Jump to content

T-34 LB-1


Tchar
 Share

02156428d811b63d3a904e834e4fd821.jpg

T-34 with a 100-mm gun LB-1

In the city of Gorky at the end of '44 in the design office of the plant named after Stalin (№ 92) designed the 100-mm tank gun LB-1. By his own device, it was close to the gun D-10S. Its trunk consisted of monoblock tube, muzzle brakes and navintnogo breech. Muzzle Brake was the difference in the respective outer gun LB-1, because the D-10T and D-10S was absent.

Gun LB-1 had a wedge bolt, semi-automatic follower (mechanical) type. Recuperater hydraulic brake hydraulic recoil compensator without spindle type. Sight TS-19.

On Gorokhovetsky range 6 — 14 April '45 proving ground tests have been carried out 100-millimeter gun LB-1 mounted on the T-34 tank. The diameter of the ring in the tower increment up to 1680 mm. Removed from the tank exchange machine gun, and the number of crew members was reduced to 4 people. The suspension of the first 3 rollers turned off. The tank was 33 tons. In the stowed position, its length is 9150 mm. The dimensions of the tank cannon appeared on the 3340 mm. Ammunition of the tank consisted of 30 rounds.

On the ground tests rate the gun LB-1 was 5.2-5.8 rounds per minute. In conclusion, the Commission stated: "The gun after eliminating defects may be advised to the adoption." But the T-34 tanks equipped by a 100-millimeter cannon into service pending. The reasons for this was that the running gear for the gun LB-1 was obviously weak, well, the war came to an end also.

 

Threw this in due to people wanting to discuss the adding of the T-44-122.

 

20110325230438.jpg20110325230437.jpg

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering we have the KT with the 105mm gun, why not...

At least the 100mm could kinda fit on the T34.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering we have the KT with the 105mm gun, why not...

At least the 100mm could kinda fit on the T34.

That and the tests were not a failure in a sense, not like the T-44-100 was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That and the tests were not a failure in a sense, not like the T-44-100 was.


Even if I somehow doubt that it would have been good enough to cross long areas of rough terrain, due to the "modified" suspensions. Edited by iRazgriz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if I somehow doubt that it would have been good enough to cross long areas of rough terrain, due to the "modified" suspensions.

After some modifications the stress on the suspension was lower. The trials were a success and the army liked this vehicle as well, but in the end, the T-34/100 was never mass produced.LB-1 was developed with a reduced recoil and they mounted this gun on the T-34 as well, this helped with the suspension issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After some modifications the stress on the suspension was lower. The trials were a success and the army liked this vehicle as well, but in the end, the T-34/100 was never mass produced.LB-1 was developed with a reduced recoil and they mounted this gun on the T-34 as well, this helped with the suspension issues.


That's great then.

Gib LB1 pls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great then.

Gib LB1 pls.

They also fired 1000 rounds from the LB-1 while it was fitted to the T-34.

LB-1 gun was tested, with 1000 rounds fired and over 501 km driven with this tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...