Tank Recovered From Lake (1 Viewer)

[Njja]

Here are some cool shots of the Russian T-34 captured by the Germans and

reciently recovered from the lake. Pulled out by a piece of Russian heavy

equiptment.

Coming out

 

[Njja]

Pulling a 30 ton tank filled with mud out of the lake!

 

[Njja]

Back to life, quite an accomplishment!

 

[Njja]

Check out the condition, and the German markings on the captured Russian

tank.

 

[Njja]

Looks like a scene from 1944 all over again!

 

[Njja]

Ready to be cleaned up (motor rebuilt) and placed in a Museum.

 

[Njja]

Final shot with crown watching action.

Link to photos came from Sierra Toy Soldier monthly newsletter, a terrific

story for all military miniature enthusiasts.

Njja

 

[Panzer]

Njja

Thanks for sharing. Amazing how well preserved this tank is!

Semper Fi!
Rick

 

[jazzeum]

This has been previously discussed, see Russian Tank

 

[Njja]

Oops I must have missed that thread!!


Njja

 

[boot51]

Oops I must have missed that thread!!


Njja

Everyone's entitled to an oops now and then. Nice pictures, John, that T34 looks in great shape for 60 years in a lake.

 

[Njja]

Yes I thought it was in great shape also. I was amazed how the Russians

recovered it from the lake. We would have brought in a hugh crane and

lifted it straight up out of the lake, and deposited it on a waiting flatbed.

The Russians bulldogged it through the mud and ripped it right out of the

lake an up the hill! They are really something! I'm quite suprised they put

landing gear on their airplanes!!

Njja

 

[bsager]

John,
I could rear that story a million times and not be bored! I would love to see a series done about this tank. Say from beginning to end with the overhaul and history, whatever they know, about the tank. This would make for a good film or book.
Thanks,
Bill

 

[sceic2]

Yes I thought it was in great shape also. I was amazed how the Russians recovered it from the lake. We would have brought in a hugh crane and lifted it straight up out of the lake, and deposited it on a waiting flatbed. The Russians bulldogged it through the mud and ripped it right out of the lake an up the hill! They are really something! I'm quite suprised they put landing gear on their airplanes!! Njja

The US military almost always would have hardened surface runways. The planes were mostly capable of landing on unfinished runways, but to maintain the aircarft in better combat condition, hardened surface runways were preferred 90% of the time. The SeaBees would spend whatever it took to make airfields with steel mesh runways on a coral base throughout the Pacific Theater. The US would spend a small fortune where ever we built, and continue to build, runways.

The Russians would not even cut the weeds growing around their buidlings let alone maintain hardened surface runways. Most Soviet airfields, except for the Strategic Bomber Force, would be grass. All of their aircarft were designed with some of the strongest undercarriages in history. USN aircraft have to have reinforced undercarriages to survive a carrier landing, but the Russians were designed to survive an airfield landing. Their landing gear was typically the strongest part of the aircraft. Take a look at some Russian aircraft pictures, on the ground, and you will more than likely see nothing but weeds and dirt. I would compare the US and Russian aircraft to something like a Porsche (US) to a dump truck (Russian).

Michael

 

[Louis Badolato]

I would love to see this T34 in person. What an amazing story!

 

[GREG]

this web site has more russian tanks.www.geocities.com/military_archeology/tanks.htm

 

[Louis Badolato]

Greg,

Thanks for the link! Apparently there have been quite a few well preserved Russian tanks recovered in recent years. Its amazing that those two were found with nearly full loads of ammunition. The article doesn't mention it, but I sure would feel nervous removing live ammunition that had been in a bog for 60 years!

 

[OzDigger]

The US military almost always would have hardened surface runways. The planes were mostly capable of landing on unfinished runways, but to maintain the aircarft in better combat condition, hardened surface runways were preferred 90% of the time. The SeaBees would spend whatever it took to make airfields with steel mesh runways on a coral base throughout the Pacific Theater. The US would spend a small fortune where ever we built, and continue to build, runways.

The Russians would not even cut the weeds growing around their buidlings let alone maintain hardened surface runways. Most Soviet airfields, except for the Strategic Bomber Force, would be grass. All of their aircarft were designed with some of the strongest undercarriages in history. USN aircraft have to have reinforced undercarriages to survive a carrier landing, but the Russians were designed to survive an airfield landing. Their landing gear was typically the strongest part of the aircraft. Take a look at some Russian aircraft pictures, on the ground, and you will more than likely see nothing but weeds and dirt. I would compare the US and Russian aircraft to something like a Porsche (US) to a dump truck (Russian).

Michael

To be honest Michael I'd much prefer to fight from a dump truck than a Porsche And don't forget the P-47 (Thunderbolt, Juggernaut, Jug), it was the dump truck of the skies, and could take more damage than most other US fighters. The Russians built their weapons simple for reliability, speedy production and repair, and of course their airfields weren't kept 'clean' to improve the camo aspect.