Talk:SU-76

Military history: Land vehicles / Technology C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military land vehicles task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force

Popularity

It was never very popular with its crews; it had very thin armour, and was one of the few Soviet AFVs not to have full armoured coverage. The open rear made it very unpleasant to serve in during harsh weather, and made it vulnerable to small arms fire and grenades. The driver's station was adjacent to the engines without a bulkhead which was unpleasant in summer. Its nickname in service was 'Suka' which was both the diminutive form of its acronym SU (pronounced 'soo' by the troops), and the Russian word for 'bitch'.

—Zaloga, Steven J., James Grandsen (1984). Soviet Tanks and Combat Vehicles of World War Two, p 159. London: Arms and Armour Press. ISBN 0-85368-606-8.

Naked-assed Ferdinand

relatively thin armour in the back

Practically all SU-76 had an open back. —Michael Z. 2006-08-20 05:06 Z

All SU-76s had a partially armored back!ModelFun (talk) 16:13, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SU-76i

Should try to add a picture of the SU-76i. This variant was based on captured German PzIII and StgIII chasis.

That was a completely different vehicle, however. They don't even share the same gun. I'd suggest the two be kept separate - with wikilinks to each other, of course, but in separate articles. Regards, DMorpheus (talk) 13:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some issues

Maximum indirect fire range was nearly 13 km, not 17. This article is very similar to an English Summary from Wydawnictwo Militaria 260 (Tank Power vol. XXXVI). Basically, only some words were changed. Mircea87 (talk) 12:46, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

End the unnecessary sarcasm

"Crews loved this vehicle for its simplicity, reliability, and ease of use, affectionately calling it suka ("bitch"), Suchka ("little bitch") or Golozhopiy Ferdinand ("bare-arsed Ferdinand") for its layout which recalled the massive Porsche-designed German tank hunter."

Yeah. Someone should do something about that.

Very "funny" whoever wrote that. I can easily quess that your right arm Triceps brachii muscle dont lack any exercise.

Been removed. Wiki writer in knowledge (talk) 19:23, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rem Nikolaevich Ulanov

Seems odd to state that Rem Nikolaevich Ulanov is famous, and then give no explanation for his fame (or even link to a full article on him). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.65.103.250 (talk) 20:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DT machine gun

Article info box currently lists the DT machine gun as a secondary weapon. Most other tertiary sources I've read state that the 76.2mm was the only weapon. This may need to be changed for the article. Whyme943 (talk) 09:25, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, ALL Russian sources (including factory blueprints) mention that as an additional weapon for SU-76, a DT machine gun was used, mounted on a folding bracket inside the fighting compartment to the right of the gun. ModelFun (talk) 16:20, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why not mention that it's crew called it cyka?

. just that 41.111.94.33 (talk) 19:27, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

122mm howitzer

"A similar vehicle called SG-122 existed, which was a similar Panzer III conversion, but armed with 122 mm M-30 howitzer. Only around 20 were converted, as the M-30 was considered an insufficient weapon for infantry support"

The 122mm howitzer was like, the standard Red Army infantry support field gun though the war, it was made in massive numbers. They used them in the SU-122. How is it conceivably "insufficient for infantry support"? The 76.2mm was considered a good gun, I don't see how a 122mm with no particular flaws could be worse, and I don't see what better alternative they had available. They didn't say "ah, this 122mm howitzer just isn't powerful enough for supporting infantry. So let's just not bother making any infantry support vehicles at all". They did make them, they made the SU-122, and used it extensively. They just didn't chose to use the Pz III chassis for this purpose. That's why they only built 20, not because they decided the 122mm wasn't good enough. Idumea47b (talk) 19:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Su85b" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Su85b has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 27 § Su85b until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 09:29, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]