Katyusha Effectiveness

"Information

Enemy soldiers on our artillery and mortars (based on interrogations of POWs, journals and letters of German and Hungarian troops)

POW Unteroffizier Franz Georg Lamus (222nd Infantry Regiment, 1st battalion, 4th company) says the following on the power of Russian weapons:

"Russia has many weapons. There are powerful airplanes. This goes against the stories were were told that the Red Army is poor and has nothing. The Stalinorgel (Katyusha) has the greatest effect on troops. When the mortar fires 42 shots everything living in the vicinity of the explosions burns. The sound of the explosions also has a negative effect on the morale of troops."

Big Dreams, Small Chassis

Despite the difficulty with which the Soviet T-40 amphibious reconnaissance tank entered production, designers considered the platform quite promising. The T-40 chassis would be used to produce the GAZ-22 artillery tractor, which would eventually replace the Komsomolets. The fact that the T-40 was also seen as an SPG platform was less well known. Most of the designs remained on paper, but at least one was produced in a small batch.

KS-77: M-8 on T-40 Chassis

"Meeting minutes for the technical meeting on the issue of producing the first batch of the KS-77 vehicle.

Moscow, Compressor factory, October 7th, 1941

Present:

• Factory director, M.I. Boganov
• NKOM TO Chief, P.F. Ostapchuk
• NKOM TO Deputy Chief, I.S. Zakharov
• Deputy director for special production, I.A. Dorozhkin
• Chief engineer, V.P. Barmin
• Chief of the 1st Section, 3rd Department of the GUVMCh, Military Engineer 2nd Class, comrade Kopylov
• Central Committee of the VKP(b) instructor, comrade Volkov
• Military Repersentative from the GUVMCh, Military Technician 1st Class, comrade Usachev

Conclusions:

The Other M-30

"Technical data of the M-30 303 mm HE (chemical) rocket

Parameter	Tested variant	In production
Total weight	82 kg	76 kg
Mass of explosive (nitrol)	27 kg	21 kg
Mass of poison (Yperite)	24 kg	21 kg
Volume of explosive or poison chamber	18 L	16 L
Range	2550 m	3000 m

World of Tanks History Section: New Life for Rockets

Using a rocket against a tank is very tempting. Rockets can carry a powerful warhead and can be launched without an expensive barrel: all you need is a rail. In the 1930s, Soviet pilots were already using rockets to fire at enemy planes.

During the Great Patriotic War, an attempt was made to use rockets to destroy German tanks, but it turns out that this wasn't so simple.

Failed Trials of 1941

A report on the first day of trials held at the Sofrino proving grounds on August 6th, 1941, can be summarized in one sentence: "Since the trials were performed at night, the rockets were not found." The trials were done to determine the precision of the rockets, and it's very clear that the results did not impress the testers.

The next day was more productive, since it was possible to find the rockets. It turned out that firing and hitting are two different things. The horizontal dispersion of the rockets launched from a kilometer away reached 50 meters. It was clear that hitting a tank at this distance was not possible, but the trials had to establish the effect of a rocket on an armoured plate anyway.

The plate was placed at 200 meters, and five rockets were launched, none of which hit. Testers once again wrote about the large dispersion and moved the target to 100 metres. Here, they got lucky: one of two rockets hit the plate and left a small dent. This was enough for GAU, but its workers were specialists. Others were specialists in the field of imagination. Today, these kinds of people write books about people going back in time and changing the course of history. Since no one though of that genre yet, all they could do was flood the State Committee of Defense with letters, or even send them directly to Stalin.

Mikhail Mil's Rocket Gun

In October of 1942, engineer Mikhail Leontyevich Mil was working as an assistant for Chief Engineer Nikolai Ilyich Kamov at factory #290. The reader may recall that these two reached glory as the creators of domestic helicopters, but that was several years later. In 1942, Mil presented a proposal for an anti-tank gun that fired 82 mm RS-82 rockets.

The designer promised that one soldier was enough to operate the gun. A special device was used to ensure that he would not be harmed by the exhaust, diverting it to the side.

The mass of the launcher was 14 to 20 kilograms, depending on whether it was installed on a tripod or a heavier mount. The effective range was the same as for a regular anti-tank rifle: 100-200 meters. Mil was certain that his specially designed anti-tank rocket could penetrate even heavy armour. Another advantage of the project was that production could be quickly set up in the Urals.

Interestingly enough, Mil's project was not pure theory. In his letter, he wrote that "Since this proposal was made (August 15th, 1942) the author, with the assistance of comrade S.V. Paskhin, made and tested 3 launchers. Trials showed the need for improvements, which are being done now."

Workers of the sorting department at the Commissariat of Defense were experienced judges of proposals. This one didn't seem like lunacy, so it was forwarded to the GAU. There, specialist studied Mil's proposal in more detail and responded that "the odds of hitting a 3 meters wide and 2 meter tall target are 3.4%, which means that out of 100 rockets launched, no more than 4 will hit. Due to this fact, development of comrade Mil's proposal is not productive."

Rocket Guns and a Self Guided Mine

There were three projects for rocket guns: Mil, Mil-Paskhin, and Kamov-Korotkih. While the negative response made its way to the Urals, all three types were assembled and tested. It's not hard to predict that the trials confirmed the suspicions of the artillery specialists. The rockets missed constantly.

Despite GAU's rejection of factory #290's proposals, the engineers kept working on them on their own initiative. N.I. Kamov informed Moscow of this in 1944. He noted that the weapon is reliable and harmless to the shooter. Kamov also presented his ideas about why the rockets don't fly straight and how to improve on that.

"Since many military leaders consider having this weapon for infantry very useful, I thought about this issue and came to the following conclusions:

1. The poor precision of the weapon is caused by random chance in the formation of the rocket jet.
2. Rotating the RS-82 rocket should neutralize that factor."

Kamov was ready to keep working on his guns, but no response from GAU was found in the archives. If there was one, it was likely that GAU informed Kamov that rotating the rocket would weaken the effect of the HEAT jet. By 1944, developers of domestic rocket launchers came to this conclusion themselves.

No story about rocket anti-tank weapons would be complete without the mention of another curious design. In late November of 1942, the SPTM self-guiding anti-tank mine designed by military engineer 2nd grade Rasskazov was tested at the GABTU proving grounds. The solution was simple and creative: a rocket propelled explosive charge was attached to a wire, hung across the road. A tank that hit the wire freed a pin, which would launch the rocket and hit the side of the tank.

Trials showed that the pin doesn't work very reliably. Out of 11 launches, it failed 4 times. In other cases, the rocket shot straight into a T-34's side. The penetrative power of the rocket was tested on PzIII and Pz38(t) tanks. While imperfect, its HEAT warhead reliably penetrated 30 mm of German armour.

The rocket was sent back to correct discovered defects. Whether there were some difficulties with that or some other factors came into play is unknown. While the SPTM did not make it into the Red Army, it can be considered a precursor to modern HEAT mines.

Original article available here.

World of Tanks Armoured Fantasy: BT with Rockets

In the 1930s and 1940s, military engineers were faced with a difficult task: how to give a light tank some heavy firepower? The BT-5 became the subject of these experiments.

For its time, the tank was well armoured and armed, but completely ordinary. In 1933, the chief of the Directorate of Mechanization and Motorization of the Red Army, I.A. Khalepskiy, ordered his engineers to turn this rank and file tank into an all-destroying armoured weapon. The goal was to "create a tank that carries 250 kg torpedoes, capable of destroying targets in the enemy rear."

150 kg from the sky

Tank torpedoes designed for the BT consisted of an aerodynamic hull with four stabilizing fins, filled with 130 kg of TNT. A light tank with a few of these rounds obtained colossal firepower. 250-TT torpedoes were primarily meant for destroying enemy fortifications, pillboxes, railroad structures, etc. Additionally, the BT could destroy enemy vehicles.

Engineers immediately raised several issues. For instance, if you mount a 400 kg weight on each side of the turret of a BT-5, can it still rotate? Will the launchers be sturdy enough? Finally, what will be the range or precision of the rocket? None of these questions could be answered with theoretical calculations, trials were necessary.

To start, engineers tested the hulls of the torpedoes in 1934-1935. 95 gunpowder charges were placed in the chamber and ignited. The hull held. It was time to try shooting from a mount. These trials were carried out at a proving grounds at Norislk.

The trials were carried out with six torpedoes, two were inert and filled with wet sand instead of explosives, the other four contained TNT. Trials showed that "the flight of all six bombs was correct and stable, the range when launched at an angle of 50 degrees is 1400-1500 meters." The four craters from the exploding torpedoes were measured to determine their power. The craters were 10 meters across and 4 meters deep on average.

Not good enough

It was time to shoot from the tank. On July 19th, 1936, a BT-5 with rockets mounted on the side arrived at the proving grounds at Podsolnechnaya station. The radiators on the rear of the tank were protected with special covers so they were not damaged by the exhaust.

The elevation was set manually, with a variation of 10 degrees. The first shot was fired with closed hatches, the second with opened hatches, to test the effect of the rocket exhaust on the crew.

The torpedoes flew correctly and were stable, with a difference in range of 100 meters, depending on the angle of elevation. The exhaust was deflected from the tank with no damage. The BT-5 turret could spin freely even with the torpedoes mounted. However, all was not as good as it seemed.

In order to zero in the torpedoes and create ballistics tables, many test shots were needed. Reloading the launchers was a risky task for the crew, who would have to exit the tank in the middle of the battle. A munitions carrier was supposed to partially resolve this problem.

Trials continued until November of 1936. Based on these trials, the commission composed a final list of drawbacks of the torpedo tank. The drawbacks were as follows:

1. Large and bulky launcher.
2. Decrease of the tank's combat performance.
3. Small amount of torpedoes carried on board.
4. Impossible to reload without leaving the tank.
5. Torpedoes are not protected from machinegun fire.
6. The projectile's range is short.
7. The initial velocity is low.

Work on the project ceased, documentation was classified, and sent to the archives. The torpedo BT never saw combat. However, six years later, an artillery instruction from Miassa proposed a more serious armament for the tank.

A humble artilleryman's rocket tank

A report from the Ural-based instructor A.P. Konstantinov arrived at the HR department of Guards mortar units in November of 1942. The inventor wrote that he developed a miniaturized M-8 launcher for the BT tank. In simpler terms, he decided to cross the BT and the Katyusha.

The design was initially targeting the T-34 chassis and was sent to the Kirov factory in Chelyabinsk, but the specialists there commented on a series of drawbacks and recommended that it should be adapted for the BT-7. Konstantinov did not know if these tanks were still in production, but he was too shy to write to GABTU, as he did not know anyone there. The report only arrived after it went through the hands of the rocket artillery branch.

The report contained sketches and a description of the launcher. Konstantinov proposed equipping all remaining BT-7s in the army, turning them into special purpose tanks. A company of these vehicles would be assigned to every tank brigade, with the following goals: "The tanks remain at our first line of defense as heavy and medium tanks attack. As the heavy tanks advance, the enemy will reveal his AT guns. Special purpose tanks will be used to suppress them, destroy the retreating enemy, and liquidate enemy counterattacks."

Konstantinov's BT-7 modernization consisted of 24 rails for 82 mm rockets, two sets of 12. During marches, the rails would be covered with armoured shields. This increased the silhouette of the tank, but also allowed it to carry infantry. The BT-7 is small, and can't carry many troops by itself.

In battle, the launchers would be moved left and right, to the sides of the tank. Aiming horizontally was done by turning the hull, controlled by the commander with his periscope. Elevation was set using a mechanism installed in the turret. 

Konstantinov completed his letter with an intriguing comment: "An M-8 round on a tank, with a range of 1000 meters can be as effective as a 122 mm HE grenade, for reasons that I will describe in following messages." However, no further letters arrives.

Did A.P. Konstantinov's project have potential? Doubtful. A year before his report, in the fall of 1941, specialists already tried to install an M-8 launcher, not on a BT-7, but on the T-40 amphibious tank. Trials showed unacceptable dispersion when firing at medium elevation angles. The T-40 rocket artillery project was shut down.

The idea of equipping a light vehicle with powerful armament was logical, but difficult to implement. However, the lack of rockets did not prevent BT tanks from fighting throughout the war and finishing it along many other vehicles that are much more widely associated with victory.

Original article available here. 

Katyusha Brigade

The following is an excerpt from a document for senior Red Army commanders, designed to help them plan operations.

"Composition and armament of  a Guards M-31 Mortar Brigade

Fire squadrons: 4
Supply squadron: 1

Squadron composition:

• Batteries: 3 (1 platoon, each with 12 launchers)
• Total in squadron: 36 launchers

Brigade composition:

• 144 M-31 launchers
• 1062 people
• 140 cars

Capability of the brigade:

• Brigade salvo: 1152 rockets in 5-7 minutes
• Salvo coverage: 1200x1000 meters
• Reload time: 2 hours
• Fortification time: 10-12 hours
• Ammunition capacity: one salvo (carried with launchers)
• Range: 4400 meters (4000 meters with improved precision rounds)
• Safe distance for infantry from exploding rounds: 400 meters

The Guards Mortar Brigade is applied in one piece in the direction of the main offensive in order to destroy the front line of enemy defenses.

The brigade column length during march is up to 8 kilometers.

Composition and armament of a Guards M-13 Mortar Regiment

• Fire squadrons: 3, 2 batteries each (1 platoon each, 4 launchers per platoon)
• Total launchers per squadron: 8
• Total launchers per regiment: 24
• People: 672
• Cars: 132

Capability of the regiment:

• Regimental salvo: 384
• Salvo coverage: 800x700 meters
• Reload time: 6-10 minutes
• Fortification time: 10 hours
• Ammunition capacity: 4 salvos (total 1536 shells) carried with launchers
• Range: 8470 meters (8000 meters with improved precision round)
• Safe distance for infantry from exploding rounds: 300 meters

The Guards Mortar Regiment is applied in one piece in the direction of the main offensive in order to destroy field fortifications and enemy manpower both on the front lines and in depth of enemy defenses.

The regiment column length during march is up to 6 kilometers."

Horsing Around

"Decree of the State Committee of Defence
On the introduction of horse drawn M-8 rocket launchers

1. Accept the horse drawn convertible wheel/sled M-8 rocket launcher  into service. When producing new M-8 launchers, include all changes suggested by the Western Front.
2. Cease production of M-8 launchers on the ZiS-6 truck chassis as of November 15th, 1941 in favour of horse-drawn launcher production.
3. Have NII-45 (Kazan) organize assembly of horse-drawn M-8 launchers. Assembly of components should be organized in Kazan.
   The Chair of the Council of People's Commissars of the Tatar ASSR, comrade Gafiatulin, must organize the cooperation in production of components and ensure the production of 40 launchers in November of 1941, 100 launchers in December of 1941, and 120 launchers in January of 1942.

I. Stalin."

RGASPI 664-2-25

M-8-16 Rocket Launcher

"1.Report on the M-8-16 Launcher

The experimental M-8-16 launcher developed by NII-3 was brought to trials. The launcher is designed to cooperate with infantry and has the following design:

A one-axle trailer has 8 two meter long paired rails for M-8 rockets. The launcher has a horizon calibration mechanism composed of two elevation screws with pads. Vertical and horizontal aiming is achieved with elevation and traverse mechanisms. The launcher uses M-5 sights. The pyrotechnic trigger is of the new simplified type. The pyrotechnic charges are ignited with the stock trigger mechanism and battery, mounted on the launcher.

The experimental M-8-16 launcher weighs about 400 kilograms and is transported (according to NII-3 design) as a trailer behind a 1.5-ton truck with a full ammunition load and 5 more loads in the truck (80 rockets).

One volley consists of 16 rockets. The maximum range is 5300 meters. Angles of elevation: minimum 5 degrees, maximum 50 degrees. Horizontal traverse: +/- 5 degrees.

The M-8-16 launcher is designed mainly for rockets that use fast-burning (pyrocotton) gunpowder. Until these rockets enter mass production, the launcher can use standard M-8-16 rockets.

2. Purpose of trials

The purpose is to check the suitability of accepting the M-8-16 launcher into service in the Red Army.

3. Plan and methodology

1. Plan: The trials will be conducted according to the trials plan, approved by the deputy chief of the Main Directorate of Mortar Armament, Military Engineer 1st Class Kuznetsov. According to the program, the following goals were made:
1. Check the robustness of individual components during transport and firing.
2. Check off-road performance of the launcher on various roads.
3. Establish the time required to move from transport position to firing position and back. Check the convenience and speed of aiming horizontally and vertically. Establish the crew size necessary to service the launcher. 
4. Determine the safety of the crew during firing and the locations that they must be in.
5. Check the stability of the launcher after firing (movement as a result of firing).
6. Find design and production defects and determine how to correct them.
2. Methodology: 
1. Trials are conducted in battle conditions in the region of the 222nd Infantry Division in the region around Tashirovo.
2. The robustness of the launcher and off-road performance was established on the way to positions and during firing. 
3. The number of required crewmen, time from travel to firing positions, convenience and speed of firing, safety and crew placement, stability when firing, and design defects were determined during training exercises and combat. In total, M-8-16 launchers fired 4 volleys at the enemy in the village of Tashirovo and in the ravine north-west of Tashirovo. 
1. November 6th, 1941: The launcher was towed to the firing position on a highway by a 1.5 ton truck. The range was 4400 meters. The launcher fired 3 volleys are various targets. Before the volleys, 1-2 shots were fired to sight in.
2. November 7th, 1941: The launcher was towed by three horses, attached to a 45 mm gun limber. The range was 3700 meters. One volley was fired at enemy positions. Before the volley, 2 shots were fired to sight in.
   Fire correction and observation was done from an observation point 200-400 meters away from the target.

4. Results

1. Trials and reviews from commanders confirm the necessity of creating M-8-16 mortar units and including them into infantry regiments.
2. The experimental M-8-16 launcher mostly meets requirements, but has a number of design and production defects:
1. The suspension is inadequate (the wheels are too small), which limits off-road performance.
2. The design of the trails is unsatisfactory, which makes it difficult to move the system from travel position to firing position, especially calibrating the horizon. 
3. The sight mount is attached incorrectly, making it necessary to use a quadrant to aim vertically instead of the sight. It is not possible to aim at the most frequently used angles (the guides get in the way).
4. The turning and elevation mechanism handles are too far away from each other and not brought out far enough, which makes aiming inconvenient and requires help from another crew member.
5. There is no equipment to move and turn the launcher by hand (instructions, handles, straps).
3. The launcher can be transported both by a 1.5 ton truck and horses. The off-road performance when towed by a truck is limited only by the off-road performance of the truck. When towing with horses, a pair of artillery horses with a standard artillery rig.
4. 5 men are enough to service the launcher (commander, gunner, 3 loaders). The launcher can fire from a trench. While firing, the crew can stay 8-10 meters away to either side, either in cover or out.
5. The rockets disperse 200-400 meters away from the target as observed by forward observers, more than standard M-8 launchers.
   Mostly, when firing at 4400 meters at live targets, the rounds deviated 150-200 meters lengthwise and 200-250 meters widthwise.
   The movement of the system after firing is negligible, despite the poorly designed trails.

Conclusions:

1. Trials of the M-8-16 launcher in combat showed many positive points. The launcher is light, maneuverable, can be transported by horse, performs well on bad roads and off-road when escorted by infantry, can fire at targets inaccessible by regular M-8 launchers.
2. Tactically, it is reasonable to use M-8-16 launchers in batteries of 4, integrating them into an infantry regiment.
3. The following changes should be made to the design:
1. Replace the suspension with one similar to the 45 mm gun, or just copy that entirely. 
2. Add handles and straps to make turning and pushing the launcher by hand more convenient.
3. Design a crate similar to the 45 mm gun ammunition crate to store one volley worth of rockets (16 rockets). 
4. Design skis that can be attached to the launcher in the winter.
5. Change the horizontal calibration mechanism such that the launcher is supported by 4 retractable trails that can be quickly moved from travel position to firing position and back.
6. Reduce the weight to 250-300 kg without compromising the robustness of parts, with the requirement that a pair of artillery horses should be able to tow the launcher and limber.
7. Reduce the height of the launcher by 15-20 cm without reducing the clearance.
8. Make the following changes to the elevation and traverse mechanisms:
1. Replace elevation and traverse mechanism handles with flywheels.
2. Move the flywheels further out.
3. Their placement should be such that aiming can be done by one person.
4. The carrier and sight placement should allow for zeroing of the launchers. Have a removable aligner that can be attached to the guides.
9. In order to simplify service and get rid of problems associated with charging batteries in infantry units it is desirable to have mechanical pyrotechnic charges.

Summary:

The M-8-16 launcher, with the aforementioned changes, can be accepted into service with the Red Army and will be a powerful infantry support weapon in attack and defense."

RGASPI 664-2-25

Rocket Bike

If you've looked into the Soviet M-72 motorcycle, you would probably know that they put all sorts of stuff on top of it: machineguns, anti-tank cannons, light mortars. Today, you can add rocket launchers to that list.

"Report #6877
On the RUM-12 launcher trials

Objective: discover the feasibility of arming motorcycle troops with 82 mm rocket launchers.

Trials were carried out at the Sofrino artillery proving grounds on September 8th, 1941, following NII-3 #1454s directives signed on September 6th, 1941.

Trial details:

The RUM-12 was designed and assembled by factory #487. The launcher consists of a motorcycle with 12 stock aircraft 840 mm rocket rails mounted instead of the sidecar, equipped with pyropistols.

An aircraft ring sight is installed for aiming, as well as a shield to protect the shooter from gases and a control device to activate the pyropistols.

24 rockets were supplied by NII-3, of which:

1. 12 were equipped with TNT warheads and AM-a. detonators. The rockets were equipped with BPP 203/50-1/36-K propellant (22 rods per charge) and a 12 gram DRP primer.
2. 12 were equipped with sulfur warheads. An 18x33 mm TNT charge was inserted, and a stock AM-a detonator was used.

Conditions of trials:

Two groups were fired off to determine groupings.

1. 12 rockets with fast-burning BPP propellant. The rockets did not have ballistic caps on, and the vanes had additional rods welded to them. The angle of elevation was 3.5 degrees.
2. 12 rockets with stock nitroglycerin propellant. The rockets used ballistic caps and stock vanes. The angle of elevation was 3.5 degrees.

Results of trials:

Precision of rockets with fast-burning propellant:

Rockets fired	Acceptable shots	Elevation	Mean deviations						Average range
			Length (m)	Length (arc)	Width (m)	Width (arc)	Required
							Length	Width
12	6*	3.5 degrees	158.1	1/12	35.7	1/52	1/10	1/50	1854

* 6 shots were practice shots. The first tore off two rockets with the exhaust, deformed the vanes on some rockets, and punched through the detonator membrane on one of the rockets. In order to avoid the aforementioned problems, the rest of the shots were made from a partially loaded launcher (3-6 rockets).

Precision of rockets with regular nitroglycerin propellant:

Of 12 shots fired, 6 dipped, falling about 50 meters from the launcher. The other six were significantly scattered width-wise. The dispersion was not measured. No damage to vanes was observed, even thought the rockets were shot from a fully loaded launcher. One shot tore off a pyropistol, likely due to poor assembly at the factory.

During firing from both the first and second groups, the motorcycle was shifted sideways noticeably. The angle of elevation was altered negligibly.

Conclusions:

1. 82 mm rockets with fast burning BPP propellant can be effectively used by motorcycle forces, given that the AM-a detonator is replaced with another detonator (try using the GMVZ detonator).
2. Stock 82 mm rockets can also be used, but with reduced effectiveness, due to their tendency to dip when fired from short ground based launchers.
3. It is necessary to:
1. Increase the stability of the motorcycle.
2. Improve the aircraft ring sight. The sight supplied with the launcher could only be used with a quadrant, which had to be installed on the launcher itself, due to a lack of mounting surfaces on the sight."

CAMD RF 64-12200-12

Rocket Gun

Opinions that Soviet man-portable rockets were just a ripoff of the Panzerfaust because of no precursors are widespread, but there desire for such a weapon long predates it.

"To the State Committee of Defense, department of Military Inventions

From Engineer M.L. Mill
Bilimbay, Sverdlovsk oblast
P.O. Box #7

Proposal

I propose that the front use an anti-tank rifle that fires RS-82 rockets.

My proposal can be operated by a single soldier, lying behind the weapon. The exhaust gases are redirected with a special device.

The weapon can be produced in a light (tripod) and heavy (wheeled mount) configuration, and weighs 14 and 20 kilograms respectively. The weapon can fire accurately at the same ranges at which an anti-tank rifle is effective (150-200 meters).

A rocket with the same weight as the RS-82 that I have developed penetrates heavy armour at this distance.

It is important to note that the weapon can be produced quickly and easily in the Urals, as RS-82 and guide rail production has already started, and the production of mounts can begin rapidly.

This weapon can be applied against tank or against pillboxes to support infantry. Due to its light weight, it can be installed on light vessels and motorboats, firing at a range of up to 1000-1500 meters against concentrations of infantry, especially in mountain regions where transporting artillery is difficult.

As of the creation of this proposal, 3 weapons have been made by the author and comrade S.V. Pakhin and tested with live rounds, indicating that improvements need to be made, which we are in the progress of doing."

RGANTD 344-1-171,173

Of course, there are pictures, but only of the heavier wheeled version.

Not exactly RPG-like, but who knows that it could have become after a few iterations of design changes, if not for a rather unfortunate weakness.

"Conclusions on the proposal of Engineer M.L. Mill titled "anti-tank rifle that fires RS-82 rockets"

The idea of devices that fire RS-82 rockets at tanks and pillboxes is not new. Similar proposals have been made in the past. Some of them have been built, but were deemed ineffective.

The problem is that the RS-82 has such a significant spread that shooting them at tanks or pillboxes is senseless.

At a range of 200 meters, the horizontal mean deviation is 3 meters and the vertical mean deviation is greater still. At a vertical mean deviation of 4 meters, the odds of hitting a 3 meter by 2 meter target are 3.4%, meaning that out of 100 shots less than 4 will hit.

Because of this, comrade Mill's device is not useful.

Chief of the 2nd Department of the GUVGMCh CVGK, Engineer-Colonel Semenov

Senior assistant of the 2nd Department Chief, Engineer-Major Shor"

While the 3.4% figure is likely for that ambitious 1000-1500 meter range, 3*4 meters at 200 meters is still pretty significant. Interestingly enough, when Panzerfausts were examined by Soviet forces, the conclusion was similar: "With a maximum range of 60-100 meters, the Panzerfaust is not, and cannot be, a serious or effective anti-tank weapon." (CAMD RF 299-3067-91)

Panzerfaust, Russian Style

CAMD RF 233-2356-775 contains a laconic and rather interesting phrase in a paragraph describing the actions of the 2nd Infantry Battalion of the 598th Infantry Regiment. It seems that Captain Kolchanov found his 45 mm guns and 76 mm regimental guns unsatisfactory, and decided to stock up on some heavier firepower. The document reads: "Against enemy Panzerfaust operators, the battalion successfully used singular M-31 mortar rounds, which were carried up to the second or third floor of a building and fired at the enemy positioned across the street."

Thankfully, a little extra digging reveals more details about this tactic.

"Experience of direct fire by rocket artillery in the streets of Berlin

In street battles, when a solid front line is gone and enemy units are often found in individual houses and crossroads, the use of traditional artillery is impossible. Rocket artillery units used M-13, M-31 and captured 280 mm rounds to fire directly without launchers.

Considering the caliber and destructive force of M-31 rockets, their use was an effective measure against enemy concentrations.

Rockets were used to destroy all or parts of houses that contained enemy concentrations or impeded progress. The conditions of city fighting allowed for transport and installation of rockets 30-100 meters from enemy forces in a house window or wall breach. Aiming was performed with a primitive aiming device.

The effectiveness of M-31 rockets is achieved due to the following:

1. At short distances (30-100 meters), it is possible to hit a small target such as a smokestack, church cupola, window, or breach in a wall. Due to the destructive power of the rocket, the target is completely destroyed.
2. Using rockets to fire directly at the last minute allows our forces to eliminate the enemy or clear a path before the enemy has a chance to commit mobile reserves. The sudden and complete destruction has a great effect on enemy morale.

One advantage of rockets over traditional artillery is that moving large caliber artillery into a direct fire position is impossible, and indirect fire introduces the danger of hitting your own forces, whereas low caliber artillery does not achieve the desired effect. Another advantage is the possibility of using many rockets at once to destroy several targets. 

Massed use of M-31 rockets results in powerful and effective fire support for infantry units in cities. The use of this method is possible when:

1. There are concealed paths towards to front lines.
2. The target is 30-150 meters away.
3. The placement of rockets is done secretly and silently.
4. Cooperation with infantry is carefully and correctly carried out.

When preparing for fire support, assault teams encountered difficulties with transporting the rockets. Due to the presence of enemy soldiers with Panzerfausts and submachineguns in our rear, as well as fires, trucks carrying the rockets were forced to stop 900-1000 meters away from the front lines. The 130 kg rockets had to be carried the rest of the way by hand. In some cases, additional breaches had to be made in house walls. In places where the path of the rockets crossed the street under fire, the rocket was placed in a box, a rope was tied to the box, and thrown across the street. Soldiers would run across one by one and then pull the box across after them. In order to protect the rocket from bullets and shrapnel, the front part was covered with bricks. 

When the rocket was put into firing position 15-30 meters from the enemy, absolute silence and stealth was required. When any noise or movement was detected, the enemy would fire upon the position with Panzerfausts.

Horizontal aiming was performed with a primitive sight, consisting of one nail in the front of the mount and two nails in the rear. Vertical aiming was performed by stacking bricks and wooden beams under the rear of the mount. The mount was stabilized with wire in different directions. This held the mount in place during the process of firing, which improved accuracy. 

Since the exhaust jet was hot and highly pressurized, all doors and windows behind the rocket were opened, and all flammable objects removed. In order to prevent accidents, the detonator was placed in the basement or a distant room. Wires were run on the floor along the walls, and held with heavy objects every 1-2 meters. 

The firing position was camouflaged during setup by field-expedient means, and was removed several seconds before opening fire."

And of course, pictures!

Firing an M-31 rocket directly,

Firing an M-31 rocket upwards.

Firing an M-31 rocket downwards.

KARST-1

"Explanatory note on the project for supplementing the KV's armament with rocket artillery.

Over several years, since 1934, NII #3 worked on arming tanks with rockets. Despite several advantages of this type of armament, no real success was achieved, all work was limited to experimental projects and blueprints.

The main advantages of rocket artillery are:

1. Simplicity of use and production, both of the shell and weapon.
2. Low weight of the system.
3. Negligible cost of the launcher.
4. Lack of recoil or any other forces that happen as a result of using conventional artillery.

Drawbacks include reduced precision and lower muzzle velocity than with conventional artillery.

The conditions of modern war present an artillery system with many tasks. Rocket artillery cannot solve those tasks on its own. A tank armed with only rockets would be infeasible. A rocket launcher should be installed on a tank only as supplemental armament. 

The issue of installing supplemental armament on a tank exists as a result of striving to increase the firepower of a tank. Usually, this can be done as a result of increasing the gun's caliber or the amount of shots fired at once (or in a burst). Increasing the caliber results in increased recoil, which impacts the tank's stability, and also in a heavier gun, which decreases the tank's performance. The rate of fire is limited by the crew's physical capacity, which is confined to the cramped fighting compartment. Additionally, in battle, a burst of many shots is often desirable, which cannot be achieved with a conventional gun.

A simple and cheap rocket launcher can be installed on a tank in addition to existing armament, and fire a barrage in any desirable pattern.

In order to develop this theory, a project for additional armament for a KV tank has been developed. The main component is the rocket launcher (fig. 1, 1), a two-level design. Slots (4) are cut in the upper and lower level for the guiding fins of a rocket. Each rocket has two fins per side. The top level rockets (2) lie on top of the guide rail, the lower level rockets (3) hang off it. The rockets and launcher are the 132 mm type, already mastered by our industry. Both sides of the tank (fig. 2) have three of these launchers installed (1), for a total of six rockets (2,3). In total, the tank has 12 rockets. The rockets are contained in armoured casings (4), which have hatches in the rear and front walls (5,6), opened automatically before firing or manually from inside the tank. The front hatch (5) consists of two halves. The launchers are fixed at an angle of 5 degrees, which gives a range up to 1500 meters. The launchers are affixed on three carriers, two near the rocket casing (7), one near the front of the launcher (8). From the sides, the launchers are covered with armoured plates (9). 

Firing is performed using a remote control in the radio operator's compartment, on the left side of the hull. The control panel is connected to the electric launcher mechanism by an adapter. The remote allows the launching of a configurable number of rockets per burst (not simultaneously, but with a very short delay, depending on how fast the launcher flywheel is spun, all rockets are launched within one full rotation). The weight of this device is 1500 kg, which should not negatively impact the tank's performance.

Here is data on the rocket artillery mount for the KV tank:

• Rocket type: RS-132
• Caliber: 132 mm
• Rocket length: 1300 mm
• Explosive filler: 5 kg
• Number of shells: 12
• Total explosive: 60 kg
• Length of the system: 3000 mm
• Weight of the system: 1500 kg

This launcher does not require any special modifications, aside from the removal of extra tanks on the rear of the wing, the use of which in battle conditions is unlikely.

In this way, using a very simple 132 mm x12 rocket launcher, we can increase the firepower of the KV tank without at all weakening its primary armament.

The proposed project was developed by the scientific research department of the academy.

Enough parts have been shipped to us to assemble one rocket launcher system. Everything is ready to equip one of the academy's KV tanks. Approval from GABTU is needed to begin this work.

Scientific Research Department, Brigade Engineer Davidovich

Military Engineer 2nd grade, Aleksandrov"

CAMD RF 38-11355-693

Up-gunning the T-60

The T-60 tank was not particularly amazing when it was conceived, of which its designers were very much aware of.

CAMD RF 38-11355-338

"Conclusions

On the basis of the aforementioned information, the commission concludes that:

1. The 20 mm ShVAK gun with a coaxial 7.62 mm DT machine gun and an optical TMFP sight, mounted inside a T-40 turret successfully passed trials, and can be recommended for installation on the T-60 tank.
2. At the same time, the commission remarks that the 20 mm ShVAK gun in the T-60 turret does not solve the problem of increasing its armour piercing capability, especially against modern tanks with 15-20 mm of armour. The commission considers it necessary to work on more effective types of armament for the T-60 tank."

One of the ways that the firepower of the tank could have been increased was with a VJa 14.5 mm autocannon, but the project came around far too late in the tank's life to save it. The existing T-60s had to be used for something, and one proposal was that they would be used as AA tanks.

CAMD RF 38-11369-115

"February 1943

The State Committee of Defense decrees that:

1. GBTU KA is allowed to re-arm all T-60 tanks that undergo capital repairs at GBTU repair factories #2 and #8 with dual 12.7 mm AA DShKT machine guns, built by the Gorkiy Molotov Automotive Factory.
2. GBTU KA is allowed to correct repair plans in accordance with the updated schedules that allow for re-armament.
3. The People's Commissar of Tank Manufacturing (comrade Zaltsmann) and factory #177 director (comrade Volkov) must manufacture and supply factories #2 and #8 with turrets and gun mantlets made by the blueprints of the Gorkiy Automotive Factory in the following amounts:
1. April: 50
2. May: 50
3. June: 100
4. The People's Commissar of Armament (comrade Ustinov) and NKO (GAU KA) must manufacture and deliver 12.7 mm machine guns to GBTU repair factories #2 and #8:
1. 12.7 mm DShKT (according to GAZ blueprints)
2. Magazines for 12.7 mm DShKT machine guns (6 magazines per machine gun), 42 rounds in capacity.
3. K-8T collimating sights.
4. TMFP optical sights.
5. Foot operated firing mechanisms for the guns.
   In amounts that satisfy manufacturing requirements of the Red Army GBTU.
5. The People's Commissar of Medium Manufacturing (comrade Akopov) and the director of the Gorkiy Molotov Automotive Factory (comrade Livshitz) must:
1. Manufacture and supply to GBTU repair factories #2 and #8
1. Turning mechanisms
2. Elevation mechanisms
3. Collimating sight rod with carrier, assembled
4. Gun trunnions
   In amounts that satisfy manufacturing requirements of the Red Army GBTU.
2. Design blueprints for installation of a turret with a Gorkiy AA gun mount on the T-60 by March 30th, 1943, and provide them to GBTU KA and GAU KA for confirmation by April 5th, 1943."

T-60 with two DShK 12.7 mm machineguns (photo from Yuri Pasholok's collection)

Or, you can always go in a radically different direction... 

Artillery T-34 and KV

I talked about mortars on a T-34 before, but this is an even more ambitious project. A 400 mm mortar was to be installed on a T-34.

CAMD RF 38-11355-693

The mortar would be transported facing forwards, but could only fire facing to the side, with spades deployed. Otherwise, the massive recoil would destroy the T-34 chassis.

CAMD RF 38-11355-693

The T-34 plan was, technically, just a backup. The main bearer of the 400 mm mortar was to be the KV-1S. The chassis weighed 37 tons. The mortar would weigh 50 tons. Just as with the T-34, the spades are present, since even the more robust KV chassis could not take that kind of recoil.

Neither project progressed past the blueprint stage.

There was another failed plan to make a KV-1 into an artillery platform, this one using Katyusha rockets. 

CAMD RF 38-11355-693

While the rockets were traditionally used for indirect fire, there were several situations where the rockets had to be aimed directly at enemy tanks, with great effect. This project was also never built.