A photo of the Polish Vickers E twin turret. This is one of the tanks purchased from England prior to home production. Poland purchased 50 vehicles. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A photo of the Polish Vickers E Single turret. This is one of the tanks purchased from England prior to home production. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The twin turret and single turret units on parade.All tanks on the photo are Vickers E with new engine air cooling system designed by Polish engineers (the back of the tank is higher as a result). Near is Vickers E mark B (one turret with 47mm gun and 7.92 Browning MG). Far are Vickers E mark A ( two turrets with 7.92mm Hotchkiss MG). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
--- All the names above have been seen in western writings as a designator for the Polish production of the Vickers 6-ton tank. All are correct, and misleading. Every designator is correct if used within the right context. Only the prototypes used the designator "VAU33-dw or VAU33-Jw". The VAU33-dw was the dual turret model while the VAU33-jw was the single turret type. 7TP tanks were produced with two designations; the 7TPjw and the 7TPdw. The 7TPdw was the dual turret design. Most writings simply state "the 7TP" and that designation is used most often to refer to the single turret (7TPjw) model. The single turret model was the tank that Poland was the most proud of and was their most modern production design. By the start of WW2, the 7TPdw was no longer in production and was considered slightly out of date. Some writings refer to the designators VAU33jw and VAU33dw. This designation is used in some Western sources for Polish Vickers Mk.E tanks. It's especially used by some model manufacturers, but this is an ERROR in fact. VAU is a short of "Vickers-Armstrong-Ursus", sometimes they supplement it with "wz.33". The Ursus factory had nothing to do with Vickers-Armstrong tanks. Polish researcher J. Magnuski wrote, that "VAU" was an initial designation for Polish Vickers development project, which led to 7TP tank. Some sources state that the VAU-33 was a prototype of 7TP and was a modification of the Vickers Mark E with a Swiss diesel engine Saurer VBLDb. Unlike many nations, Poland did not simply produce (or even buy) more clone Vickers 6 ton tanks, but actually improved on the already excellent basic design. Poland's 7TP was the first step in an uncompleted process (interrupted by WW2) of gaining engineering and industrial ability needed to produce a truly Polish Tank. The Vickers tank was well within the capacity of the Polish industrial technology, and the design offered some potential for further development. The PZI design bureau was tasked with the study of making a homemade copy. PZI produced the 7-TP, a 9-ton twin turreted tank that was to be a considerable step forward in design over the Vickers original. At first the original engine of the Vickers was installed, but this was replaced by a license-built Saurer 6-cylinder diesel engine which developed 110hp. This made the Polish 7-TP the world's first diesel-powered tank to reach production status. The 7-TP's armor was also 4mm thicker than the Vickers originals. The first 7-TP to be built by PZI left the works in 1934. While the production of the modified twin turret model 7-TP was proceeding, it was decided to introduce a single version carrying a Bofors gun. This variant appeared in 1937, but the production was slowed by the difficulties of making armor plates and procuring the turrets from Sweden. In 1939, after some minor arguments unsuitable armor thickness, PZI got involved to evolve a heavier variant with an improved engine, welded armor thickened up to 40mm in front, a strengthened suspension, wider tracks and a turret with a rear overhang which could accommodate both transmitter and receiver radio sets. The new up-armored 7-TP, which now weighed 11-tons, did not have time to go beyond the pre-production stage before the events of 1939. During the nineteen thirties and during the development of the 7-TP, the question of designing tanks in Poland had become a very controversial matter. Two schools of thought were in contention: the first one defended the launching of domestic design and production programs, the second one (represented by the Chief of the Armored Force himself), considered this as a waste of time and money which could be better spent in purchasing well-proven foreign tanks. Nothing came of these debates except friction and the slowing of progress. A total of 169 7TPs saw service.
|
|
|
Last Update: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 |
|
