Talk:T-44

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

T-44 is part of the WikiProject Russian history, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Russian history. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] Recognition

On the picture it looks like a T34/76. The difference between the '85 and '76 is that the barrel on the '85 is stuck through a box protruding trough the turret glacis(?). The '76 turret glacis looks like it is crimped on the barrel. Just like the T44.

I know that in at least one book the two T34 models are mixed up. As a result there might also be the odd television program mixup.

The original 76.2mm-armed T-34 was built with many subtle variations of the turret design, from different factories and design revisions; some are angular, others more streamlined or curvaceous, but I think they all have the box shape on the mantlet. The T34/85 had a new, larger turret design with more rear overhang, although its easiest recognition feature is the long 85mm gun. The T-44 had another brand-new turret, very similar to the T-34/85's but still bigger. The T-44's hull and suspension are identical to the T-54/55's; look for the driver's hatch on the top of the hull instead of the front, and a gap between first and second road wheels. The T-34 has sloped rear armour with two exhaust pipes on it, while the T-44's is square and its exhaust port is on the left side of the hull. Michael Z. 2005-09-23 17:50 Z

Congratulations with the article! I was getting so vexed with the T-44 not being covered I was actually on the brink of writing one myself :o).--MWAK 15:15, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

I've had this one vaguely in mind for a long time, too. I just realized that I had enough info at hand to write a stub, and with a little more research time (or was that a lot of time?), filled it in quite a bit. After writing the response above, I decided I might as well add that to the article; recognition comes up a lot, and it's always seemed like something missing from WP AFV articles. Thanks for the note. Michael Z. 2005-09-25 16:00 Z
Yes, recognition is always a severe problem; I've even removed some M-60 pictures from the Leopard 2 article! (with the wrong name in WikiCommons) :o) Have you ever seen those old World War 2 Photo Albums by Bruce Quarry? They contained an incredible number of mistaken identities. I've added some production numbers from Zaloga's T-54 and T-55 Main Battle Tanks 1944-2004.--MWAK 06:57, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Use against Japan in Operation August Storm?

Soviet soldiers in Mongolia, before the invasion.
Soviet soldiers in Mongolia, before the invasion.

It seems likely that the T-44 was used in Manchuria in August 1945 in the Operation August Storm. The image on the page seems to show tanks which are not the T-34.

-- Petri Krohn 03:21, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

They are T-34's (look at the hull hatches). The turret of the first vehicle just looks strange because it has been retouched by someone incorrectly :o).--MWAK 11:23, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that too; what appears to be a big square hatch cover over the glacis. Wish I had a better scan of the photo to look at. It looks like they might have stowage or camouflage on top of the turrets, giving them a bloated look. The fenders are flat and square like a T-34's, but that's not a conclusive identification feature. Michael Z. 2005-09-30 15:46 Z
And the famous gap between the first and second road wheel is lacking...--MWAK 10:51, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Quite right. I would say these are definitely T-34s. Michael Z. 2005-10-1 20:20 Z