During the Second World War, a huge number of tanks were created in each of the countries participating in the conflict. In Germany, the USA and the USSR, over 5 years of conflict, several generations of armored vehicles managed to change at once. Moreover, if you look at most of the Soviet tanks, and then compare them with German tanks and assault guns, you will notice that the former have almost no muzzle brakes on the barrel. Why?
On the T-34, T-60, KV series, the guns did not have muzzle brakes. In fact, the only tank "burdened" with this structural element was the IS-2 and those that followed it. Even the SU-85 self-propelled gun does not have a muzzle brake. At the same time, most Soviet anti-tank guns still have it, and the SU-76 also has it. The Germans have much better muzzle brakes. Only the Pz. Kpfw. III and early Pz. Kpfw. IV. The later modifications of the "Panzer", including the "Tiger" and "Panther", have a muzzle brake, as well as the anti-tank models of the StuG III assault gun. For the Americans, things were similar. The early Sherman tanks did not have brakes on the barrel, while the later Easy Yite models did.
What was the reason for such an ambiguous attitude towards the muzzle brake on tank guns during the Second World War? In fact, everything is quite simple. In most cases, there was no need for a muzzle brake, because the main thing why it is needed is to reduce the recoil of the gun. The more powerful the weapon is, the more recoil it has and the more noticeable the "walking" at the moment of the shot. The stronger the gun, the more space its carriage takes up. The problem of increasing the gun carriage is partially eliminated by adding a muzzle brake. However, if the gun is weak, then there is no point in it.
Look at modern tanks: it will be difficult to find a car among them without a muzzle brake. This is also because modern vehicles are equipped with guns, which during the Second World War were comparable in power and firing range with the most serious anti-tank artillery. They have calibers of 120 millimeters or more. And what about the tanks of the late first half of the 20th century? Soviet T-34s were armed with 76 and 85 mm guns, American Shermans fired from 75, 76 and 105 mm guns. The German Panzer 4 used 75 mm guns of various models. There were, of course, exceptions, but in most cases no brakes were installed on such calibers.
>>>>Ideas for life | NOVATE.RU<<<<
Affected by the practice of using a muzzle brake and something else. In the first half of the 20th century, it was believed that the use of the brake would unmask the tank, since most of the gases would fly in different directions when fired. With a cannon without a brake, most of the gases escape into the interior of the tank. Thus, each type of implement design has its own pros and cons.
If you want to know even more interesting things, then you should read about napalm on caterpillars: how flamethrower tanks appeared and why they are not in service today.
A source: https://novate.ru/blogs/020821/60011/
IT IS INTERESTING:
1. Voice of Victory: why the famous announcer Yuri Levitan was removed from the air in the post-war period
2. Makarov pistol: why modern models have a black handle, if in the USSR it was brown
3. How a huge ship manages to stay at a relatively small anchor in the current