The BITCH. Revisions to the SU-76 Sotka
I have recently been doing some reading and I wanted to point out some revisions that need to be made to the ASL version of the SU-76 Sotka.
SU-76
All SU-76 were very well armed with small arms, including a Degtyaryov light machine gun,
PPsk submachine guns and up to a dozen hand grenades per crew member. As a result,
the SU-76 should have a 4 CCV and not suffer from a -2 penalty for no machine gun in CC.
The SU-76 also had no room for crew members inside the vehicle. Therefore, the SU-76
may not button up. Crews are always exposed and may be considered vulnerable as per
D5.311 UNPROTECTED CREWS.
PPsk submachine guns and up to a dozen hand grenades per crew member. As a result,
the SU-76 should have a 4 CCV and not suffer from a -2 penalty for no machine gun in CC.
The SU-76 also had no room for crew members inside the vehicle. Therefore, the SU-76
may not button up. Crews are always exposed and may be considered vulnerable as per
D5.311 UNPROTECTED CREWS.
SU-76E (Early Version)
The SU-76 was envisioned as an assault gun in the model of the German Sturmgeschutz. However,
with the loss of factories during the Summer of 1941 and modernization efforts initiated prior to the war,
the only suitable guns in production for a self-propelled weapon were the Zis-5 and the F-24 multi-use
guns. The Zis-5 was being used for T34 and KV-1 tanks, and were already under significant production
pressure. The F-24, while an excellent weapon, suffered from the need for a rather large layout, heavy
weight and the need for good ventilation. What is more, the Soviets were in the process of updating
their chassis in production. With the T36 and BT series tanks being phased out and the T60 chassis
being considered too small, the T70 chassis was adopted, which proved fortuitous because the T70
was considered obsolete and the production of the SU-76 was to save production of this chassis.
However, motors could not be produced fast enough and with the arrival of US trucks as part of
Lend-Lease, Gaz truck motors were diverted to the SU-76. The unfortunate layout of two Gaz motors
on either side of the driver attached to a rear drive train meant that severe strain was placed on the
drive train. Combined with the weight of the F-24 gun, the two Gaz motors laid out in a side-by-side
were insufficient and problematic with their dual connection with the drive shaft.
with the loss of factories during the Summer of 1941 and modernization efforts initiated prior to the war,
the only suitable guns in production for a self-propelled weapon were the Zis-5 and the F-24 multi-use
guns. The Zis-5 was being used for T34 and KV-1 tanks, and were already under significant production
pressure. The F-24, while an excellent weapon, suffered from the need for a rather large layout, heavy
weight and the need for good ventilation. What is more, the Soviets were in the process of updating
their chassis in production. With the T36 and BT series tanks being phased out and the T60 chassis
being considered too small, the T70 chassis was adopted, which proved fortuitous because the T70
was considered obsolete and the production of the SU-76 was to save production of this chassis.
However, motors could not be produced fast enough and with the arrival of US trucks as part of
Lend-Lease, Gaz truck motors were diverted to the SU-76. The unfortunate layout of two Gaz motors
on either side of the driver attached to a rear drive train meant that severe strain was placed on the
drive train. Combined with the weight of the F-24 gun, the two Gaz motors laid out in a side-by-side
were insufficient and problematic with their dual connection with the drive shaft.
Production of the SU-76 was begun in 1942. They should have red movement points equal to a T70
(14mp).
(14mp).
SU-76Ec1
Some of these early SU-76’s were equipped with an armored top--just a few MM of armor, but enough
to be considered closed top with respect to CC and indirect fire. However, in order to facilitate ventilation
and visibility, the crew is still considered CE for all other purposes. These were both production models
and field modifications. However, for this vehicle, D5.311 do not apply.
to be considered closed top with respect to CC and indirect fire. However, in order to facilitate ventilation
and visibility, the crew is still considered CE for all other purposes. These were both production models
and field modifications. However, for this vehicle, D5.311 do not apply.
SU-76Ec2
Some field modifications were made which included large armored doors fastened to each side of the
SU-76’s superstructure. This allowed the crew to drive around “buttoned up,” while opening the fighting
compartment for combat operations. This had the advantages of some protection for the crew while an
open and well ventilated fighting space.
SU-76’s superstructure. This allowed the crew to drive around “buttoned up,” while opening the fighting
compartment for combat operations. This had the advantages of some protection for the crew while an
open and well ventilated fighting space.
SU-76M
By 1944, production of light tanks, including the T-70, had ended and the SU-76 received a proper
engine/drive train. Thus, at this point the SU-76M should have black movement points and the normal
16MP. The covered version had been abandoned by this time and the SU-76 appears in its normal
ASL version.
engine/drive train. Thus, at this point the SU-76M should have black movement points and the normal
16MP. The covered version had been abandoned by this time and the SU-76 appears in its normal
ASL version.
Comments