WI: No T-34?
- Thread starter Odyssey
- Start date
Ok then. But could delaying its development be possible? (as opposed to removing from the face of history completely)
Well, possible. Have comrade Koshkin get Stalin cross and it would retard the development of T-34. For how long remains speculation.
So we have the POD. But now, we need to know its effects, like how long this delay would last... Anyone knows how long it could be?
Maybe have them persist with the multi-turreted monstrosities such as the T35 and T100?
Really though, I think a T34 analogue is inevitable as the war progresses. A cheap and fast tank to produce, well protected and well armed, whilst still fast and reliable - very much a product of lessons learned.
An interesting AH might be a reverse lend lease of a few hundred T34 to the UK...
Really though, I think a T34 analogue is inevitable as the war progresses. A cheap and fast tank to produce, well protected and well armed, whilst still fast and reliable - very much a product of lessons learned.
An interesting AH might be a reverse lend lease of a few hundred T34 to the UK...
There were alternatives to the design that ultimately became the T-34 - for instance, the A-20 design that met the initial requirements (20mm sloped armor, 45mm cannon, V-12 diesel, BT-style convertible wheel/track drive), rather than the uparmored, upgunned A-32 (or the T-34 itself, which had further increases to armor and widened tracks). One thing - the A-20 design was intended only as a BT-series replacement, with a separate design presumably replacing the T-26, while the A-32 (and T-34) replaced both types.
The problem is a few hundred wouldn't work, except as possibly a template for the British to reverse engineer it if they wanted to. The T34 was a "use it once and throw it away" tank. It ran for a few tens maybe a couple hundred miles then they were useless and replaced. Early models were also undergunned and had a small turret, no radio and relatively light armor. They were useful in masses to be replaced when they were killed, not exactly what the British needed. By the time the T34/85 came out the British had the Firefly and Churchill and the Soviets were not going to be sending their best tank to anyone - they needed every one they produced.
T34 was a great tank, in a war that produced many great tanks. If there hadn't been a T34/76 in 1941 the Soviets would have ended up with something like it in 1942 out of the BT series and the T34/85 equivalent would have followed on a similar time frame as OTL just from pressures of war. I can see it being delayed by 6-8 months by political maneuvering but once the shells start flying it becomes obvious what they need and the paper studies get translated to steel very quickly. And there are always paper studies...
If the T-34 is rejected, the T-50 will probably be accepted for service.
Or maybe the A-20?
The T-34 project was only one among many in Soviet tank development, as you can see from my links. The main Soviet tank will probably carry the 45mm gun longer, and perhaps be a bit lighter, but otherwise I don't see much difference.
Or maybe the A-20?
The T-34 project was only one among many in Soviet tank development, as you can see from my links. The main Soviet tank will probably carry the 45mm gun longer, and perhaps be a bit lighter, but otherwise I don't see much difference.
Well they are both more complex to build and support than the T34 so they probably end up in smaller numbers. Plus the T50 is a light tank so it is more of a step toward a T34ish tank than a direct replacement.
mowque
Banned
We can assume a less good T-34* though. And having a weaker tank would have some big butterflies. Even in the darkest hour of the Soviet invasion, the Reds could always lean on having a great machine. Take that away (or even just replace it with an average tank)? Bad things could happen.
Snake Featherston
Banned
It's pretty difficult to avoid the USSR deciding to invent sloped armor, if that's what you mean. And this might be cheating but suppose they invent a tank with sloped armor and a gun that outshoots any of the major Nazi armor? You can't do anything to Soviet armored doctrine before the war as this politically butterflies away WWII as we know it.
Butterfly away the SCW and the Ukrainian designers of the T-34 had a lot more problems to develop it. Some ideas they already had, but most of them were decided after reading the operations of the Soviet tanks there ( and many of those ideas were completely against then current Soviet doctrine, which considered the BT-1 "more than enough" )
However, if we had a scenario where there was no T-34, and instead the Soviets were forced to make do with a highly flawed design (something like having a Sherman tank equivalent in which they were mostly inferior than their opponents), then I still think that eventually the Soviets would win by sheer quantity, but there would be higher casualties and Bagration-like offensives would be smaller in scale. The war might last long enough that the Allies could use the A-Bomb on Berlin and that they would control the bulk of post-war Germany, including up to the Oder.