T-34 with an autoloader

Source: Yuri Pasholok’s blog
Author: Yuri Pasholok

On 1st of August 1944, Ing-Maj. (military constructor rank) Barabash (we heard about him before) filed an application no. 8988atb for a patent for “a lift for automatic handling of artillery or one-piece shells”. Basically it was nothing else but an autoloader, fitted into a modified T-34 turret.

From the description, it is intended for the 76mm F-22 gun. Yuri Pasholok writes that the author was a bit late with this invention, as it was made for an obsolete gun, but nevertheless he did recieve a patent for it in 1946.


This could be fun in WoT :)

35 thoughts on “T-34 with an autoloader

    • …and what part of this thing looks like it would have ANYTHING in common with the “revolvers”, gameplay-wise?

      And yeah, the A-43 is a prity cool tank and doesn’t afraid of anything.

  1. This would make A-43 actually usable. As it stands now its just a huge pile of junk, probably worse than ARL V39.

    • No, it’s just you. That thing is probably the best “light cavalry” tank currently in the game.

      • My Cromwell and VK 3002 M contradicts you.

        IMO…they’re almost the same…a piece of jewel in their nation tech-tree.
        Cromwell…fast, no armor, low accuracy.
        VK3002…not that fast, has “some” armour and great accuracy.
        And the A-43 is something in-between them.

        • *shrug* Wasn’t too fond of either of those, personally, but matter of taste I guess. COMFORT was certainly superior to the “A” though but then that’s to be expected.

      • Yeh, paper generals ahoy! And then reality strikes…

        With 57mm you absolutely lack alpha damage (and pen), forcing you to fire gold ammo 24/7.
        With 76mm you lack accuracy, still have craptastic damage, and have horrible gold ammo.

        Thats with guns. Lets look at tank:
        armor that cant bounce anything (E8 can sometimes bounce an odd shot)
        no gun depression
        similiar mobility (granted, A-43 is tad more mobile)

        As a result A-43 can work only on 2-3 maps in this game (mostly city maps), and preferably against same tier. E8 can easily hull down/fight in rigid terrain; basically do the same stuff A-43 does plus much more.

        Sure i did get 3k damage versus tier8s in this tank, getting just short of 1600exp base, but thats one odd game, that doesnt change a thing: this tank blows hard. If you want to run circles around enemy heavies just buy E8 and additionally you will be useful on few other maps.

        Its just bad, and looking at stats alone wont tell you that unless you actually take it out to the field.

        • (EDIT)
          Aaaand if you really want a fast tank other than E8 you can easily pick Cromwell, which does same stuff A-43 can and much more.

        • Errrrrr…
          E8: 76mm M1A1 acc 0.4 aim 2.3s
          A-43: 76mm S-54 acc 0.41 aim 2.3s
          …and literally identical RoFs.
          “Lack accuracy” my foot, L2Aim. I’ll give you the E8 has better prem shells (DAT SOVJET BIAS) and, naturally, superior COMFORT but then conversely the A-43 is a fair bit smaller and faster. Personally I came to regard it more as a “super light” than a “medium” in the normal sense (in the same manner as how the T32 is a “super medium” more than a “heavy”) – zip in, spot & shoot up stuff, relocate elsewhere and repeat if necessary.
          …it was actually a medium I would pretty confidently try soloing a KV-1S in, and often enough get away with it too.
          ‘Course as far as I’m concerned the main point of the exercise was to reach the LOL So Weird(tm) A-44 (tentative personal nickname: “the Lancer”), that the grind was painless was just a bonus.

          • Identical guns? Remind me, can A-43 use vertical stab? AFAIK it changes the gun efficiency quite drastically… thought so.

            And you are still throwing out “smaller and faster” forgetting that E8 has HUGE advantage thanks to gun depression and decent mantlet.

            BTW: if “kellomies” is your in game account, you dont really have any stellar results on A-43 to back up your words on how “good” it is.

            • A-43 trades gun mantlet armor and gun depression of the E8 for a better aim time (1.9), more speed, and smaller size. The on the move accuracy is pretty good too, can’t compare it to the E8 right now because I don’t have any stats on hand right now.
              But you’re severely underestimating the A-43, it’s an amazing tank for a different role compared to the E8. It’s basically a light tank with better matchmaking, and armor that can ding stuff occasionally. In no way a bad tank, check out my stats with it, I’m not lying, lol.

            • The Murricans are the only ones who can get V-Stab at T6 anyway – it’s one of their “national schtiks” – so that’s hardly an argument; I got by well enough on GLD and crewskills, personally. Personally I always replace that one with the Stab once it becomes available but it’s good enough until then.

              And if you’re THAT hung up on gundep you basically have no business in the Soviet tree anyway; with very few exceptions theirs range from “poor” to “abysmal”, and you either Deal Wit It or GTFO. The A-series turret is surprisingly bouncy though, and while the weird commander cupola (which seems to have a pair of SMGs in it for maximum WTF) tends to draw fire it pretty much has a 4+ Troll Save due to the two thick “disks”.
              Basically, apples and oranges. You don’t drive Soviet tanks like Murrican/British ones, period. (You can TRY ofc, but dismal failure is likely to result.)

              As for my perfomance, uh-huh. I cleared the grind to the A-44 in 79 battles with ~56% win rate I’d point out, with a rookie crew who started their careers in the T-34 for the purpose; while it obviously hastened things that I had the guns, radios and engines res’d previously (the A’s share those with the KV line) that’s still fast enuff in my books. Actually… looking at them my stats with it seem to be on the whole slightly better than my average, though as a rule of thumb I regard under ~100 battles as too small a sample to be really significant anyway.

            • Ooo, V-stab. Hmm, lets see:
              Dispersion factor on top suspension of M4A3E8 = 0.19
              So with Vstab its 20% less = 0.152
              Dispersion factor on top suspension of A43 = 0.16

              Hmm, so I can drive A43 _not use Vstab_ but for example vents and _have practically the same accuracy on the move_ as M4A3E8 with Vstab taking up a slot for module? Russian bias!

            • Yes, you are right.
              But both tanks are good to be honest, they are just different, which is actually great that there are different tanks with different characteristics.
              And although I hated A43 bad gun depression (T-34-85 has better) and I Really hated the shit bucket on the turret (the guns also could have been better to be honest) it was not the bad tank I was expecting to be. (finished it with ~1,230 avg dmg per battle (yes I did use gold ammo for tougher opponents, but I tried not to use it, that’s also why I used the 76mm gun that has some more regular ammo pen so I don’t have to use as much gold ammo)) (but if I would have to go for tier 6 medium I would go for some other one, with a better gun most probably)

        • You’re SOOOOO underestimating that tank, sure it looks garbage on paper but it’s actually a really good flanker with great DPM.

    • You must be playing it wrong then.

      Try the S-54 instead of the ZiS-4. Made a world of difference for me.

    • Idk, it looks like it can feed quite interchangeably from both the central “well” and the bustle stacks…

      • It appears to be 36 rounds per magazine (counting the bottom row, I don’t know about interchangeability, but it seems that the 2 magazines in the rear of the turret can at least be hand fed into the breech quite easily, if one so desires, and the loader is small enough….

        • This looks like a pretty straight adaptation of the man’s earlier KV autoloader, and that one definitely could feed from the bustle too. This one seems to have the same “conveyor” under the stacks and presumably duly retains the associated loading mechanism.

  2. Since, as far as the Soviet military cares, Tanks of this period are disposable, if slightly less disposable than crews, this is too much an investment in ammo since many tanks will not live long enough to to use up the ammo stock they were delivered with. A very spectular ammo rack explosion waiting to happen. WG will have to get a much better graphics engine to do it justice.

    • Tanks of this period were T-34/85s and IS-2s, so anything involving a 76mm on nigh any platform was too much of an investement by default.

  3. Hmm…this could work in the game, I think. It would give the T-34 a couple of decent options (the other being the 57 mm gun, which is a fast-firing, low-damage sniping weapon) to be able to better-compete with the M4 Shermans and Panzer IVs with their 105 mm howitzers.

    • Forgot to add something to this.

      Compared to the earlier article about an autoloading KV-1, this could work, but the KV-1 with an autoloader wouldn’t because it doesn’t need it at all (plus the 76 mm stock gun is insufficient for a Heavy tank anyway), whereas the T-34, while it doesn’t NEED it either, it would be a nice option to have against M4s and Panzer IVs.

  4. To be honest this “blueprint” looks rather fake to me. A single drawing without a lot of details, some smudges added here and there, just saying. All of a sudden so many new designs appear. Of course I could be wrong, but I have some doubts. Are there some more detailed sources anywhere available?

    • You want details, click the link. It’s pretty much the exact same system as the good Major devised for KVs.