Re: [MV] WWII Russian 5-ton trucks?

From: Richard Notton (Richard@fv623.demon.co.uk)
Date: Thu Nov 22 2001 - 12:36:21 PST


----- Original Message -----
From: "islander" <islander@midmaine.com>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 6:19 AM
Subject: Re: [MV] WWII Russian 5-ton trucks?

Hi Carl,
>
> >You sure? What about the ZiLs and Tatras?
>
> My one source stated only the YaG (JAG) trucks as being "heavy" trucks,
> although apparently the ZIS-5 was a 3 ton and therefore a "medium", but
> still fitting the greater than 2.5 ton specification asked for. Nice
> catch Richard :-)
>
Yup, we need to remember the Russian designations are for example ? ?
Automobile Zavod so KRAZ actually means Kremenchug Automobile Plant and UAZ
is the Ural Automobile Plant. Steve also has a point in that we cannot
directly translate the Russian Cyrillic characters so YaG is also JAG and we
find JAAZ as JaAZ or YaAZ.

There is a lot of concise information in the Vanderveen WWII and post 1945
"Bibles", far too much to re-type.

> >While the latter is Czech, it
> >is the T in so many Russian designations.
>
> The Soviets use the "t" designation much like the way US uses "m". In
> other words, they reffer to a German Tiger Mark VI as "T-VI Tiger". The
> "t" used by the Germans was their country code for "Tschechish", which is
> German for Czech. They had single letter designations for all
> nationalities whose equipment they used (e = englisch, f = franzosich,
> etc).
>
> >Maybe that's why they invaded
> >Czechoslovakia?
>
> Er... Not until 1945 :-) Time period asked about was up until 1941. But
> since Hitler specifically invaided Czechoslovakia for its industrial
> production (Skoda in particular), I am sure Stalin might have had this on
> his mind a LITTLE bit as well :-)
>
Most likely, however, the Russians were quite capable of designing and
making very durable trucks and still do, which actually stand up to their
winters, just starting one in their winter requires a whole different set of
technology and petro-chemical chemistry, further more the T34 diesel fired
up after a night at ridiculously low temperatures, the fuel didn't wax
either and all this while you, me and the Germans were using what is really
an inappropriate petrol (gas) tank engine.

I have to say both the WWII and cold war Russian trucks have great
attraction, they are simple, reliable, robust in the extreme and just get on
with the job in a very inhospitable land.

> >When did the ZiL 131 / 151 come out? Or the ZiL Essence? When did Ural
> >come into being? Kamaz? BTW, did Kraz become Kamaz?
>
Vanderveen gives the ZiL 131 series as 1962 and of course ZiL didn't exist
until 1956. Following the Russian retreat in 1941 a ZiS plant was built in
the Urals to be safely away from the front line (as did many threatened
factories) production started in '43/'44 and these vehicles were known as
Ural or Ural-ZiS.

> "Ural" was a designation, IIRC, to differentiate production done after
> the factories were moved East into the Ural mountains. Basically,
> anything made after 1941.
>
Yup.

Russian aircraft are titled by the design bureau not the actual makers, but
trucks are titled by the factory and this may not be the design house.

> >Oh geez, now I've done it: I've asked more questions than answered. I'm
> >going to go hide under a rock and ask Santa for that Tatra 813...
>
> Hehe... please ask Santa for two because I would like one but the wife
> will have none of it :-)
>
While you're at it I'll have one as well please or failing that a KRAZ 255B
would be most acceptable.

Richard
Southampton - England



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 07 2001 - 00:37:00 PST