored units on the front.

In the fall of 1941, medium armored cars operated in fairly large quantities near Leningrad, which was explained by the proximity of the Izhora plant, the only enterprise for their production. Therefore, when some tank units were formed here, a very large number of armored vehicles were included. For example, the 124th Tank Brigade, formed on September 19 - 25, 1941 in Leningrad, received 46 KV-1 tanks and 26 BA-10 armored cars (of which 7 were radial). Moreover, all the equipment came directly from the factories.

In the battles near Moscow in the fall of 1941, medium armored vehicles were used on a much smaller scale than near Leningrad. For example, the 6 tank brigades that arrived in the 5th Army of the Western Front in October - November included 305 tanks of all types and 24 armored vehicles, of which 1 BA-20 and 23 BA-10 (we are talking about the composition of the brigades upon their arrival at front, during subsequent battles they were replenished many times). The vehicles were part of 18 (7 BA-10, 1 BA-20), 19 (7 BA-10), 20 (7 BA-10), 22 (7 BA-10) and 145th (2 BA-10) tank brigades, and the 25th brigade had no armored vehicles at all.

Due to large losses in armored vehicles in the battles for Moscow, such “oldies” as the BA-27M were used to replenish tank units. For example, the already mentioned 18th Tank Brigade, withdrawn to the rear for replenishment in the period from October 23 to October 25, 1941, received 2 BA-27M and 1 BA-10. On November 21, one of the BA-27Ms, together with a repair platoon from the brigade, covered the Tarkhovo-Petrovskoye road. In a battle with German tanks, this armored car “was hit and burned along with the crew.”

The 20th Tank Brigade of the 5th Army received 2 BA-27Ms on November 14, 1941, one of which was lost two weeks later, and the second on December 22, already during the Soviet counteroffensive, was defeated “in the battles for the city of Ruza.”

According to the report of the armored forces department of the 5th Army, in the period from October 15, 1941 to January 1, 1942, 225 tanks and 54 armored vehicles were repaired (6 BA-6, 5 BA-10, 3 BA-27M and 40 BA-20, and from January 1 to April 1, 1942 - 152 tanks and 24 armored cars (8 BA-6, 3 BA-10 and 13 BA-20. As of April 1, 1942, units of the 5th Army had 167 tanks and 60 armored cars - 17 BA-6, 13 BA-10, 2 BA-27M, 26 BA-20 and 2 FAI-M, of which 8 BA-6, 6 BA-20 and 2 FAI-M required repairs.

In the 1942 campaigns, medium armored vehicles were used very limitedly, since their losses in previous battles were very large. By this time, the use of these armored cars was mainly for communications and reconnaissance. For example, by June 28, 1942, the 16th Tank Corps of the Bryansk Front had 12 armored vehicles, of which 5 BA-10, 20 medium armored vehicles (18 BA-10, 1 BA-6, 1 BA-ZM) were listed in the 10th the motorized rifle brigade of the 21st Army of the Southwestern Front and 1 more BA-10 was in the security company of the headquarters of the same army. During the fighting in July, most of these vehicles were lost. For example, by July 31, 1942, in the 10th Motorized Rifle Brigade there were only 4 BA-10, BA-6 and BA-3M left, and the rest from July 1 to July 7 were out of action “from shells and bombs” and there were no territories occupied advancing German troops. But in some units, medium armored cars were still operational at the end of summer. Thus, the 18th Tank Corps of the Southwestern Front, as of August 20, 1942, after heavy fighting and heavy losses, had 11 BA-10s - 5 vehicles were in the corps control, 4 in the 18th motorized rifle brigade and 2 in the 1st separate reconnaissance battalion.

Medium armored vehicles were used in small numbers on the central fronts in the decisive battles of the 1943 campaigns. For example, in the newly formed 5th Guards Tank Army, by March 30, 1943, there were 12 BA-10s in the 38th armored battalion (besides them, the battalion had 7 T-70s and 10 BA-64s) and 17 BA-10s in the 53rd motorized rifle brigade. By June 10, 1943, when the 5th Guards Tank Army was already part of the Steppe Front, it had only 12 BA-10s in the 38th Armored Battalion. These vehicles were used in battles in the Belgorod direction and near Kharkov in July - August 1943.

On the eve of the Battle of Kursk - July 1, 1943 - there were 8 BA-10 armored vehicles in the tank units of the Voronezh Front - 3 each in the 6th Guards Army and the 6th Tank Corps and 2 in “other parts of the front”.

Some examples of medium armored vehicles were in service with the troops until the end of the war in Europe. As a rule, they were used in security companies of the headquarters of fronts and armies, as well as as command vehicles and communications vehicles in some tank and rifle units. For example, as of December 15, 1944, the 18th Army had only 6 armored vehicles - 5 BA-64 and 1 BA-10. And in units of the 2nd Belorussian Front, by April 14, 1945, there were still 14 cannon armored cars - 1 BA-10 in the 65th Army and 13 in the 19th Army (3 BA-10 and 3 BA-ZM in the 97th company headquarters security, 3 BA-10 in the 132nd and 1 BA-10 in the 40th Guards Rifle Corps).

But during the Great Patriotic War, medium armored vehicles became most widespread on the Leningrad Front, where they were used quite widely until May 1945. This is explained primarily by the fact that from the autumn of 1941 to February 1944, the Red Army did not conduct active offensive operations here and the fighting was of a positional nature. In addition, in the rear of the front was Leningrad, a large industrial center that made it possible to carry out high-quality repairs of damaged armored vehicles. During the war, there were cases when in some armies of the Leningrad Front, cannon armored vehicles could “compete” with tanks in terms of their numbers. For example, as of September 15, 1941, the troops of the 42nd Army of this front numbered 65 tanks and 45 armored vehicles, of which 31 were medium - 1 BA-27M and 30 BA-10.

By the fall of 1941, experience in combat use showed that using cannon armored vehicles “like a tank” - to accompany infantry or attack enemy fortifications - leads to huge losses, since the armor protection of the vehicles was bulletproof, and the cross-country ability was significantly inferior to tracked vehicles. And since there were quite a lot of cannon armored cars on the Leningrad Front, it was decided to consolidate them into separate units and use them for reconnaissance and communications, that is, for what they, in fact, were created. At the end of 1941, the formation of separate reconnaissance companies of 16 - 21 BA-10s in each began as part of the tank brigades of the Leningrad Front. True, the composition of these companies could be quite varied, and in some cases, if the necessary equipment was available, larger armored vehicle units were created. For example, on July 27, 1942, the 61st Tank Brigade had 64 tanks in two tank battalions (63 T-60 and 1 T-26) and 39 armored vehicles in a separate armored battalion (16 BA-20 and 23 BA-10). In this situation, the BA-10s were superior in armament to tanks and were the main firepower of the brigade.

In addition, at the end of 1941, by decision of the Military Council of the Leningrad Front, the formation of independent units equipped with cannon armored cars - separate armored battalions (oabb) - began. They were recruited by units of individual reconnaissance companies of tank brigades and other units of the front.

For example, the 1st separate armored battalion was formed by the commander and commissar of a separate reconnaissance company of the 123rd tank brigade, Major Tatarenko and senior political instructor Stupakov, who on January 1, 1942 were summoned to the headquarters of the Leningrad Front, where they received the task of “surrendering command of the company and reporting with two armored platoons.” at the disposal of the commander of a separate security regiment in the village of Koskerovo (Lake Ladoga).” Having completed an 83-km march, 10 BA-10 arrived at the designated point by 10.30 on January 2.

On January 7, Tatarenko and Stupakov were again called to the front headquarters, where they “were briefed on the contents of the resolution of the Military Council of the Leningrad Front dated January 5, 1942 No. 00530 on the formation of a separate armored battalion.” According to the developed staff, the battalion was supposed to consist of a command and headquarters, a support platoon and two companies of 10 BA-10s each, a total of 114 people, 20 armored vehicles, 8 trucks, a type A repair flight and a gas tanker. The 1st Automobile Battalion was recruited by a company from the 123rd Tank Brigade, mentioned above, and a company from the 12th Reserve Tank Regiment. Major Tatarenko was appointed battalion commander. At first, the battalion became part of the 2nd defensive region, and on May 8, 1942 it was assigned to the 389th Infantry Division for joint actions to defend the western coast of Lake Ladoga.” By this time, the staff of the battalion had changed slightly - now it consisted of three companies of 7 BA-10s each and 1 BA-10 in battalion control, with a total of 23 BA-10s (in fact there were 22 BA-10s and 1 BA-6).

By this time, the troops of the 42nd Army of the Leningrad Front had formed an armored vehicle company of 11 BA-10s withdrawn from the rifle units. Together with a tank company of 5 BT-2 armored cars became part of the 3rd separate reconnaissance battalion of the army. On June 1, 1942, the formation of the 2nd separate armored vehicle battalion began as part of the 42nd Army, which by June 6 had 20 BA-10, 1 BA-11 and 1 armored car from the Izhora plant on a ZiS-6 chassis with a 45-mm cannon.

Until the end of 1942, both armored battalions did not participate in battles - they were used to strengthen the defense of rifle units and as a mobile reserve. Subsequently, it turned out that the 1st Oabb had to fight more, the 2nd was used in rare battles and its losses were small.

On February 4, 1943, the 1st Armored Battalion received the task of supporting the 63rd Guards Rifle Division of the 55th Army and clearing the village of Krasny Bor from the enemy. The battalion arrived at the site of the upcoming battles on February 6 and until February 11 conducted reconnaissance and prepared for the offensive. To identify the vehicles with their own infantry, their turrets were “painted red, and numbers from 601 to 623 were inscribed on the right side and rear.”

On February 11, BA-10s, using the method of mobile ambushes, supported with fire the advance of the 269th and 270th rifle regiments along the Moscow highway to Krasny Bor. And the next day, the entire battalion participated in repelling the German counterattack, and then, pursuing the retreating enemy, broke into the southern and southwestern outskirts of the village.

During the two-day battles, the 1st Airborne Forces lost 8 people killed (including the commander of the 1st company, Senior Lieutenant Kolbasov), 20 wounded (including the commander of the 2nd company, Lieutenant Mamich), 5 BA-10s burned out, 2 were shot down , but later restored. In the battle for Krasny Bor, armored vehicles destroyed 8 anti-tank and 1 anti-aircraft gun, a mortar battery, 8 machine gun points and 148 enemy soldiers and officers. On February 13, the battalion was taken to the rear to be put in order.

On March 12 - 13, 1943, 6 BA-10s from the 14th fortified area and the 23rd Army were received to replenish the 1st OAB, and on March 15th the battalion received the task of “entering a breakthrough northwest of Krasny Bor on Sablino, on large capture Sablino at speed, cut the Minsk railway and hold the line until the 123rd Infantry Division arrives.”

The attack began at 13.00 on March 19, 1943, but due to heavy fire from the vehicle, the armored cars were unable to get through to Sablino and, having lost 3 BA-10s shot down, retreated to their original positions. And since the Red Army units operating in front were not successful, the battalion was withdrawn to the rear. Until the end of March, the battalion's vehicles were used for communications as part of several rifle divisions, and then the 1st OAB was transferred to Kolpino, and then to B. Shemilovka on the outskirts of Leningrad. Until January 1944, the battalion did not participate in battles; its vehicles were used for communications and security of the western coast of Lake Ladoga together with the 104th border regiment of the NKVD troops.

On January 24, 1944, the 1st Airborne Division was placed at the disposal of the 67th Army with the task of supporting units of the 5b Infantry Division during the attack on the village of Novo-Lisino.

On January 26, the 2nd company of the battalion, after artillery bombardment with the support of infantry, captured Novo-Lisino and, pursuing the retreating enemy, took the village of Logi in battle, which it held for 4 hours until the support of rifle units. During the battle, the company lost 7 people killed, 5 wounded, 3 BA-10s burned out and 1 shot down.

The next day, the 1st and 3rd companies of the armored battalion (12 BA-10 in total), having 7 - 8 machine gunners on armored vehicles, attacked the enemy in the area of ​​​​the village of Zaitsevo, but after a stubborn battle due to strong artillery fire and minefields, the armored cars retreated to starting positions. Losses were 6 killed, 14 wounded, 3 vehicles were burned and 1 was shot down. During the two-day battles, the 1st Armored Battalion destroyed one German tank with its fire and captured 6 75-mm and 3 37-mm anti-tank guns in full service.

On February 2, 1944, the 1st Airborne Brigade was assigned to the 220th Tank Brigade, with which it operated in the Gdov-Pskov direction, and also conducted reconnaissance of ice routes along Lake Pskov. At the same time, 2 BA-10s arrived for replenishment.

On April 3, 1944, at 1.40 am, the 1st separate armored battalion attacked the villages of Yavanovo and Pavlovo and, after a fierce battle, occupied them, defeating up to two companies of infantry with anti-tank guns. Having taken up firing positions, the armored cars held the occupied line until their infantry arrived, but the subsequent attempt to attack the German positions behind the villages of Yavnovo and Pavlovo was unsuccessful. The vehicles came under artillery fire from the front and from the flanks and were soon all destroyed. Only 3 BA-10s of the 1st platoon of the 3rd company survived, which cruised along the Oleshino-Yavnovo road, supporting the attack with fire. At 6.30, having picked up all the wounded, the platoon retreated to Oleshno. In the year of this battle, the 1st Airborne Forces suffered huge losses - 15 people were killed, 22 were wounded and 18 were missing, 15 BA-10s burned out. after that, only 3 armored vehicles remained in the battalion, it was transferred to the second echelon and it no longer participated in battles.

The 2nd Armored Battalion did not participate in attacks on German positions; its vehicles were used for reconnaissance and communications. The 2nd Airborne Battalion was stationed in Leningrad, first on Stachek Avenue, and then on Moskovskoe Highway. Where was he until the end of the war?

Despite the fact that the battalion did not participate in battles, it suffered losses. Moreover, from the fire of our own artillery. Thus, during one of the reconnaissance missions near the village of Mukhanovka on January 22, 1944, one BA-10 from a distance of 150 m was destroyed by a direct hit from two 76-mm shells from a gun of the 380th light artillery regiment of the 169th rifle division. The car burned down, three crew members were seriously injured, and one died.

As of January 1, 1945, the 2nd Airborne Regiment included: 21 BA-10, 1 BA-11, 1 MZA1 “Scout” armored personnel carrier, 1 “armored vehicle with a 5AK radio” (as in the document, it is unknown what kind of vehicle it was, most likely a truck reserved on its own at one of the Leningrad enterprises. - Author's note), 6 GAZ-AA trucks, 1 ZIS-5, 1 captured Opel Blitz, 1 type A repair flight and 3 captured BMW motorcycles. In the spring of 1946, the 1st and 2nd separate armored vehicle battalions were disbanded.

It should be said that in 1944 - 1945 on the Leningrad Front, in addition to the 1st and 2nd ABB, there were other units that included cannon armored vehicles. Thus, as of April 19, 1944, the 152nd tank brigade had 2 BA-10s and 1 BA-6, and the 48th separate armored battalion of the 54th Army had 18 BA-10s and 2 BA-20s.

Armored car BA-3

In 1934, the Izhora plant produced an improved model of the BAI - BA-3 . The body was lengthened by 50 mm, air outlet windows appeared in the engine compartment, the running board was shortened, and mounts for all-terrain track chains were provided on the rear fenders.

The main difference of the new vehicle was the turret with weapons, borrowed from the T-26 tank, but with a decrease in armor thickness to 8 mm. The armament remained unchanged - 45-mm cannon 20K mod. 1932 (60 shells) and a DT machine gun. The ammunition was placed partly in the turret, and partly in the body of the armored car.

Removable all-terrain tracks, the well-known “Overall”, were created especially for the BA-3. Putting on the tracks with the participation of the entire crew of the armored car took 10-15 minutes.

The vehicle successfully passed tests (subject to strengthening the front suspension and improving the engine cooling system) and was accepted for production. Between 1934 and 1935, the Izhora and Vyksinsky plants produced 180 BA-3 armored vehicles.

Drawing of the BA-6 armored car

History of creation

Armored vehicles appeared in Russia before the start of the First World War, and on the battlefield these vehicles very quickly proved their usefulness and effectiveness. As a result, by 1917, the Russian army was armed with several hundred armored vehicles of both domestic and foreign production. Moreover, we can say that at that time, in terms of the quantity and quality of these machines, Russia surpassed all other countries participating in the conflict.

Armored vehicles were actively used during the Civil War. Moreover, they were used very effectively - the maneuverable nature of combat operations and the absence of a permanent front line contributed to this. By 1920, the Red Army was armed with about 400 armored vehicles of various types. True, the condition of the equipment left much to be desired - it was badly worn out, and there simply weren’t enough spare parts for repairs. Therefore, after the end of the Civil War, some armored cars had to be disposed of or disassembled for spare parts. The young Soviet republic could not produce new armored vehicles - there was no automobile industry in the country.

Only after the start of mass production of the first AMO-F-15 trucks did work on the creation of armored vehicles resume in the country. From 1928 to 1946, more than 16 thousand armored vehicles of various types and brands were manufactured in the USSR. They were used in all pre-war conflicts, and also took part in the war with Germany.

At the end of 1930, a contract was signed with the American for the supply of 1 thousand three-axle trucks, known as Ford Timken. The Americans took a regular Ford Model AA truck and installed a third axle on it. It was on the basis of this vehicle that the Soviet BAI armored car was developed, which became the ancestor of a whole family of domestic combat vehicles of this type.

The medium Soviet armored car BAI was created in 1932 at the Izhora plant design bureau. This vehicle was equipped with a 37 mm Hotchkiss cannon and two 7.62 mm machine guns. The military liked the BAI so much that even before the end of the field tests it was put into service.

The main weapon of the BAI - like most Soviet light and medium tanks of the time - was the 37mm Hotchkiss gun, which was a converted naval gun developed in 1880. It is clear that by the beginning of the 30s its ballistic characteristics were more than mediocre. However, this gun was distinguished by its simplicity of design, small size and weight, which made it possible to install the gun not only on armored vehicles and tanks, but even on airplanes.

In the early 30s, based on the German Rheinmetall 37-mm anti-tank gun, Soviet designers developed a 45-mm gun, which received the designation 20K.

On August 1, 1932, the UMM of the Red Army signed a contract with the Design Bureau of the Izhora Plant to create a new armored vehicle based on the BAI. The military wanted an armored car equipped with a new 45 mm gun. In addition, it was planned to eliminate the defects discovered during the operation of the BAI in the new machine. The new armored car was named BA-3, it can be considered an improved modification of the BAI, because externally and structurally these two vehicles were practically no different.

The task was not completed on time (before November 1932), the BA-3 armored car was ready only by April of the following year, and even then the first prototype was made of ordinary, not armored steel. Despite this, the car took part in the May Day parade in Leningrad.

The body of the BA-3 armored car had minor differences from its predecessor BAI: its rear was lengthened by 50 mm, the engine compartment received side windows for the emission of hot air, the design of the folding flaps in the side doors was changed and the running boards under them were shortened. In addition, on the rear wings of the car there are places for laying all-terrain chains.

The main difference between two similar vehicles was their armament. The new 45-mm 20K gun could not fit into the old turret, so to install it, the designers took the turret from the serial T-26 light tank, and to reduce its weight, they reduced the thickness of the armor walls to 9 mm. This required some alteration of the armored car body: to install the turret, a new extended shoulder strap was needed, to which it was attached with bolts.

After testing at the plant and minor modifications in the fall of 1934, the Izhora plant began mass production of the BA-3 armored car. Later, an attempt was made to expand the production of the car at the Vyksa DRO plant, but due to the significant workload of the latter, this idea was abandoned.

In 1932, based on the American Ford-AA truck, the domestic three-axle GAZ-AAA truck was created, which was not much different from the original. In 1935, the designers of the Izhora plant design bureau received the task of “adapting the body of the BA-3 armored car to the chassis of the GAZ-AAA truck.” It was somewhat lighter, had a smaller base and consisted entirely of domestic components. The new armored car was named BA-6 and was practically no different from the BA-3.

At the end of 1934, BA-3 armored vehicles began to enter service with combat units, mainly this equipment was included in the reconnaissance battalions of mechanized brigades, where they gradually replaced the older BAI and BA-27. During 1935-1936 a large number of these vehicles were transferred to mechanized units that were part of the cavalry divisions. BA-3s were also in service with reconnaissance battalions of conventional rifle divisions.

For the first time in combat conditions, an armored car was used during the Spanish Civil War. Of the 60 armored cars that the Soviet Union sent to the republican government of this country, there were 3 BA-3s. They were first used during the defense of Madrid, and in 1937 all armored vehicles were lost. The BA-3's armament was quite effective against enemy light tanks and wedges, but their protection left much to be desired: even heavy machine guns could penetrate it.

These vehicles performed much better during conflicts with the Japanese in the Far East. When used skillfully, the BA-3 (like other types of armored vehicles) showed high efficiency in combat. During the battles at Khalkhin Gol, the Red Army lost 8 BA-3 armored vehicles.

During the occupation of the eastern regions of Poland, BA-3s were not used, but they were actively used during the Winter War with the Finns. However, the difficult conditions of Karelia with the almost complete absence of roads were not suitable for the use of armored vehicles, so a large number of them were lost or simply abandoned.

Quite a lot of BA-3s were in the western districts at the beginning of the Great Patriotic War. In total, as of June 1, 1941, the Red Army operated 143 BA-3s. Almost all of them were lost in the first months of the war.

About a dozen captured armored cars were adopted by the Wehrmacht. They were used in reconnaissance, as well as training and propaganda vehicles. One armored car BA-3 was restored by the Finns, and was used until 1954.

Only one copy of the armored vehicle has survived to this day; those interested can see it in Kubinka, near Moscow.

Armored car BA-6

In 1935, the GAZ plant launched production of the domestic three-axle car GAZ-AAA, on the basis of which the Izhora plant developed a new armored car based on the BA-3, BA-6 . The BA-6 did not have any significant differences in the hull and armament, and it can be distinguished from the BA-3 only by its increased track width to 1940 mm (for the BA-3 - 1905 mm) and the absence of a rear door, rear inspection hatches and a step in the rear housings.

The BA-6 was the first to use bullet-resistant GK tires filled with sponge rubber. Thanks to stricter weight discipline, as well as the lightweight GAZ-AAA chassis, compared to the Ford-Timken, the weight of the armored car was reduced to 5.12 tons while maintaining other tactical and technical parameters. Another significant difference of the BA-6 is the use of the domestic GAZ-AA carburetor engine with a power of 40 hp.

The complete abandonment of imported components had a positive effect on the speed and volume of production - during the period from 1936 to 1938, the Izhora plant managed to produce 386 BA-6 armored vehicles.

Armored car BA-6

Stories about weapons. Wheeled tank BA-10

There are truly epoch-making machines in the history of Soviet military equipment. Machines that, on the one hand, became a logical development of military-technical thought of that time, and on the other hand, appeared clearly ahead of time and therefore were appreciated only after a certain time.

This is the kind of car we will talk about today. We will talk about the BA-10 medium armored car. Undoubtedly, the best armored car of its class in the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War. An armored vehicle, which was intended not only for reconnaissance, communications and other support tasks, but also for real support of infantry and (not least!) cavalry on the battlefield.

In general, the need for such a car was recognized by the command of the Red Army already in the late 20s - early 30s of the last century. And the development was carried out by many design bureaus. Moreover, the main chassis of all developments was the three-axle GAZ-AAA truck with a 50 hp engine.

The BA-10 is far from the first Soviet armored vehicle armed with a cannon. The BA-3, developed in 1934 by the Izhora plant, was the first to go into production.

In principle, the car fully complied with the requirements of the Red Army. It had a turret from a T-26 tank. Yes, and it was used until the end of the Great Patriotic War. True, by 1945 only a few examples had survived, but many vehicles ended up in the Finnish army as trophies.

By the way, many people confuse BA-3 with BA-6. Both replicas of these cars can be seen in the Verkhnyaya Pyshma Museum. BA-6 is practically the same BA-3 with some changes in design, size and weight. Visually, the cars differ in their stern. BA-6 does not have a rear door, steps or inspection hatches.

BA-3 from the collection of the UMMC Museum of Military Equipment in Verkhnyaya Pyshma.

The BA-3 can with full confidence be called the first Soviet serial wheeled tank. The statement may be controversial. However, if we compare light tanks of that time and armored cars, there are minimal differences in armor and armament, as well as in the tactics of using the vehicles.

Armament of the BA-3 (BA-6): a T-26 turret with a 45-mm anti-tank gun (modernized model 1934), two 7.62-mm DT-29 machine guns. Which corresponds to the tank's armament. And the car’s armor is impressive - 8 mm (BA-6 has 9 mm) welded armor plates. Crew 4 people.

What makes the BA-3 and T-26 even more similar is the presence of track chains on the rear wheels. And the speed that the BA had on good roads, 45 km/h, made it possible to use it to attack populated areas in the same way as light tanks. In fact, the BA-3 (6) had only one drawback, but it was significant. This is its own mass.

Here it is necessary to make one more digression, which will help readers not to “get lost” in the world of Red Army armored vehicles. It is necessary to clarify one more detail regarding the BA-6M (1936). The BA-6 was equipped with a turret from the T-26, but the modernized version of the BA-6M was equipped with a BT-7 turret. And the armor was increased by another millimeter (10 mm). It should probably be noted that this car has a more modern radio station.

But, no matter how good the BA-3 and BA-6 are, we must admit that these are intermediate models for creating a truly outstanding armored vehicle BA-10. In addition to the fact that the designers of the specialized design bureau of the Izhora plant studied, the cars were quite actively used by the military. They participated in all military conflicts where our army took part. Even in Spain, according to some sources, there were several such cars.

All these factors contributed to the appearance in 1938 of a truly new generation armored car, the BA-10. Why can we talk about a new generation of wheeled tanks, referring specifically to the “ten”? What's new in this armored car?

As an example, we used the BA-10ZhD car, which is in the collection of the Pyshma Museum. But the only difference was the set of wheels and rims for moving along the railway tracks.

First of all, the BA-10 was built on a shortened chassis from the GAZ-AAA with a reinforced front beam, which improved the cross-country ability and maneuverability of the armored car.

Instead of single-acting lever shock absorbers, more modern hydraulic ones were used. For a fairly heavy car, this is truly a revolution. The smoothness of the vehicle has increased, and, consequently, the accuracy of shooting in motion has increased.

The headlights and front wheel hubs were covered with armored caps. The car uses a central brake in the transmission. The ventilation and cooling system of the engine and the entire engine compartment has been improved.

To increase the power reserve, a second gas tank was installed, and the body of the vehicle was welded from sheets of armor, in some places up to 15 mm thick. This made it possible not only to move quickly enough across the battlefield, but also to work effectively against enemy light armored vehicles.

Like its predecessors, the BA-10, to improve cross-country ability, was equipped with removable “Overall” tracks (like the BA-3 in the photo above) and rotating spare wheels mounted on the sides of the vehicle.

Even such a “trifle” as armored door hinges, which from external to internal, resulted in weight savings!

An important innovation was shielded electrical equipment for the installation of more powerful radio communication systems. The armored car has become more effective as a reconnaissance and command vehicle. And the very possibility of adjusting the actions of the BA-10 from the outside significantly increased the combat capabilities of the vehicle.

As a result of all the tricks, an armored car 4.6 meters long weighed 5,140 kg, and on the highway it confidently accelerated to a speed of 53 km/h (over rough terrain -20 km/h). And on railway tracks the BA-10 could accelerate to 90 km/h!

The range has also been increased to 320 km on roads, 260 km on highways and 200 km on rough terrain. In general, the armored car had fairly good driving characteristics and could overcome inclines of up to 24° and fords up to 0.6 m deep.

But the Izhorians did not stop there. Almost in parallel with the BA-10, work was carried out on a modernized version of the BA-10M vehicle. The modernization was carried out specifically for the battlefield vehicle. The engine armor has been improved and a new control mechanism has been installed. The car appeared already in 1939.

In the same year, BA-10s underwent baptism of fire. Moreover, new vehicles took part in the conflict near the Khalkhin Gol River from the very beginning. Moreover, the number of BA-10 wheeled tanks in this area suggests the targeted use of this particular vehicle in the conflict. Approximately half of the entire fleet of these Red Army vehicles was concentrated in this area! 203 units!

Khalkhin Gol, 1939, BA-10 in the background.

We know practically nothing about specific episodes of that war. Yes, there was such a conflict, and we seemed to have won. That's all the knowledge of the majority of our generation. But the great-grandfathers of our readers fought there, perhaps also of our readers. Let's remember...

On June 20-25, the 3rd battalion of the 149th rifle regiment, with the support of an armored car company of the 234th armored battalion of the 8th motorized armored brigade and a battery of the 175th artillery regiment, fought with Japanese-Manchu units northeast of Khalkhin Gol in the Khalkhin-Sume region and Debden-Sume (territory of Manchuria).

In the Debden-Sume area, Soviet troops discovered a Japanese military town, in which there were up to a battalion of Japanese, a Manchu cavalry regiment and two artillery batteries (75-mm field and 37-mm anti-tank guns). A battle ensued, during which the Japanese, sitting on the roofs of the barracks, pinned the infantry of the 149th regiment to the ground with fire.

However, the commander of the armored company went behind enemy lines, placed armored cars and two 76-mm guns at direct fire and began to destroy the Japanese barracks, which soon caught fire. Panic arose in the town, which our infantry took advantage of to exit the battle. The armored car losses amounted to three vehicles: two BA-10s and one BA-3. All these vehicles were hit and left on enemy territory. Another five BA-10s were damaged by enemy artillery fire.

They often try to convince us that the Soviet, and Russian too, way of waging war is inhumane. We do not think about the losses of our own army and the cost of victory. We just win no matter what. This is disgusting. Is the armored company commander not human? Lose so many of your own subordinates and equipment for the sake of some infantrymen?

No, gentlemen "people". The commander and soldiers of the armored company and the artillerymen of these two guns - these are people! Sacrificing your own life for the sake of your comrades is the most human quality. This is called heroism. Only we have the immortal “Perish yourself, but save your comrade”! But this is so, an emotional insert from the authors...

The powerful armament of Soviet armored vehicles allowed them to fight Japanese tanks on almost equal terms. In this regard, the BA-10s from the 9th Motorized Armored Brigade operated most successfully.

At 12 noon on July 3, 1939, the positions of Soviet troops on the eastern bank were attacked by units of the 3rd and 4th Japanese tank regiments, which consisted of more than 70 tanks. At the same time, up to 40 Japanese combat vehicles reached the positions of the company of the armored battalion of the 9th motorized armored brigade (12 BA-10), which first began to retreat.

But when the brigade commander, Colonel S. Oleinikov, arrived in time, the company was stopped and “put in a position with an extended turret” (the armored cars stood behind a dune, above which only their turrets were visible). At this point, the Japanese tanks approached a distance of 800 - 1000 m and the armored vehicles opened fire.

As a result of a two-hour battle, 9 tanks were knocked out and destroyed, while six BA-10 armored vehicles remained in service! How do you like the result? Like the “inhuman brigade commander” Colonel Oleinikov?

In total, during the conflict, the Red Army lost, mainly from anti-tank artillery fire and bottle makers (the Japanese analogue of our “Molotov cocktails”), 41 BA-10 type vehicles. In total, by July 20, there were 80 BA-10 armored vehicles in units of the 1st Army Group.

At the end of the conflict, a thorough analysis of the battles was carried out in the Red Army. Results of the analysis as it relates specifically to BA-10:

1. Armored cars are an excellent anti-tank weapon in defense on terrain with half-closed positions.

2. The firing of Japanese tanks with a 57-mm fragmentation grenade (half of the Japanese tanks participating in this attack were Type 89 tanks, armed with a 57-mm Type 90 cannon with a barrel length of 14.9 calibers) at armored cars did not defeat them and did not justify itself .

3. The attack of Japanese tanks without infantry and artillery preparation did not give them any results other than losses in tanks.

4. An armor-piercing 45 mm grenade easily penetrates the 22 mm armor of Japanese tanks.

5. If the infantry is defending with armored cars and there is a possibility of a massive attack by tanks, then it is necessary to prepare some of the armored cars for firing from semi-closed positions.

With a seemingly completely satisfactory assessment of the work of the BA-10 on the Soviet-Japanese front, in fact, the command of the Red Army signed a verdict on the excellent machine in the next part of the report. This, in our opinion, is connected with the concept of a future war, which was actively introduced into the minds of our military at that time.

So, armored vehicles turned out to be ineffective in the offensive. They are almost impossible to use on rough terrain due to their heavy weight and weak motor. Cars get stuck in the ground and cannot overcome a rise above 18 degrees.

The result? The cars stopped production in 1941. And the developed design and production base was used to create the sanitary BA-22. A car that was absolutely necessary, but was no longer a wheeled tank...

But the wheeled tanks of the Red Army contributed to the victory over Germany. Yes, most of these vehicles died heroically in the first year of this war, but there were also those who went through the war completely. Let's remember the episodes of the Great Patriotic War...

5.00 On June 22, 1941, the commander of the tank regiment of the 5th tank division of the 3rd mechanized corps, Colonel Bogdanov, assigned the task of conducting reconnaissance to a platoon of 6 BA-10 armored vehicles of senior lieutenant Surovtsev.

The vehicles left the unit's location at 6.25. When approaching the town of L., the platoon commander organized an ambush in the forest, on both sides of the highway. The vehicles are camouflaged in such a way that it was difficult to notice them from a distance of 200 meters.

At 10.00 a platoon of German motorcyclists appeared, who were destroyed by BA-10 fire from a distance of 200–300 m.

After 40 minutes, a light tank appeared on the road, moving at high speed. The commander of one of the armored vehicles set it on fire with the first shot from a gun. After 7 minutes, more bottoms of the tank approached the ambush, which were also destroyed by BA-10 fire.

Ten minutes later, a column of 15 tanks and motorcyclists approached the place where the destroyed tanks and motorcycles stood. With their sudden fire, the BA-10 disabled 3 tanks and a large number of motorcycles, which forced the remaining German vehicles to turn back.

With the approach to the town of L, the main forces of the 7th Tank Division of the 39th Tank Corps of the Germans, the platoon of Senior Lieutenant Surovtsev retreated to their own. Thus, as a result of a well-organized ambush, 6 BA-10 armored vehicles knocked out and destroyed 6 German tanks and a large number of motorcycles.

The contribution of the BA-10 to the defense of Leningrad and breaking the blockade has not been deservedly forgotten. This is a separate page in the history of the war, Leningrad, Izhora and Putilov factories.

When the Nazis approached the city and the Izhora plant was actually on the front line, on September 10, 1941, production of the BA-10 was transferred to the Baltic plant.

Several dozen wheeled tanks were produced there! Under blockade!

Another story about a specific battle. Southern Front, Rostov-on-Don region, early March 1943. On the morning of January 18, 1943, a Separate reconnaissance battalion under the command of L. Legeza moved into an attack on Shlisselburg along with the infantry.

Painted white, 19 BA-10s rushed forward, grinding snow with wide tracks mounted on their rear wheels. By 10 o'clock in the morning, three guns, several machine guns and over 120 German soldiers were destroyed by armored car fire. By noon the city was taken.

BA-10s even took part in the Battle of Kursk! On the eve of the Battle of Kursk - July 1, 1943 - there were 8 BA-10 armored vehicles in the tank units of the Voronezh Front - 3 each in the 6th Guards Army and the 6th Tank Corps and 2 in “other parts of the front”.

Some examples of medium armored vehicles were in service with the troops until the end of the war in Europe. As a rule, they were used in security companies of the headquarters of fronts and armies, as well as as command vehicles and communications vehicles in some tank and rifle units.

But the war in Europe is just an episode for the BA-10. The combat life in our army for these vehicles ended in the east. The final chord of the BA-10 was the Soviet-Japanese War of 1945 - many T-26, BT-7 tanks and BA-10 armored vehicles remained in the troops stationed in the Far East.

All this equipment was successfully used against the Japanese, and at the end of hostilities it was donated to the Chinese communists, who used it against the troops of Chiang Kai-shek. It was also used during the Korean War.

At the end of the article there is some information about the armored car that you see in the photo. Alas, today in Russia only one wheeled tank, the BA-10, is known, which is assembled from two. In Verkhnyaya Pyshma we see a replica that is as close as possible to the original. This is a railway version of the BA-10ZhD.

Real vehicles can be seen in Finland (removed from service in 1959), in Ukraine in the Poltava region (hull) and in Mongolia.

Well, the traditional performance characteristics of the BA-10 armored car:

Crew, people: 4 Layout: with aft-mounted fighting compartment Number of units produced, pcs.: 3,413

Weight, t: 5.1

Dimensions: — Body length, mm: 4450 — Body width, mm: 2100 — Height, mm: 2470 — Base, mm: front and middle axles — 2730 mm, rear bogie — 940 mm — Ground clearance, mm: 230

Reservations: - Armor type: rolled steel - Hull forehead, mm/deg.: 10 - Hull side, mm/deg.: 10 - Hull rear, mm/deg.: 6-10 - Bottom, mm: 4 - Hull roof, mm: 6 — Tower front, mm/deg.: 10 — Tower side, mm/deg.: 10 — Tower rear, mm/deg.: 10 — Tower roof, mm: 6

Armament: — Caliber and brand of gun: 45 mm mod. 1938 (20K) — Gun ammunition: 49 — Sights: periscopic PT-1, telescopic TOP — Machine guns: 2 × 7.62 mm DT-29, ammunition 2,000 rounds.

Engine: — Engine type: in-line 4-cylinder carburetor liquid cooling — Engine power, l. pp.: 50 at 2800 rpm

— Speed ​​on the highway, km/h: 52 — Speed ​​on rough terrain, km/h: 20 — Cruising range on the highway, km: 260 — Cruising range on rough terrain, km: 200

— Wheel formula: 6×4 — Suspension type: dependent on leaf springs, with hydraulic shock absorbers — Climbability, degrees: 20 — Fording capability, m: 0.6

What would you like to say in the end? To summarize, we can say that the entire BA-3, 6, 10 family were outstanding machines for that time. Moreover, we would say - simply ahead of their time.

Of course there is a difference. And significant. But - after 50 years. No offense, of course. There can only be grievances towards our industry, which was not able to produce more powerful engines. At least 100 hp. That’s why 50-horsepower engines from the master’s shoulder of Henry Ford carried multi-ton cars. They carried it rather badly, but still.

In our country there were many places where these fast (by tank standards) and mobile (a 100-kilometer march for a running tank is one thing, but for an BA is completely different) vehicles could be successfully used. And they applied it.

Moreover, if you look on the Internet, you can find just a huge number of photographs of Germans and Finns, along with the BA-10. And there is no doom or indignation on their faces that they have to use this machine. Vice versa.

So it turns out that our wheeled tank was quite a combat, “working” vehicle. The question, probably, was solely as with many other machines - the ability to correctly and with the greatest efficiency use the BA. We agree with this, there were problems.

It’s strange, perhaps, but there is no negativity left in history towards the car. And three and a half thousand of these wheeled tanks did everything they could in the conditions of the outbreak of war. Probably, you shouldn’t make any claims to the cars?

Modifications of armored vehicles BAI, BA-3, BA-6

Railroad option . The railway version was developed for the BA-3, but was not mass-produced. With the BA-6, the matter was completed - with the BA-6ZhD, when switching from wheeled to rail, railway ramps were installed on the front and rear axles instead of pneumatics, and the steering was blocked. With a mass of 5.9 tons, the BA-6ZhD developed a speed of up to 55 km/h on the railway.

BA-6M . In 1936, a prototype of the modernized BA-6M armored car was manufactured with a turret in the form of a truncated cone, with armor increased to 10 mm and a 50-horsepower M-1 engine. Due to the installation of a conical turret and a reduction in the volume of the fighting compartment, the ammunition load was reduced to 50 rounds for the cannon and 2,520 rounds for DT machine guns. The capacity of the fuel tanks was increased from 65 to 94 liters. The cruising range of the armored car increased from 197 km to 250 km. Due to a more rational layout, despite increased armor protection, the weight of the armored car decreased to 4.8 tons. The maximum speed on the highway increased to 52 km/h. Didn't go into the BA-6M series.

BA-9 . In 1936, the BA-9 armored car (“lightweight BA-6M”), armed with a 12.7 mm DK machine gun instead of a cannon, was built at the Izhora plant. At the same time, only a large-caliber machine gun was installed in the turret; the 7.62-mm DT machine gun was located in the ball joint of the front hull plate. The ammunition consisted of 1000 rounds of ammunition for the DK machine gun and 1512 rounds of ammunition for the DT machine gun. The combat weight was reduced to 4.5 tons, the speed on the highway increased to 55 km/h, and the range was significantly increased due to an increase in the capacity of the fuel tanks. It is interesting that the BA-9 received the green light from K.E. Voroshilov himself (at that time the People's Commissar of Defense), but everything came down to a shortage of DK machine guns. In the future, they did not return to the idea of ​​BA-9.

BA-tyushki! They are not like that!

Home » Alternative tank building » BA-tyushki! They are not like that!

Alternative tank building

Ansar02 04/10/2017 692

1

in Favoritesin Favoritesfrom Favorites 0

Retelling the history of domestic armored vehicles (BA) of the 30s is IMHO pointless: those who are interested are already aware, and those who don’t care will not read this article anyway. But, in order to bring the not very advanced, but inquisitive reader up to date, I will only recall a couple of obvious and indisputable circumstances under which our BAs were designed and built.

1. All SERIAL BA, starting with the first BA-27 and D-8/12, and ending with the most popular BA-10 and BA-20, were built exclusively on slightly modified chassis of serial vehicles - no original chassis for armored vehicles were mass-produced in the USSR . And this is understandable - the Red Army needed a lot of armored vehicles, and the industry physically did not have the opportunity to waste time on satisfying some highly specialized requests - even the beloved Red Army! All that she OBJECTIVELY could offer in the required quantities was to install armored hulls on standard (or slightly modified) chassis. Moreover, this was beneficial not only in terms of development, assembly and maintenance during operation, but also from a mobilization point of view.

2. It was what was said in paragraph 1 that became the reason that all our BAs of the 30s were tied to roads. Moreover, during muddy times, even the roads were impassable for them due to the structural overload of the chassis, the weakness of the power units and the total lack of all-wheel drive. At the same time, the armament and armor protection of our armored vehicles were quite satisfactory for their time.

Of course, they tried to somehow solve the problem of cross-country ability. First of all, by using medium-sized BA trucks of the 6×4 formula as a chassis. Experiments were also conducted with half-track designs. But, alas.

The 6x4 formula on an overloaded chassis, narrow slopes and a weak engine did not fundamentally solve the problem, and half-track armored cars did not leave the experimental stage.

(Experimental half-track armored vehicle BA-30)

As a result, the Red Army had to use BA in a completely different way than was probably originally intended. Ideally, a light BA is a vehicle for reconnaissance, and a medium one, with a tank turret, is essentially the same tank, only wheeled with, accordingly, high mobility and the widest range of tasks.

But limited cross-country ability forced the use of light BAs on a 4×2 passenger car chassis purely as communications vehicles and command transport, and medium BAs - as patrol vehicles for protecting communications and in close-range reconnaissance, practically “without leaving” the road surface. This significantly reduced their effectiveness and, to be honest, based on the range of tasks available to perform, did not justify either the prohibitive weight for the chassis or the powerful tank-like weapons.

Was it possible to somehow, at least slightly, increase cross-country ability without developing new special chassis, still using serial units? Why not? After all, in essence, it was only necessary to correctly determine the policy in the construction of the armored vehicles and modernize the projects accordingly - fortunately, the assembly was carried out by Vyksunsky, who did not care what “Lego” to assemble armored cars from. Ready-made chassis only made life easier for the plant.

In the Republic of Ingushetia, light BAs (D-8/12, FAI, BA-20) were built on the chassis of serial 4x2 passenger cars.

(Passenger GAZ and light BA-20 on its chassis)

And having piled an armored hull, weapons with ammunition and a crew onto such a chassis, it was difficult to expect that the vehicle would be at least somewhat useful a little away from the highway. So why use that dead base at all? No, I’m not the smartest - there have always been plenty of smart people - and they even tried to put light BAs on three-axle chassis.

(Experienced LB-23)

In our same Republic of Ingushetia, medium-sized BA (BAI, BA-3/6/10) were built on the chassis of a three-axle GAZ truck.

And again, with a bulky armored hull and a turret with cannon and machine gun armament, like a light tank. Moreover, with a crew larger than that of a tank. It is not surprising that armored cars turned out to be traditionally overloaded with almost conventionally “increased” cross-country ability even in comparison with a regular truck (4x2).

(The most popular BA of the Red Army of the 30s BA-10)

Why don't we shift the classification relative to the chassis?

That is, we refuse junk on a 4x2 chassis. We will make a light BA on the same GAZ-AAA chassis (6x4). Yes, quite expensive, but the useless equipment of the Red Army is not needed in principle. For the average BA we use the more durable and powerful chassis of the three-ton ZiS-6 (also 6x4).

(The experimental BA-5 armored car, created on the basis of the ZiS-6 chassis. Again with a huge armored body, advanced weapons and a large crew, it turned out to be more than 3 tons heavier than the BA on the GAZ-AAA chassis and did not go into production, since its performance characteristics did not superior to serial medium armored vehicles)

So here it is. To increase cross-country ability, on the alternative light BA we install wheels not from GAZ, but from the serial ZiS (due to which we make the rear axles single-slope), and on the alternative medium BA on a chassis from the ZiS - wheels or from the same ZiS (if the rear axles are double-pitch), or even from a Yaroslavl five-ton heavy truck (in a single-slope version).

(Yaroslavl trucks with a carrying capacity of 5 tons were the most powerful (not counting the 8-ton three-axle version of the Yag-10) mass-produced in the USSR)

In order to further reduce the mass of armored hulls, and therefore the vehicles as a whole, we slightly change the layout and armament. In the most compressed armored hull of a light BA, only two crew members will be accommodated (plus, of course, a radio station, or one passenger in the fighting compartment) - like on the BA-64 during the Second World War.

(An alternative light BA model 34 g. It differs from the medium BA-3 RI by wheels from the ZiS, single-pitched drive axles, a compressed double armored hull and a new turret with a DK-DT ​​twin pair)

The armored hull of the average AltBA is three-seater. But the single-seat control compartment (like the light altBA) will no longer suffer from cramped conditions. And it is there that the gas tank, located in the RI under the roof of the hull, can be moved, between the fighting compartment and the control compartment. The gain is undoubted - in the Republic of Ingushetia, when the tank was shot through, gasoline (including burning gasoline) spread freely (literally over the backs of the driver and commander) over the body of the armored car. If it is placed in the control compartment - to the right of the driver, at the bottom, and if there is a drain pan, gasoline will simply flow out of the car - under the bottom of the body.

The turret of the medium BA is, as in RI, a tank standard, but without a rear niche. Although, IMHO, it would be much better (and more efficient and easier) to arm an armored vehicle with a heavy-caliber DK machine gun instead of a 45-mm cannon - fortunately, such experiments were carried out in the USSR, and the “development” of that success was prevented solely by the lack of mass production of heavy machine guns.

(Experienced armored reconnaissance vehicle BA-9)

Thus, we will get a more adequate armored vehicle for communications and a reconnaissance vehicle with better maneuverability.

(Alternative medium BA model 34 g. Armored hull - similar to the BA-3/6 type, but narrowed in width, with a single-seat control compartment, extended hood for installation of the power unit from the ZiS. The GAZ units that needed reinforcement were replaced with ZiS ones. Rear the bridge is completely from the ZiS on ZiS wheels. The radio station from the aft niche has been moved under the commander's seat in the turret. Armament - twin DK-DT)

As for the “wheeled tank”. Wanting one is a sacred thing, given the low operational mobility of the T-26 and the “gasoline gluttony” of the BT. Considering the completely successful experiment with the “Danilov car”, you can try to make a similar chassis even earlier, on the basis of either a ZiS or a Yag with single rear axles.

(The four-axle version of the GAZ with three drive axles differed from a regular three-axle truck in its incredibly increased cross-country capability. But also in its increased turning radius. According to these parameters, Danilov’s vehicle fully corresponded to the best examples of half-track all-terrain vehicles. But the engine of the serial GAZ truck has the power to turn three at once there were not enough drive axles. In general, the experiment did not receive further development. It’s a pity. Nowadays the world is full of heavy trucks of a similar design)

So that there are no misunderstandings regarding the suspension, the two rear axles are standard (except that the second drive axle is the same “through” as the first), and the third is suspended not on longitudinal, but on transverse springs.

The wheels, of course, are single-pitch - that is, in total, each car will require even less of them than for a regular 6x4 truck.

(Alternative heavy armored vehicles and armored personnel carriers model 35 on the chassis of a four-axle version of the ZiS-6 with an engine power of at least 85–90 hp. Preferably somewhere in the region of 100 hp - i.e. either “Hercules ", or "Continental")

A vehicle with a closed armored hull with a standard tank turret is a “wheeled tank”, and a turretless, open-top version is a ready-made armored personnel carrier, including as an artillery tractor? A large armored hull on a fairly long chassis makes this possible. In the artillery tractor version it is not even necessary to armor it. But a four-axle truck on a Yag-10 chassis can even be used as a tank trailer.

(Heavy all-terrain and load-carrying truck Yag-10S “special”, with a third drive axle. On such a chassis you can do anything - from heavy self-propelled guns, to the largest armored personnel carriers and artillery tractors - if only there was an engine of suitable power)

The armored version based on the four-bridge ZiS can also be used under self-propelled guns. The only problem is that such a car, like any Yaga, really needs an engine more powerful than the ZiSovsky. That is, again, it is NECESSARY to build our own engine cluster at YAGAZ and use it to develop the imported 100-horsepower automobile "Hercules" - in the late 30s, the USSR purchased a small batch of 102-horsepower "Hercules" engines for three-axle Yag-10 trucks (and also It’s better to master the 150-horsepower diesel engine from the German MAN, which won the Moscow-Tiflis-Moscow run in 1934 and, accordingly, the competition for the best serial diesel engine for production in the USSR).

Comparison of AI BA with RI (above) BA-6, which served as the “source” for all AI models.

Something like that. And let the Red Army receive fewer armored vehicles than in the Republic of Ingushetia, but at what cost? If due to this (in the lower photo there are light BA-20s, of which more than 2 thousand vehicles were configured in various modifications), then its combat effectiveness will not decrease at all, but, on the contrary, will only increase.

Combat use of armored vehicles BAI, BA-3, BA-6

Armored vehicles BA-3 and BA-6 entered service with reconnaissance units of tank, cavalry and rifle formations of the Red Army, and most of them were concentrated in the Far East.

Three brigades (7,8,9) each with 80 medium and 30 light armored vehicles took part in the battles with Japanese troops near the Khalkhin Gol River. In the period from 1936 to 1938 7 BAI and 80 BA-6 were delivered to Spain, where the BA-6 successfully fought against enemy tanks. The remaining armored cars served in Spain until the 50s. These vehicles were supplied to Turkey (BA-3) and Mongolia.

In the west, BA-3 and BA-6 took part in the Polish campaign, in the Soviet-Finnish War (the Finns captured several BA-6s and operated them until the mid-50s of the 20th century) and, in some numbers, in the Great Patriotic War, where mentions of them occur before 1942.

Source: compilation based on publicly available information on the Internet, as well as the book “Armored Cars of the Red Army 1918-1945.”

The only copy of the BA-3M armored car

Published by: dokaspez, 6-09-2017, 11:08, Equipment and weapons, 772, 0

BA-3

was developed in 1934 by the design bureau of the Izhora plant on the basis of the BA-I model and the three-axle
Ford-Timken
.
The hull of the BA-I changed slightly, and the main difference between the new vehicle was the turret and armament compared to the T-26. The BA-3
received a turret from the T-26 tank with a standard twin weapon mount (45 mm 20K cannon) and a DT-29 machine gun, but with armor thickness reduced to 8 mm.
The ammunition, significant for a compact vehicle, was located partly in the turret and partly in the body of the armored vehicle. To increase cross-country ability, for the first time in the Soviet armored vehicle industry, all-terrain tracks were developed, which were put on the rear slopes of the BA-3. Cars were produced at the Izhora plant and the Vyksa crushing and grinding equipment plant, which produced a total of 221
armored vehicles of this type in 1933-1936. Over five years of continuous operation, wear on the BA-3 chassis and power plant reached an unacceptable level.
In the report on the presence of combat vehicles in the Red Army on January 1, 1938, which were withdrawn from service and unfit for use in the army, 180 BA-3 (179 linear and 1 radial) fell into this category - that is, the BA-3 was recognized as an uncombatable type armored car. The plan to save the BA-3
turned out to be extremely simple - replace the worn-out Ford-Timken chassis with the domestic GAZ-AAA, which had better maintainability and had no shortage of spare parts.
The first such experiment was carried out on the older BA-27 - the result was very encouraging and soon most of these vehicles were transferred to a new chassis. In 1938 it was the turn of the BA-3, which, in addition to the chassis and engine from GAZ-AAA, received bullet-resistant tires type GK. The updated armored car became half a ton lighter (total weight was 5422 kg), while developing a speed of 58.3 km/h and having a range of 280 km. After a factory run-in and elimination of identified deficiencies, the vehicle, renamed BA-3M, was transferred to the NIBT test site in Kubinka, where from November 1938 to January 1939 it underwent comprehensive testing. In total, the armored vehicle covered 1,509 km on the highway, 959 on a country road and 336 km on virgin soil. Despite the fact that the dynamic qualities of the BA-3M turned out to be higher, test site representatives noted strong body vibrations and poor visibility when driving over rough terrain and uneven roads, overloaded front axle and springs, poor seat design and unreliable door locks. The combat use
of BA-3 armored vehicles began
in Spain.
As part of providing military assistance to the republican government, the USSR in October 1936 sent a batch of 60 armored vehicles, among which there were three BA-3s.
They were first used during defensive battles near Madrid and soon the armored vehicles were transferred to the disposal of a tank brigade formed in December. Over the next months, BA-3s saw action in central Spain and were all lost during 1937. According to reports from the front, 45-mm cannons turned out to be the most effective weapon against light tanks and wedges of the Francoists, but the armor protection of armored vehicles turned out to be frankly weak and did not withstand the fire of large-caliber machine guns and cannons. BA-3s were used more extensively during the repulsion of Japanese aggression near the Khalkhin Gol River
.
The 57th Special Corps stationed here on February 1, 1939 had 284 tanks and 534 armored vehicles of various types. Machines of the BA-3 type were in a clear minority, but when used correctly they showed high efficiency. For example, on June 20-25, armored cars of the 234th armored battalion of
the 8th motorized armored brigade of the 175th artillery regiment provided great assistance to the infantry units of the 149th Infantry Regiment, which discovered a Japanese military town in the Debden-Sume area.
The forces were clearly not equal - the Japanese had two infantry battalions, a Manchu cavalry regiment, a battery of 75 field guns, a battery of 37 mm anti-tank guns and four 13.2 mm machine guns. The Soviet infantry had to lie low under fierce enemy fire, and only the appearance of armored vehicles saved the soldiers from heavy losses. The armored company that arrived in time, consisting of several BA-10 and BA-3, as well as two 76-mm guns, almost point-blank shot the Japanese barracks, forcing the enemy to stop organized resistance. During the battle, two BA-10s and one BA-3 were irretrievably lost. They tried to pull out another BA-3, knocked out and stuck in a swamp, with the help of a BT-5 tank, but it was also stuck and both vehicles had to be burned. In the hostilities that followed, the main role was played by the BA-6 and BA-10, while the BA-3 was involved sporadically. Total irretrievable losses amounted to 8 vehicles, five of which belonged to the 36th Motorized Rifle Division
and five to the 8th Mechanized Infantry Brigade.
BA-3s practically did not take part in the liberation of Western Belarus and Ukraine - the main work here was carried out by BA-10s and light tanks, while armored vehicles of older types were used only for close-range reconnaissance and combat security. There were no combat losses among the BA-3 in September 1939. The BA-3 had to be used much more actively during the Winter War with Finland. By December 1939, the bulk of the modified BA-3s were transferred to the infantry and, together with them, took part in the first battles on the Finnish border. One of the first, on November 30, 1939, was the 62nd separate reconnaissance battalion
of the 52nd infantry division, which had ten BA-10s and three BA-3s, from Pinsk (BVO).
The battalion was placed at the disposal of the 14th Army and was the only such unit equipped with armored vehicles. Armored vehicles were mainly used here to patrol roads and guard headquarters, so the 62nd Orb had no losses. The situation was completely different with the 177th Orb of
the 122nd Infantry Division of the 9th Army, which launched an extremely unsuccessful offensive in Karelia in mid-December 1939.
Having only 20 armored vehicles at their disposal (two BA-3M, three BA-20, ten BA-10, eight D-8 and two BA-27M), the 122nd and 44th rifle divisions were forced to fight surrounded until the first dates of March 1940, having lost 17 vehicles during this period. Both BA-3Ms had to be left on enemy territory due to the impossibility of repair and evacuation. Towards the end of the war, in February 1940, the 69th reconnaissance battalion of the 100th Infantry Division also arrived from Lida with nine BA-10s and two BA-3s. Although at the final stage of the battles with the Finnish troops there was almost no work for him, in the Great Patriotic War the 100th Division showed its best side during the defense of Minsk. It should be noted that, quantitatively, the number of BA-3M armored vehicles in the period from September to June 1941 practically did not change. Of the almost 90 available vehicles, most of them remained in the Western OVO (29 units) as part of the reconnaissance battalions of rifle divisions and mechanized corps. They were mainly located in the central part of Belarus, in the Minsk UR zone and northeastern regions. It was not always possible to properly manage the material, so many armored vehicles were left to the enemy, either damaged or completely serviceable without ammunition or fuel. For example, the 3rd Tank Division
of the 1st Mechanized Corps had 131 armored vehicles (of which 16 BA-3M) and 338 tanks of various types on June 22.
Having lost some of its equipment during the extremely poorly organized Pskov-Leningrad-Slavkovichi march, the division received an order on July 5 to knock out the enemy from the city of Ostrov. Having launched several unsuccessful attacks and lost more than 400 tanks and armored vehicles, the front command issued an order on July 11 to withdraw units of the 3rd TD to the rear for reorganization. By this time, only 35 BT tanks remained in the division. A little earlier, on June 26-29, 1941, formations of the 100th and 161st Rifle Divisions
, which were understaffed, began the defense of Minsk.
The defenders of the Belarusian capital had only a few tanks - each division had several amphibious T-37A and T-38, and there were about a dozen three-turreted T-28s in warehouses and under repair, which did not participate in the battles. Things were a little better with armored vehicles, which bore the brunt of the first blow. Near Minsk, in addition to the main types of armored vehicles, at least one BA-3M was lost. Having retreated to the north, the command of the Western Front planned a powerful counterattack near Lepel, which took place on July 8. The 13th Tank Division of
, which attacked the enemy here , had 78 medium armored vehicles (44 BA-10, 5 BA-6, 7 BA-3M and 22 BAI-M), retaining only 4 by August 8. The fate of the BA-3M was clear as follows: three vehicles were destroyed in the battle and four had to be left outside enemy territory.
Actually, this marked the end of the active period of use of the BA-3
in the battles of the Great Patriotic War.
Reinforcements arriving from the rear in single copies were “taken away” to various units, most often rifle units. For example, on June 28, 1942, the 10th Motorized Rifle Brigade had 20 armored vehicles (one BA-3M and BA-6, and 18 BA-10M), and older types of vehicles remained here until the fall. Probably the BA-3Ms that served the longest in the Red Army were in the 19th Army
- on April 14, 1945, the 97th Headquarters Security Company was still using three BA-3Ms and three BA-10s.
However, after the war, all outdated armored vehicles were sent for de-armoring. Some BA-3Ms suitable for further use (according to the most reliable data - about a dozen) were adopted by the Wehrmacht and, after repairs, were put into service under the designation Panzerspahwagen BA(F) 203(r). In the summer and autumn of 1941, individual armored vehicles were used for reconnaissance, but most of them were transferred to the category of training and propaganda vehicles. A single BA-3M, captured in the winter of 1940, was in service with the Finnish army. This vehicle also underwent a major overhaul (fortunately, there was an abundance of captured property) and served until the end of the war for its intended purpose, and its operation as a training armored vehicle continued until 1954. Only one BA-3M has survived to this day, exhibited at the museum of armored vehicles in Kubinka near Moscow
(in the photo - exhibited in Moscow on May 7, 2015)

 

• 0