"To the Chief of the GBTU Tank Directorate, Engineer-Colonel comrade Blagonravov
I additionally report on the issue of quality of M4A2 tanks with modernized suspension. After informing the Americans that M4A2 tanks with serial numbers less than #64926 have defective tracks, serial numbers of tanks in possession of the 16th OTP and the department were checked.
As of May 25th, 1945, the department and regiment have a combined total of 177 M4A2 tanks with modernized suspensions. All 177 tanks have serial numbers below #64926. These are the tanks whose tracks are considered defective.
Inspection of the markings on the track links was performed. It was determined that each track consists of links of various brands. The track links in one track are not of uniform brand.
Track links are marked as follows:
- D80073 CC
- C 135 866 E
- CWC
Track links of the third brand have a number underneath the W: 7, 8, 9, or 10.
During trials of M4A2 with serial number #64525 and registration number 30122505 a track link with the marking D80073 CC broke. This track link also had an old crack through 80% of the eye. This occurrence confirms that track links marked D80073 CC are not reliable.
Markings on broken track links that were observed by the 16th regiment earlier were not recorded, as the need for this only arose after receiving reports of low quality of CC branded track links.
I consider that until information from the USA arrives on the specific brand of tracks that is considered reliable, all 177 M4A2 tanks need to have their tracks replaced.
At the same time, I report that new track links for M4A2 tanks with modernized suspensions have not yet arrived to URT warehouse #37.
I ask for your direction on the aforementioned issues.
Chief of Military Acceptance of Imported Armament, Engineer-Colonel Davydov."
Must be M4A2 76mm HVSS
ReplyDeleteOne would think that the Soviet's would just remove the cracked track links and replace them. If worse comes to worse they could sacrifice a few tanks and use them for spare parts.
ReplyDeleteI imagine they did, but sending back this info would be important for QA at the manufacturer.
DeleteDat34 Considering the late date in the war I was wondering if the Soviets were just looking for a excuse to get out of the lease agreement. All that steel melted down could be valuable.
DeleteThe agreement was that any tank destroyed in battle was not paid for, so they just could have said the tanks blew up rather than make up excuses.
DeletePeter Samsonov To be fair the European war ended on May 8th. Although I recall other allies just destroying their Lend Lease equipment to get out of the deal. So I think you are right. I suspect due to the long logistic line to the Pacific front, that the Soviets preferred to standardize on Soviet equipment.
DeleteQuite a few Shermans fought in the Far East, including some HVSS ones. The Far Eastern Front forces were largely equipped with obsolete tanks like T-26es and T-37s, so as many modern tanks as possible would have to have been shipped there very quickly before the start of the war with Japan.
Delete