Part 8 – Tanks in the Winter War: The T-26 Family of Soviet Tanks

This installment of the diarieswill focus on the type of Soviet tank most commonly fielded by the Soviet 8th Tank Army: the T-26. Note: At the end of the last Diaries installment, I reported that Part 8 would examine Soviet tactics in the Winter War. I've since received some emails requesting to hear more about the tanks. I'm happy to oblige.

Above: Armored units in Red Winter include T-26 models '31 and '33, the amphibious T-37, and the BA-10 armored car. Playtest counters by Michael Evans.

Below: Soviet T-26 tanks, 1933 models sporting rail antennae on the turrets and spotlights for night fighting.

The T-26 is actually a family of tanks, and appears in many models and variants. We will quickly examine some of those models which were most commonly fielded during the Winter War.

T-26m31

Produced from 1931 to 1933, this was the most common tank in the Red Army until 1941. Over 11,000 of these tanks were produced. The T-26m31 is a rather light tank, weighing about 8.7 tons and having between 6 and 15 mm of armor protection. It is capable of a top speed of about 28 kph.

During the earliest weeks of the Winter War, these tanks proved very effective against Finnish machine gun nests, as they were virtually immune to return fire.

Sporting twin 7.62 mm machine gun turrets but no main gun, the T-26m31 was mainly intended for use against enemy infantry and machine guns; at this task it excelled. It's light armor and lack of a main gun left it unsuitable for fighting enemy armor.

Below: This is one of the four Soviet armored units appearing in Red Winter. It represents a company of T-26m31 tanks- about ten vehicles. Of the armor in Red Winter, these tanks are the most effective, given that the Finns have only infantry (no tanks) at Tolvajärvi.

The T-26m31 used the Vickers-Armstrong chassis, the same one used in the Vickers tanks bought by Finland in the 1930's. The lead tank in photos below is a Vickers. The remaining tanks in the column are T-26m31's. Note that three have been painted white; the rest are green.

Destroyed T-26m31 tanks near Tolvajärvi.

Above: T26m31 tank crew compare notes.

Below: Soviet troops examine a Finnish tank helmet found in a Vickers.

T-26 m33

This 9.5 ton model was produced from 1933 through 1938. It sports a 45mm gun and one or two 7.62 mm machine guns. Armor thickness is slightly better than previous models, at 10-15 mm. It is identifiable by a conical turret atop a base with vertical edges.

Top: Soviet infantry advance beside a T-26m33.

Bottom: This T-26m33 models has a rail-shaped turret antennae and a large spotlight for night fighting.

Above: Playtest counter representing a company of T-26m33 tanks (roughly ten tanks).

Below: A comparison of two commonly fielded versions of T-26 produced in 1933. The tank at left has the earlier twin-turrets. The tank at right sports a 45 mm gun, anti-aircraft MG, a spotlight for night fighting, and the rail-shaped antenna.

Above: T-26m33 tanks race into battle.

Below: A T-26m33 tank crew receives presents from Leningrad.

T-26 m39

The most modern of the T-26 types used during the Winter War, the 10.2 ton 1939 model featured a conical turret atop a tapered base. Armament was identical to the m37 model, but armor protection had been improved slightly to 15-20 mm. A 100 hp engine provided top speeds of 30 kph. Note: These models do not appear in the game Red Winter.

Below: A Soviet medic tends to a wounded soldier. A T-26 tank looms in the background.

The T-26 Family of Tanks, continued: The Oddballs

The T-26 chassis was used for some other, more unusual, versions as well.

ChT-26 Chemical Tank

These flame-throwing tanks were used to combat heavily fortified infantry. They were first tested in June and July of 1931. The Command for Military Chemistry (VOChIMU) of the RKKA (Red Army) called for "a chemical T-26 test model be developed and provided with equipment for dispersing smoke and flame-throwing, along with technology for dispersing poisonous substances.

Below: Cht-26 Chemical Tank in battle.

The first models were T-26 m31 tanks with the left turret removed. This freed up space for a 400 liter storage tank for substances including: flame-throwing, smoke dispersion, poisonous gas dispersion, or neutralization of poisonous gases.

When the Winter War began, the 8th Tank Army included two chemical tank battalions, the 218th and 201st, with 31 and 51 Cht-26 tanks, respectively.

Below: The tank on right is a Cht-26 chemical tank. Note that it has not been painted white. The white tank at left is a T-26 m33 which lacks the rail antenna. The tank has driven over a mine, and it is being evacuated by a S-60 tractor.

T-26 Radio-Controlled Tank

I believe these were mainly used in the highly mined areas near the Mannerheim Line. I have yet to come across any documentation of their use in the Tolvajärvi campaign.

Below: Here's real odd duck- a radio-controlled chemical tank. These two photos appear to be the same tank, photographed from different angles.

Red Winter Notes:

Soviet Armor Commitment

Historically, the Soviet tanks did not make their appearance until the fifth and final day of the battle. This created an interesting game design challenge. I've played games where the designer takes a rather rigid approach to history- if a certain unit entered at a certain time on a certain day, that's when it enters the game, period. I have no problem with this approach, but it doesn't address the uncertainty of the situation at Tolvajärvi.

The Finns knew the Soviet 139th Rifle Division had tank support; they had been overrun by the tanks multiple times during the preceding week. The Soviets were sitting on a valuable resource, presumably waiting for the critical moment to commit it to the battle. As it was, the Finns' began their counteroffensive on the morning of December 12th, throwing the Soviets off balance. But what if the Soviets had the a chance to orchestrate a breakthrough using their armor?

Armor Commitment Rules

In Red Winter, the Soviet player decides when to commit his armor, and how much to deploy. He has three tank companies and an armored recon battalion of BA-10 armored cars (Note: While the latter sounds intimidating, this "battalion" was most likely comprised of only 9 or 10 vehicles).

Below: A portion of the playtest Turn Track. The orange values are VP costs associated with commitment of Soviet armor units for the given game turn. Cost is on a unit per unit basis. Armored units are company-sized (Exception: As mentioned above, the BA-10 armored cars are an armored recon battalion on paper, but contained roughly the same number of vehicles as the tank companies).

The Soviet player can commit none, some or all all of his armored units. But by committing his armor, he "ups the stakes" by forfeiting victory points to the Finnish player. The earlier he commits the armor, the more VPs he forfeits. Thus it is possible for the Soviet player to commit all of his armor very early in the battle. But if he does so, he has also committed to the "all or nothing" approach of going for an automatic victory (capturing and holding Tolvajärvi village and the main highway, or eliminating sufficient Finns). Anything less than an automatic victory at this point will see the Finns win based on Victory Points.

After playtesting many options, I went with this approach because it creates some tense and interesting decisions for the Soviet player. It also increases the tension for the Finnish player, who never knows when or how many tanks are en route to the front.

Below: Soviet T-26 tank crew.

This "player's choice" approach has a convenient side effect. It gives the Soviet player a means of breaking a potential stalemate before it develops. For example, if the Soviet player finds that his offensive is grinding to a halt by day 3 or day 4, he can throw in the armor in an attempt to crack the Finns' defenses. This keeps the game exciting, and avoids potential situations where the players say "Well, we can see where this one is heading. Let's go play something else." (We've all played a game like that, and it was not my goal with Red Winter)

Committed armor units enter the game at the Soviet supply source hex, per normal reinforcement rules.

Members of the RW team (pictured below) are currently in playtesting to determine whether the armor commitment VP costs are spot-on for their corresponding game turns.

Next time: The history raises some interesting questions. If the Soviet 139th Rifle Division had an entire tank battalion (plus armored recon battalion) in support at Tolvajärvi, why did they wait until the fifth day of the battle to deploy the armor? And three tanks is hardly the entire battalion. What gives?

In the next installment of Red Winter Diaries, we'll put on our thinking caps and examine the evidence, and I'll offer some of my opinions.

Below: Soviet T-26m39 tank crew.