Main battle tank
|Place of origin||Soviet Union|
OKB-520 (T-54A and later)
|Manufacturer||KhPZ, UVZ (USSR),
ZTS Martin (Czechoslovakia)
|Number built||86,000–100,000+ est.|
|Variants||See Operators and variants section below|
|Weight||36 tonnes (39.7 ST)|
|Armour||hull front 100 mm @60°, turret front 205 mm (rounded), hull side 80 mm @0°, lower hull side 20 mm @0°, turret side 130 mm (rounded), hull rear 60 mm @0°, turret rear 60 mm (rounded), hull top 33-16 mm, turret top 30 mm, hull floor 20 mm|
|D-10T 100 mm rifled gun|
|7.62 mm SGMT coaxial machine gun, (12.7 mm DShK heavy machine gun)|
|Engine||Model V-55(V-54) V-12 water-cooled. 38.88-l diesel
581 hp (433 kW)
|Transmission||Mechanical synchromesh, 5 forward, 1 reverse gears|
|Ground clearance||0.425 m|
|Fuel capacity||580 l internal, 320 l external (less on early T54), 400 l jettisonable rear drums|
|Speed||48 km/h (30 mph)|
The T-54 and T-55 tanks are a series of main battle tanks (according to some sources) although not recognised as an MBT by Soviet and Russian sources, instead classifying them as medium tanks  (the very concept of "main battle tanks" was applied only to tanks beginning with T-64A, armed with 125-mm tank gun) that were designed in the Soviet Union. The first T-54 prototype appeared in March 1945, just as the Second World War ended. The T-54 entered full production in 1947 and became the main tank for armoured units of the Soviet Army, armies of the Warsaw Pact countries, and others. T-54s and T-55s were involved in many of the world's armed conflicts during the late 20th and early 21st centuries.
The T-54/55 series eventually became the most-produced tank in history. Estimated production numbers for the series range from 86,000 to 100,000. They were replaced by the T-62, T-64, T-72, T-80, and T-90 in the Soviet and Russian Armies, but remain in use by up to 50 other armies worldwide, some having received sophisticated retrofitting.
Soviet tanks never directly faced their NATO Cold War adversaries in Europe. However, the T-54/55's first appearance in the West in 1960 spurred the United Kingdom to develop a new tank gun, the Royal Ordnance L7 and the United States to develop the M60 Patton.
- 1 Development history
- 2 Description
- 3 Production history
- 4 Service history
- 5 Operators and variants
- 6 See also
- 7 Notes
- 8 References
- 9 External links
Predecessors: T-34 and T-44
The Soviet T-34 main battle tank of the 1940s is considered to have the best balance of firepower (76.2 mm gun), protection and mobility for its cost of any tank of its time in the world. Its development never stopped throughout the Second World War and it continued to perform well; however, the designers could not incorporate the latest technologies or major developments as vital tank production could not be interrupted during wartime.
In 1943, the Morozov Design Bureau resurrected the pre-war T-34M development project and created the T-44 tank. Thanks to a space-efficient torsion-bar suspension, a novel transverse engine mount, and the removal of the hull machine-gunner's crew position, the T-44 performed at least as well as the T-34, but with substantially superior armour. The T-44's main drawback was the small turret which remained incapable of mounting more powerful armament than its predecessor's 85 mm tank gun. A tank mounting a 100 mm gun was desired.
|This section needs additional citations for verification. (July 2009)|
Development of the first T-54 prototype started in October 1944 at the OKB-520 design bureau, at the Stalin Ural Tank Factory No. 183 (Uralvagonzavod), in Nizhny Tagil. The initial design was completed in December, with a prototype completed in February 1945.
Trials conducted between March and April 1945, resulted in the new tank being commissioned for service with the Red Army as the T-54. The tank had virtually the same hull and drive train as the T-44. Major differences included thicker front armour (120 mm on the upper section and 90 mm on the lower section) and a newly designed driver's hatch and vision slot. The turret ring increased in diameter to 1800 mm and had thicker armour (180 mm on the front, between 90 mm and 150 mm on the sides and 30 mm on the roof).
The main armament was the 100 mm D-10TK cannon, with two 7.62 mm GWT machine guns. The tank was powered by a new V-54 12-cylinder 38.88 litre water-cooled diesel engine developing 520 hp (388 kW) at 2,000 rpm with a two-stage reduction gearbox. Fuel capacity was increased to 530 litres in the internal fuel tank and 165 litres in the external fuel tank. Unlike the T-34, the external fuel tanks were connected to the fuel system. The rubber rollers on the road wheels were widened. The T-54 weighed 35.5 tonnes, making it slightly slower than the T-44 at 43.5 km/h. The road range increased to 360 km.
It was decided to modernize the tank before production started. The new tank's turret was tried on two modified T-44 tanks.
Another T-54 prototype, which received the alternative designation Ob'yekt 137, was built in July 1945. The tank was equipped with a new turret armed with 100 mm LB-1 tank gun and 7.62 mm SG medium coaxial machine gun. The turret armour was thickened (200 mm on the front, between 125 mm and 160 mm on the sides). The tank was armed with two 7.62 mm SG-43 medium machine guns mounted inside fixed boxes on the fenders, each with 500 rounds of ammunition and operated by the driver. The turret was fitted with a 12.7 mm DShK anti-aircraft heavy machine gun. The fuel capacity was increased to 545 litres in internal fuel tanks and 180 litres in external fuel tanks. Because of this, the road range remained 360 km despite the increased weight of 39.15 tonnes. This prototype went through trials between July and November 1945. Although there were numerous drawbacks, which required correction and many alterations that had to be made to the vehicle's design, it was decided to begin serial production of the new vehicle and the vehicle officially entered service on 29 April 1946. It would go into production in Nizhni Tagil in 1947 and Kharkiv in 1948.
Production of the initial series of T-54s began slowly as 1,490 modifications were made. The Red Army received a tank that was superior to World War II designs and theoretically better than the newest tanks of potential opponents. The 100 mm gun fired BR-412 series full-calibre APHE ammunition, which had superior penetration capability compared to the T-34 that it replaced.
The serial production version, designated T-54-1, differed from the second T-54 prototype. It had thicker hull armour (80 mm on the sides, 30 mm on the roof and 20 mm on the bottom). As production ramped up, quality problems emerged. Production was stopped and an improved T-54-2 (Ob'yekt 137R) version was designed. Several changes were made and a new turret was fitted. The new dome-shaped turret with flat sides was inspired by the turret from the IS-3 heavy tank; it is similar to the later T-54 turret but with a distinctive overhang at the rear. It also had a shorter bustle. The fender machine guns were removed in favour of a single bow-mounted machine gun. The transmission was modernized and the track was widened to 580 mm. The T-54-2 entered production in 1949, at Stalin Ural Tank Factory No. 183 (Uralvagonzavod). In 1951, a second modernization was made, designated T-54-3 (Ob'yekt 137Sh), which had a new turret without side undercuts, as well as the new TSh-2-22 telescopic gunner's sight instead of the TSh-20. The tank featured the TDA smoke generating system. A command version was built, the T-54K (komandirskiy), with a second R-113 radio.
T-54A and T-54B
In the beginning of the 1950s, the personnel of the OKB-520 design bureau of the Stalin Ural Tank Factory No. 183 (Uralvagonzavod) had been changed considerably. Morozov was replaced by Kolesnikow, who in turn was replaced by Leonid N. Kartsev in March 1953. The first decision of the new designer was to fit the 100 mm D-10T tank gun with the STP-1 "Gorizont" vertical stabilizer. The new tank gun received the designation D-10TG and was fitted into the T-54's turret. The new tank received night vision equipment for the driver and was designated T-54A (Ob'yekt 137G). Originally, this had a small muzzle counter-weight, which was later replaced with a fume extractor. It was equipped with an OPVT wading snorkel, the TSh-2A-22 telescopic sight, TVN-1 infrared driver's periscope and IR headlight, a new R-113 radio, multi-stage engine air filter and radiator controls for improved engine performance, an electrical oil pump, a bilge pump, an automatic fire extinguisher and extra fuel tanks. The tank officially entered production in 1954 and service in 1955. It served as a basis for T-54AK command tank, with additional R-112 radio set (front line tanks were equipped with R-113 radio set), TNA-2 navigational device, ammunition load for the main gun decreased by 5 rounds and the AB-1-P/30 charging unit, which was produced in small numbers. In October 1954 a T-54A tank, designated as T-54M (Ob'yekt 139) served as a testbed for new D-54T and D-54TS 100 mm smoothbore guns and "Raduga" and "Molniya" stabilization systems, which were later used in the T-62. These were not completely successful, so further T-55 development continued to use the D-10 series guns. It was fitted with V-54-6 engine developing 581 hp (433 kW). It never went into production.
A new version, based on T-54A, designated T-54B (Ob'yekt 137G2), was designed in 1955. It was fitted with a new 100 mm D-10T2S tank gun with STP-2 "Tsyklon" 2-plane stabilizer. It entered production in 1957. During the last four months of production, the new tanks were equipped with an L-2 "Luna" infrared searchlight and TPN-1-22-11 IR gunner's sight, and OU-3 IR commander's searchlight. Modern APFSDS ammunition was developed, dramatically enhancing the penetrative performance of the gun to keep it competitive with NATO armour developments. T-54B served as the basis for T-54BK command tank which had exactly the same additional equipment as the T-54AK command tank.
Trials with nuclear weapons showed that a T-54 could survive a 2–15 kt nuclear charge at a range of more than 300 metres (980 ft) from the epicentre, but the crew only had a chance of surviving at 700 metres (2,300 ft). It was decided to create an NBC (nuclear, biological, and chemical) protection system which would start working 0.3 seconds after detecting gamma radiation.
The task of creating a basic PAZ (Protivoatomnaya Zashchita) NBC protection system offering protection against the blast of a nuclear explosion and (radioactive) particulate filtration, but not against external gamma radiation or gas, was given to the KB-60 design bureau in Kharkov and was completed in 1956. The documentation was sent to Uralvagonzavod. It was decided to increase the tank's battle capabilities by changing the tank's construction and introducing new production technologies. Many of those changes were initially tested on the T-54M (Ob'yekt 139). The tank was fitted with the new V-55 12-cylinder 4-stroke one-chamber 38.88 litre water-cooled diesel engine developing 581 hp (433 kW). Greater engine power was accomplished by increasing the pressure of the fuel delivery and charging degree. The designers planned to introduce a heating system for the engine compartment and MC-1 diesel fuel filter. The engine was to be started pneumatically with the use of an AK-150S charger and an electric starter. This eliminated the need for the tank to carry a tank filled with air. To allow easier access during maintenance and repairs, it was decided to change hatches over the engine compartment. To increase the operational range, 300 litres (66 imp gal; 79 US gal) fuel tanks were added to the front of the hull, increasing the overall fuel capacity to 680 litres (150 imp gal; 180 US gal).
The ammunition load for the main gun was increased from 34 to 45, with 18 shells stored in so called "wet containers" located in hull fuel tanks (the concept for which came from Kartsev's cancelled Ob'yekt 140). The ammunition load included high explosive-fragmentation and anti-tank rounds and designers also planned to introduce the BK5M HEAT rounds which penetrated 390 millimetres (15 in) thick armour. The TPKU commander's vision device was replaced by either the TPKUB or TPKU-2B. The gunner received a TNP-165 vision device. The loader's hatch-mounted 12.7 mm DShK anti-aircraft heavy machine gun was dropped, because it was deemed worthless against high-performance jets. The tank was supposed to be equipped with the "Rosa" fire protection system. The tank had a thicker turret casting and the improved two-plane gun stabilization system from the T-54B, as well as night vision fighting equipment. To balance the weight of the new equipment, the armour on the back of the hull was thinned slightly.
The T-55 was significantly superior to the IS-2 Heavy Tank in all respects, including the rate of fire of the gun (at least four compared to less than three rounds per minute). Despite somewhat thinner frontal turret armour (200 millimetres (7.9 in) instead of 250 millimetres (9.8 in)) it compared favourably with the IS-3, thanks to its improved antitank gun and better mobility. Heavy tanks soon fell from favour, with only 350 IS-3s produced. The old model of highly mobile medium tanks and heavily armoured heavy tanks was replaced by a new paradigm: the "main battle tank". Parallel developments in the West would produce similar results. Katsev combined all the ongoing improvements being offered, or planned, on the T-54 into one design. This became the Ob'yect 155, and entered production at Uralvagonzavod 1 January 1958 as the T-55. It was accepted for service with the Red Army on 8 May. It suffered a significant lapse in one area: there was no antiaircraft machine gun, which had been present on the T-54.
After 1959, it served as a basis for the T-55K command tank which was equipped with an additional R-112 radio set, an AB-1-P/30 fuel powered accumulator charging unit, and TPN-1-22-11 night vision sight. All this additional equipment made it necessary to decrease the ammunition load for the main gun to 37 rounds and eliminate the bow machine gun. In the beginning of the 1960s, a T-55K was experimentally fitted with a Uran TV relay apparatus for battlefield surveillance. The tank was fitted with an external camera, the picture from which was relayed to a receiver in a BTR-50PU command vehicle. There was an observation camera mounted on a folding mast which was in turn mounted on a UAZ 69 car. The range within which the picture could be relayed varied between 10 and 30 kilometres (6.2 and 18.6 mi).
In 1961, a T-55 tank was used to test the "Almaz" TV complex which was supposed to replace the standard observation devices right after a nuclear explosion or while fording a body of water. There was a camera mounted on the hull for the driver and two cameras mounted on the turret, one for aiming and one for observation, and the picture from the cameras was relayed to two control screens. The tank had the front hull fuel tanks and bow machine gun removed. The commander was seated in the driver's usual position while the driver sat next to him. The cameras allowed battlefield observation and firing during daytime at ranges between 1.5 and 2 kilometres (0.93 and 1.24 mi). Because of the low quality of the equipment, the trials gave negative results. In the beginning of the 1960s, the OKB-29 design bureau in Omsk was working on adapting the tank to use a GTD-3T gas turbine engine developing 700 hp (522 kW). One T-55 tank fitted with this gas turbine engine passed trials but was deemed unsatisfactory and the design did not go into production.
The Omsk OKB-29 group tested three experimental T-55 tanks (designated Ob'yekt 612) between 1962 and 1965 that were fitted with an automatic gearbox controlled by electro-hydraulic systems. The trials found that such gearboxes were prone to frequent breakdowns in tanks. At the same time the Ob'yekt 155ML, a T-55 fitted with a launcher for three 9M14 "Malyutka" (NATO code: AT-3 Sagger) ATGMs mounted on the rear of the turret, was tested. Along with standard tanks a flamethrower-armed version was designed (designated TO-55 (Ob'yekt 482)), which was produced until 1962. It was fitted with 460 litre tanks filled with flammable liquid instead of the frontal hull fuel tanks. The flamethrower replaced the coaxial machine gun. This was a much better way to mount a flamethrower than in the experimental Ob'yekt 483, based on the T-54 tank, where the flamethrower replaced the main gun. TO-55 flamethrower tanks were withdrawn from service in 1993.
During the 1950s, the T-55 remained a significantly smaller and lighter tank than its NATO contemporaries—the U.S. M48 Patton and the British Centurion—while maintaining good firepower and reliability but light armour. The 100-mm D-10T tank gun had a larger bore than its Western counterparts.
In January 1945, some captured German tanks and vehicles were shipped to the Ordnance Research and Development Center, Aberdeen, Maryland, for tests and examination. The criteria for penetration in the tests was for at least fifty percent of the mass of the projectile to penetrate the armour. The M3 90 mm gun, firing the most widely equipped T33 armour-piercing round penetrated roughly 150 mm (6 in) of steel armour at 100 metres (330 ft), while the T30E16 HVAP round penetrated 270 mm (11 in) at the same range. These tests were carried out before the T-54/55 tank entered production, so it was not known how the popular 90 mm gun on the M46, M47, M48 and other western tanks would perform against the armour of the post-World War II Soviet tanks.
The data shows that the T33 AP round would fail to penetrate the frontal armour of the T-54/55 at any range, while the T30E16 HVAP round would only be able to penetrate the armour within 700 metres (2,300 ft). The T33 round could penetrate the side armour of the turret at about 800 metres, while the T30E16 HVAP round could do this at any practical range. The most popular anti-armour round the Soviets used for the D-10 tank gun was the 100 mm BR-412 APHE, first used on the SU-100 tank destroyer during World War II with an 80% probability of penetrating 135 millimetres (5.3 in) of steel armour at 1,000 metres (3,300 ft) fired from the D-10S tank gun. The BR-412D and BR-412B rounds developed in 1946–1950 had slightly superior performance over the 90 mm T33 and the M82 armour-piercing rounds.
This disadvantage lasted until the Soviet tanks began to be surpassed by newer Western developments like the M60 main battle tank and upgraded Centurions and M48 Pattons using the 105 mm rifled Royal Ordnance L7 gun. Due to the low velocity of rounds from the 100 mm gun, and the tank's simple fire-control system, the T-54/55 was forced to rely on HEAT shaped-charge ammunition to engage tanks at long range well into the 1960s, despite the relative inaccuracy of this ammunition at long ranges. The Soviets considered this acceptable for a potential European conflict, until the development of composite armour began reducing the effectiveness of HEAT warheads and sabot rounds were developed for the D-10T gun.
In 1961, development of improved NBC protection systems began. The goal was to protect the crew from fast neutrons; adequate protection against gamma radiation was provided by the thick armour and a PAZ basic NBC protection system.
The POV plasticized lead antiradiation lining was developed to provide the needed protection. It was installed in the interior, requiring the driver's hatch and the coamings over the turret hatches to be noticeably enlarged. This liner had the added benefit of protecting the crew from fragments of penetrated armour.
The tank was equipped with a full PAZ/FVU chemical filtration system. The coaxial 7.62 mm SGMT machine gun was replaced by a 7.62 mm PKT machine gun. The hull was lengthened from 6.04 m to 6.2 m. The hull machine gun was removed, making space for six more main gun rounds. These changes increased the weight of the vehicle to 38 tonnes.
The design work was done by OKB-520 design bureau of Uralvagonzavod under the leadership of Leonid N. Kartsev. The T-55A served as the basis for the T-55AK command tank.
In its long service life, the T-55 has been upgraded many times. Early T-55s were fitted with a new TSh-2B-32P sight. In 1959, some tanks received mountings for the PT-55 mineclearing system or the BTU/BTU-55 plough. In 1967, the improved BM8 APDS round, which could penetrate 275 mm thick armour at a range of 2 km, was introduced. In 1970, new and old T-55 tanks had the loader's hatch modified to mount the 12.7 mm DShK machine gun, to deal with the threat of attack helicopters. Starting in 1974, T-55 tanks received the KTD-1 or KTD-2 laser rangefinder in an armoured box over the mantlet of the main gun, as well as the R-123 or R-123M radio set. Simultaneously efforts were made to modernize and increase the lifespan of the drive train.
During production, the T-55A was frequently modernized. In 1965, a new track was introduced that could be used for between 2,000 km and 3,000 km, which was twice the range of the old track. It required a new drive sprocket, with 14 teeth instead of 13. Since 1974, T-55A tanks were equipped with a KTD-1 "Newa" rangefinder and a TSzS-32PM sight. All T-55A tanks were equipped with the TPN-1-22-11 night sight. The R-113 radio set was replaced by a R-123 radio set. Late production models had rubber sideskirts and a driver's windshield for use during longer stints.
T-54 and T-55 tanks continued to be upgraded, refitted, and modernized into the 1990s. Advances in armour-piercing and HEAT ammunition would improve the gun's antitank capabilities in the 1960s and 1980s.
A wide array of upgrades in different price ranges are provided by many manufacturers in different countries, intended to bring the T-54/55 up to the capabilities of newer MBTs, at a lower cost. Upgrades include new engines, explosive reactive armour, new main armament such as 120 mm or 125 mm guns, active protection systems, and fire control systems with range-finders or thermal sights. These improvements make it a potent main battle tank (MBT) for the low-end budget, even to this day.
One of these upgrade packages was produced by Cadillac Gage Textron and a prototype named the Jaguar was produced. The Jaguar looked quite different from its predecessors. A newly designed turret was formed by flat armour plates installed at different angles. The hull top was new. The engine compartment and fuel tanks on the shelves over the tracks were armour-protected. The Soviet-made 100 mm gun was replaced with the American M68 105 mm rifled gun fitted with a thermal sleeve. A Marconi fire control system which was originally developed for the American light tank Stingray was fitted. The vehicle incorporated a Cadillac-Gage weapon stabilizer and gunner's sight equipped with an integral laser rangefinder. The powerpack inherited by the Jaguar from the Stinger underwent only minor alterations and comprised the Detroit Diesel 8V-92TA engine and XTG-411 automatic transmission. In 1989, two Jaguar tanks were manufactured. The chassis were provided by PRC, while the hull tops, turrets and powerplants were manufactured by Cadillac Gage Textron.
Another prototype upgrade package was produced by Teledyne Continental Motors (now General Dynamics Land Systems) for the Egyptian Army and was known as the T-54E. After further modifications and trials it was sent into mass production and received the designation Ramses II.
As late as 2013, Ukrainian companies were reportedly developing T-55 main battle tank upgrades targeting the export market.
The T-54 and T-55 have a cabin layout shared with many post-World War II tanks, with the fighting compartment in the front, engine compartment in the rear, and a dome-shaped turret in the centre of the hull. The driver's hatch is on the front left of the hull roof. The commander is seated on the left, with the gunner to his front and the loader on the right. The tank's suspension has the drive sprocket at the rear, and dead track. Engine exhaust is on the left fender. There is a prominent gap between the first and second road wheel pairs, a distinguishing feature from the T-62, which has progressively larger spaces between road wheels towards the rear.
The T-54 and T-55 tanks are outwardly very similar and difficult to distinguish visually. Many T-54s were also updated to T-55 standards, so the distinction is often downplayed with the collective name T-54/55. Soviet tanks were factory-overhauled every 7,000 km and often given minor technology updates. Many states have added or modified the tank's equipment; India, for example, affixed fake fume extractors to its T-54s and T-55s so that its gunners would not confuse them with Pakistani Type 59s.
The older T-54 can be distinguished from the T-55 by a dome-shaped ventilator on the front right of the turret and a driver-operated SGMT 7.62 mm machine gun mounted to fire through a tiny hole in the centre of the hull's front. Early T-54s lacked a gun fume extractor, had an undercut at the turret's rear, and a distinctive "pig-snout" gun mantlet.
Advantages and drawbacks
|This section needs additional citations for verification. (July 2009)|
The T-54/55 tanks are mechanically simple and robust. They are very simple to operate compared to Western tanks, and don't require a high level of training or education in their crew members. The T-54/55 is a relatively small main battle tank, presenting a smaller target for its opponents to hit. The tanks have good mobility thanks to their relatively light weight (which permits easy transport by rail or flatbed truck, and allows crossing of lighter bridges), wide tracks (which give lower ground pressure and hence good mobility on soft ground), a good cold-weather start-up system, and a snorkel that allows river crossings. Together, the T-54/55 tanks have been manufactured in the tens of thousands, and many still remain in reserve, or even in front-line use among lower-technology fighting forces. Abundance and age together make these tanks cheap and easy to purchase. While the T-54/55 is not a match for a modern main battle tank, armour and ammunition upgrades can dramatically improve the old vehicle's performance to the point that it cannot be dismissed on the battlefield.
Nevertheless, T-54/55 tanks have many serious drawbacks. Small size is achieved at the expense of interior space and crew comforts, which is a common trait of most Russian tanks. This causes practical difficulties, as it constrains the physical movements of the crew and slows operation of controls and equipment. Israelis who crewed T-54/55s captured during the 1967 and 1973 wars constantly complained about this, and it remains a problem that cannot be remedied by any upgrades. Height limits were set for any recruit joining the tank crews in the Soviet Army, hence the low average height of Soviet tanks. This is believed to completely solve the low silhouette issue, whereas other armies may not include crew member height limits as standards. The low turret profile of the tanks prevents them from depressing their main guns by more than 5° (the average for Western tanks is 10°), which limits the ability to cover terrain by fire from a hull-down position on a reverse slope. While both tanks have stabilized guns, in practice they can only fire accurately when the vehicles are at rest (this problem may have been solved with more recent upgrades). Its main disadvantage is its light armour. While it had very strong armour that could withstand frontal hits from bazooka, PIAT, RPG-2 and most tank guns of that era, its armour became obsolete within 20 years of its introduction. Because it was designed for "traditional warfare", its side and rear armour was between a third and a half the frontal thickness. In Vietnam, its side armour proved very vulnerable to LAW rockets, TOW missiles and the M41 Walker Bulldog light tank with 76mm gun. As in most tanks of that generation, the internal ammunition supply is not shielded, increasing the odds that any enemy penetration of the fighting compartment could cause a catastrophic secondary explosion. The original T-54/55 tanks are unlikely to be successful against modern opponents without the benefit of upgrades.
The T-54 lacks NBC protection, a revolving turret floor (which complicated the crew's operations), and early models lacked gun stabilization. All of these problems were corrected in the T-55 tank, which is otherwise largely identical to the T-54.
T-54-1 production was slow at first, as only 3 vehicles were built in 1946 and 22 in 1947. 285 T-54-1 tanks were built in 1948 by Stalin Ural Tank Factory No. 183 (Uralvagonzavod); by then it had completely replaced T-44 production at Uralvagonzavod, and Kharkov Diesel Factory No. 75 (KhPZ). Production was stopped because of a low level of production quality and frequent breakdowns. The T-54-2 entered production in 1949 at Uralvagonzavod, which produced 423 tanks by the end of 1950. It replaced the T-34 in production at the Omsk Factory No. 183 in 1950. In 1951, over 800 T-54-2 tanks were produced. The T-54-2 remained in production until 1952. The T-54A was produced between 1955 and 1957. The T-54B was produced between 1957 and April 1959. The T-55 was produced by Uralvagonzavod between 1958 and 1962. The T-55K command tank was produced from 1959. The TO-55 (Ob'yekt 482) flamethrower tank was produced until 1962.
Overall 35,000 T-54-1, T-54-2, T-54 (T-54-3), T-54A, T-54B, T-54AK1, T-54AK2, T-54BK1 and T-54BK2 tanks were produced between 1946 and 1958 and 27,500 T-55, T-55A, T-55K1, T-55K2, T-55K3, T-55AK1, T-55AK2 and T-55AK3 tanks were produced between 1955 and 1981.
Poland produced 3,000 T-54, T-54A, T-54AD and T-54AM tanks between 1956 and 1964 and 7,000 T-55 (between 1964 and 1968), T-55L, T-55AD-1 and T-55AD-2 tanks (between 1968 and 1979).
Czechoslovakia produced 2,700 T-54A, T-54AM, T-54AK, T-54AMK tanks (between 1957 and 1966) and 8,300 T-55 and T-55A tanks (between 1964 and 1983; T-55A was probably produced since 1968). Most of them were for export.
Soviet Union and Russian Federation
The T-54/55 and the T-62 were the two most common tanks in Soviet inventory—in the mid-1970s the two tank types together comprised approximately 85% of the Soviet Army's tanks.
T-54 tanks served in the 1956 invasion of Hungary, and a few were knocked out by Molotov cocktails and Hungarian antitank guns. The revolutionaries delivered one captured T-54A to the British Embassy in Budapest, the analysis of which spurred the development of the Royal Ordnance L7 tank gun. The T-62 and T-55 are now mostly in reserve status; Russian active-duty units mainly use the T-80 and T-72, with around 900 T-90 tanks in service.
During the 1967 Six-Day War, U.S.-supplied M48 Patton tanks, Centurion tanks, and even upgraded World War II era Sherman tanks, faced T-55s. This mix of Israeli tanks, combined with superior planning of operations and superior airpower, proved to be more than capable of dealing with the T-54/T-55 series.
During the 1970 Jordanian Civil war, Syrian tanks inflicted heavy losses on Jordanian Centurions. In one case, a squadron of T-55s stopped the advance of a large Jordanian column, with 19 Centurions destroyed and up to 10 Syrian T-55s lost in the battle.
By the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the T-54A and T-55's gun was starting to lose its competitive effectiveness relative to the 105 mm Royal Ordnance L7 gun mounted in Israeli Centurion Mk V and M60A1 tanks. Israel captured many T-55s from Syria and mostly Egypt in 1967, and kept some of them in service. They were upgraded with a 105 mm NATO-standard L7 or M68, a US version of the L7, replacing the old Soviet 100 mm D-10, and a General Motors diesel replacing the original Soviet diesel engine. The Israelis designated these Tiran-5 medium tanks, and they were used by reserve units until the early 1990s. Most of these were then sold to assorted Third World countries, some of them in Latin America, and the rest were heavily modified, converted into the Achzarit heavy armoured personnel carrier.
The tank was heavily used during the Iran–Iraq War of 1980-88. T-54/55 participated in the biggest tank battle of the war in early 1981. Iran lost 200 Chieftain tank and M60A1 tanks in battle. In return, Iraq lost 50 T-55 and T-62 tanks. Another known tank battle occurred on 15 October 1981, when a large Iranian convoy was ambushed by Iraqi T-55s. During the battle, the Iranians lost 20 Chieftains plus other armoured vehicles and withdrew.
The NVA and ARVN engaged each other for the first time during Operation Lam Son 719, in February 1971. During that battle, 17 M41 light tanks of the ARVN 1st Armored Brigade destroyed 22 NVA-tanks, 6 T-54 and 16 PT-76, at no loss to themselves, but the friendly units loss 5 M41s and 25 APCs
On Easter Sunday, 2 April 1972, the newly activated ARVN 20th Tank Regiment, consisting of approximately 57 M48A3 Patton tanks (ARVN regiments were equivalent to US battalions, and ARVN squadrons were equivalent to US companies or troops) received reports of a large NVA tank column moving towards Dong Ha (the largest South Vietnamese city near the DMZ at the 17th parallel). At about noon, the crewmen of the ARVN 1st Squadron observed enemy armour moving south along highway 1 towards Dong Ha, and concealed their tanks on high ground with a good vantage point. Waiting for the NVA column to close to between 2,500 and 3,000 meters, the 90-mm guns of the Pattons opened fire, quickly destroying nine PT-76 light tanks and two T-54 medium tanks. The remaining NVA armour, unable to see their enemy, turned about and withdrew.
NVA armour units equipped with the T-54 tank achieved one of their greatest victories in April 1972, when the NVA 203rd Armored Regiment attacked the ARVN 22nd Infantry Division at Tan Canh, which dominated a main route into the city of Kon Tum. After a two-day artillery barrage, eighteen T-54 tanks from the 203rd regiment attacked the 22nd Division at dawn from two directions, breaking the ARVN unit, which quickly abandoned its positions. T-54 tank No. 377 had destroyed seven M41s before itself had been destroyed by M72 LAW rocket launchers The NVA destroyed 18 M41 tanks and 31 M113 armored personnel carriers and captured 17 other M41s, while losing only two T-54 tanks and one PT-76 tank.
On 9 April 1972, all three squadrons of the 20th Tank Regiment fought enemy armour, firing upon tanks accompanied by infantry, again while occupying the high ground. The Pattons opened fire at approximately 2,800 meters. A few answering shots from the T-54s fell short, and the NVA tanks began to scatter. By the end of the day, the 20th had destroyed sixteen T-54s and captured one Type 59, at no loss to themselves.
Angolan Civil War
T-54/T-55s began appearing in Southern Africa in the late 1970s, when many emerging Marxist states, particularly Angola and Mozambique, were bolstered with modern Soviet military hardware. The T-55's dependability and ruggedness proved well-suited to the local combat environments. Survivability of opposing medium-armour vehicles deployed by UNITA and the South African Defence Force (SADF) against late model MBTs used in the Angolan Civil War remained a major concern throughout that conflict. Angolan Army T-54s were first blooded during Operation Askari, in 1981. At least five were subsequently destroyed in encounters with South African Eland or Ratel-90 armoured cars, and some were captured. Soviet sources confirm that numerous T-55s were penetrated by an Eland's 90mm low-pressure gun. Nevertheless, multiple HEAT rounds were required to guarantee sufficient damage against a T-55's frontal arc and SADF anti-tank teams forced to operate in platoons accordingly.
During the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale, another six T-55s of Angola's 21st Brigade were shot out by Ratel tank destroyers armed with ZT3 Ingwe ATGMs near the Lomba River. On 9 November 1987, an engagement between South African and Angolan tanks occurred when thirteen Olifant Mk1A's eliminated two T-55's in a nine-minute skirmish. T-55s again participated in a critical engagement near Cuito Cuanavale on 14 February 1988, when Cuba's 3 Tank Battalion counter-attacked to spare Angola's 16th Brigade virtual annihilation by 61 Mechanised Infantry Battalion Group and the 4th South African Infantry Battalion. Six or seven T-55s were lost, but the attack blunted the South African advance, safeguarding the cohesion of the Angolan line. Cuban and Soviet sources maintain that they destroyed ten Olifant tanks and twelve Ratels, while South African and Western sources maintain that only one Olifant and one Ratel were damaged, as well as one Ratel being destroyed.
The Indian Army has used T-55 extensively in its conflicts with Pakistan. T-54 tanks were used during the Cambodian civil war. During the Ugandan-Tanzanian War of 1978-79, Libya sent an expeditionary force to aid Uganda dictator Idi Amin, which included a few dozen T-54/55 tanks. Some of these tanks saw action against Tanzanian forces.
The T-55 was the most numerous tank of the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA). It was the mainstay of armoured combat units during the Yugoslav Wars, where it proved vulnerable to infantry equipped with anti-tank rockets, and to misemployment in urban areas and unfriendly terrain. But there were too many of them in service for them to be replaced. During the battle of Vukovar, where the JNA grouped a large part of its tank force, a number were destroyed, almost exclusively by infantry-carried anti-tank weapons. Serbian T-55s performed well against Croatian M47 Patton tanks. The T-55 tank remained the most common tank in the armies of the Yugoslavian successor states until recently, and it was the most used tank by all armies during the wars. T-55s were also used by Yugoslavia and Macedonia in Kosovo and the 2001 Macedonia conflict.
The Sri Lankan army used T-55s in the Sri Lankan Civil War, which concluded in May 2009, against the LTTE (Tamil Tigers). A T-55 belonging to the LTTE was destroyed on 6 April 2009; according to media reports, it was a model produced in Czechoslovakia and obtained by the LTTE in 2001 or 2002.
Operators and variants
The T-55 has been used worldwide by as many as 50 countries and quasi-armies. They have been subject to numerous improvements throughout their production history and afterwards and many are still in service today.
Modifications to the T-54/55 series over the years have changed almost every aspect of the vehicle. Initially, Soviet modifications included a better turret shape, improved NBC protection and an improved powerplant. Later, improved fire-control equipment and night-vision equipment was added.
Foreign improvements, both in Warsaw Pact nations and elsewhere, have further improved protection, powerplant, and firepower. T-54/55s have been re-armed with improved tank guns, AA machine guns, advanced armour arrays, and technologies, such as laser range finders and computerized fire control systems, that did not exist when the tank was first being built in the early days of the Cold War.
- Tanks of comparable role, performance and era
- Halberstadt, Hans Inside the Great Tanks The Crowood Press Ltd. Wiltshire, England 1997 94-96 ISBN 1-86126-270-1
"The T-54/T-55 series is the hands down, all time most popular tank in history."
- Miller, David The great Book of Tanks Salamander Books London, England 2002 338-341 ISBN 1-84065-475-9.
- Zaloga 2004, p. 6.
- Zaloga 2004, p. 11.
- "PAZ vehicle collective protection system". Janes.com. Retrieved 2013-02-18.
- Sewell, Stephen, CW2 (rtd). "Why Three Tanks?" (Armor, July–August 1998), p.26.
- Sewell, p.27.
- Zaloga 2004, p. 40.
- "Armor-Piercing Ammunition for Gun, 90-mm, M3, Office of the Chief of Ordnance, January 1945". Lone Sentry. Retrieved 2013-02-18.
- Автор: Валерий Потапов. "100-мм танковая пушка Д-10 - BATTLEFIELD.RU - всё о Великой Отечественной войне". Battlefield.Ru. Retrieved 2013-02-18.
- Hunnicutt, pp. 6, 149, 408.
- Zaloga 2004, p. 14.
- Jaguar Main Battle Tank at Jane's Armour and Artillery.
- Jane's Defence, http://www.janes.com/products/janes/defence-security-report.aspx?ID=1065977074&channel=defence&subChannel=land
- Zaloga 2004, p. 41.
- Gelbart 1996, pp.75-78
- Zaloga 2004, p. 39.
- Zaloga 1996.
- "Arabs at War: Military Effectiveness, 1948-1991", Kenneth Michael Pollack, U of Nebraska Press, 2002, pp.337-341
- «The Iran-Iraq War» Efraim Karsh pp.29-30.
- TACTICAL EVOLUTION IN THE IRAQI ARMY: A THE ABADAN ISLAND AND FISH LAKE CAMPAIGNS OF THE IRAN-IRAQ WAR
- Starry p. 193
- Fulgham, David, Terrence Maitland, et al. South Vietnam On Trial: Mid-1970 to 1972. Boston: Boston Publishing Company, 1984. P.85
- "Kíp xe huyền thoại - Quân đội nhân dân". Qdnd.vn. Retrieved 2013-02-18.
- Thi, Lam Quang, Hell in An Loc, The 1972 Easter Invasion and the Battle that Saved South Vietnam, University of North Texas Press, Denton, Texas, 2009. p.50-70
- Starry p. 207, 208
- Cuban Tanks, II part, Rubén Urribarres, 2001
- Johnson, David E. In the Middle of the Fight: An Assessment of Medium-armored Forces in past military operations (2011 ed.). RAND Corporation. pp. 73–81. ISBN 978-0-8330-4413-6.
- A Forgotten War: Angola and South West Africa
- Lessons of the Border War
- Hamann, Hilton (2001). Days of the Generals. Cape Town: Zebra Press. p. 94. ISBN 1-86872-340-2.
- Tokarev, Andrei; Shubin, Gennady, eds. (2011). Bush War: The Road to Cuito Cuanavale: Soviet Soldiers' Accounts of the Angolan War. Auckland Park: Jacana Media (Pty) Ltd. pp. 128–130. ISBN 978-1-4314-0185-7.
- Mitchell, Thomas G. (2013). Israel/Palestine and the Politics of a Two-State Solution. Jefferson: McFarland & Company Inc. p. 97. ISBN 978-0-7864-7597-1.
- George, Edward (2005). The Cuban Intervention in Angola, 1965-1991: From Che Guevara to Cuito Cuanavale. London: Frank Cass. pp. 206–233. ISBN 0-415-35015-8.
- Heitman, Helmoed (1990). War in Angola: the final South African phase. Gibraltar: Ashanti Publishing. p. 137. ISBN 978-0-620-14370-7.
- Bridgland, Fred (1990). The War for Africa: Twelve months that transformed a continent. Gibraltar: Ashanti Publishing. p. 194. ISBN 978-1-874800-12-5.
- Tokarev, Andrei; Shubin, Gennady, eds. (2010). Ветераны локальных войн и миротворческих операций ООН вспоминают [Veterans of Local Wars and UN Peacekeeping Missions Remember] (in Russian). Moscow: Memories. pp. 118–119. ISBN 978-5-904935-04-7.
- Bridgland 1990, pp. 196-197.
- Peou, Sorpong (2000). Intervention & Change in Cambodia: towards democracy?. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 129. ISBN 978-0-312-22717-3.
- Pollack, Kenneth M. (2002). Arabs at War: Military Effectiveness, 1948-91. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. ISBN 0-8032-8783-6.
- Wierzynski, Gregory H. (1981-12-28). "Poland: Tanks Amid the Eerie Calm". Time.com. Retrieved 2013-02-18.
- Cockburn, Andrew (1983). The Threat: Inside the Soviet Military Machine. New York: Random House. 3 May 1983 ISBN 0-394-52402-0.
- Dunstan, Simon (1982). Vietnam tracks-Armor In Battle 1945-75. Osprey Publications. ISBN 0-89141-171-2.
- Foss, Christopher F., ed (2005). Jane's Armour and Artillery 2005–2006, 26th edition. 15 August 2005 ISBN 0-7106-2686-X.
- Gelbart, Marsh (1996). Tanks: Main Battle and Light Tanks. London: Brassey's. ISBN 1-85753-168-X.
- Starry, Gen. Donn A. (1989). Mounted Combat in Vietnam. Washington, D.C.: Vietnam Studies, Department of the Army. First printed in 1978-CMH Pub 90-17.
- Hunnicutt, R. P. "Patton: A History of the American Main Battle Tank." ISBN 0-89141-230-1.
- Hunnicutt, R. P. Sheridan: A History of the American Light Tank. Volume 2; 1995, Presidio Press. ISBN 0-89141-462-2.
- Zaloga, Steven; Hugh Johnson (2004). T-54 and T-55 Main Battle Tanks 1944–2004. Oxford: Osprey. ISBN 1-84176-792-1.
- Zaloga, Steven; Samuel Katz (1 September 1996). Tank Battles of the Mid-East Wars 1: The Wars of 1948–1973. Concord. ISBN 978-962-361-612-6.
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to T-55.|
- T-54-1, T-54-2, T-55AM, T-55AM2 Additional photos
- Cuban T-55
- Technical data sheet and pictures T-55 from ArmyRecognition.com
- T-55 Variant walk arounds and photos on Prime Portal
- Jaguar prototype main battle tank