How the IS-2 was created and improved


Experienced heavy tank "237" / IS-1. On its basis, the IS-2 will be created later. Wikimedia Commons Photos


Throughout the Great Patriotic War, the most important component of the armored forces of the Red Army were heavy Tanks different types. The most successful and perfect example of this class should be recognized as the IS-2, adopted for service on October 31, 1943. It combined the successful achievements of past projects and effective promising solutions that made it possible to obtain very high tactical and technical characteristics and combat qualities. All the positive features of the tank have been repeatedly confirmed both at the training grounds and in battles.

Consistent development


The development of Soviet heavy tanks during the war was carried out by the gradual improvement and modification of existing structures. A number of tanks were created, some of which were mass-produced and used by the troops. The most interesting processes in this area, which resulted in the future IS-2, took place in 1942-43.

In the winter and spring of 1943, tests of the captured German Pz.Kpfw tank took place. VI Tiger, showing its high performance. It turned out that the existing heavy tanks of the Red Army can not always fight such an enemy. To solve such problems required new cars with enhanced armor and weapons.

The development of such a tank was entrusted to SKB-2 of the Chelyabinsk Kirov Plant and pilot plant No. 100. The result of these works was the appearance of the IS-1 tank, which was put into service already in August 1943. However, this machine was not mass-produced - from October 1943 to January 1944, a little more than a hundred tanks were produced.


Scheme IS-2 arr. 1943 Graphics Tanks-encyclopedia.com

From the beginning of 1943, tank builders and gunsmiths studied the issue of increasing the caliber of tank guns. The fundamental possibility of equipping a promising heavy tank with a rifled gun of 122 mm caliber like the existing A-19 was determined, and soon Plant No. 9 began developing a new tank gun based on its ballistics. Subsequently, such a gun received the index D-25T.

In parallel, there was a study of the issues of installing a new gun on a heavy tank. The basis for such a combat vehicle was the existing IS-1 chassis, which should have been equipped with an updated turret. The new project of Chelyabinsk designers received the number "240". Subsequently, the IS-2 and IS-122 indices were assigned to it - they indicated the “origin” of the project and the caliber of the gun.

"240 Object"


The first version of the future IS-2 retained the basic features of the previous machine, although it had significant differences. So, the case of the traditional layout retained a differentiated cast and rolled reservation with a welded joint. An improved casting tower of sufficient volume for the installation of a new large gun was proposed. The power plant and chassis did not undergo fundamental changes.

Tank "240" in the initial version received a cast block of nasal armor with a thickness of up to 120 mm in the upper part. The largest middle part of the forehead had a thickness of 60 mm and was located at an angle of 72 °. The lower armor element at a thickness of 100 mm leaned forward 30 °. The curved forehead of the cast tower was 100 mm thick. The side projection was protected by 90 mm rolled sheets; the upper elements of the hull and side of the tower leaned inward.


Reservation IS-2. The parameters of the initial project are shown at the top, and after completion in 1944, the Wikimedia Commons graphics are shown.

The main armament of the IS-2 was the 122-mm tank gun mod. 1943 or D-25T under separate shell loading. The gun mount provided vertical guidance from -3 ° to + 20 °, there was also a mechanism for fine aiming in the horizontal plane. For the D-25T, three types of shells were intended - the pointed-headed armor-piercing armor BR-471, the blunt-headed armor-piercing armor with the ballistic cap BR-471B and the HE-471 high-explosive fragmentation shell. All shells were used with a full charge of the Zh-471.

It was planned to install a whole set of DT machine guns: coaxial, frontal in the hull and stern in the tower. Later they introduced a turret for a large-caliber DShK on the tower. New tanks received it at the factory, old tanks - right in the units.

Mobility was provided by a 12-cylinder V-2-IS diesel engine with a capacity of 520 hp. The design of the power unit as a whole repeated the IS-1, but some new elements were used, such as planetary rotation mechanisms. The chassis was also borrowed with some modifications and changes.

The preservation of the power plant and chassis has led to some reduction in mobility compared to previous heavy tanks. IS-2 was heavier to 46 tons, which reduced its specific power and driving performance.

Sea trials


At the end of the summer of 1943, the construction of the experimental 100 tank began at factory No. 240. The car was not made from scratch, it was made on the basis of one of the prototypes of “Object 237” / IS-1. In the shortest possible time, we manufactured and installed all new units, with the exception of the gun mount. D-25T and other details had to wait until the end of September.


Ammunition gun D-25T. Shells with a charge Zh / ZhN-471, high-explosive fragmentation grenade OF-471, as well as armor-piercing shells BR-471 and BR-471B. Wikimedia Commons Graphics

In the middle of the month, Plant No. 9 made an experimental cannon and then spent about a week testing it. The gun showed its best side, but some details needed to be improved. The main complaint was caused by an insufficiently strong muzzle brake. A few days later, the experimental D-25T was sent to Chelyabinsk, and on September 30 she got up on the carrier. After that, the tank "240", slightly different from the design, was ready for full-scale factory tests.

The tests began with an accident and almost led to tragedy. The tank reached the shooting range under its own power and fired several shots. At the next shot, the already damaged muzzle brake tore apart, its wreckage nearly killed several people. The fire tests had to be temporarily stopped - until a new muzzle brake was received.

On October 1-4, 1943, the experimental “Object 240”, together with the “237” tank, underwent trials along the 345 km long track. The average speed on the route exceeded 18 km / h. Unlike “Object 237”, “240” did without serious problems and malfunctions. At the same time, he twice had to work in tow and pull out the "seated" fellow.

On October 6, new sea trials took place on a route of more than 110 km, mainly on rough terrain. Despite some problems, the future IS-2 coped with the task and showed fairly high performance. The tests continued, and before the end of the month the prototype car passed more than 1200 km.

Firepower


In mid-October, Plant No. 9 completed the completion of the D-25T gun and conducted new tests. The improved muzzle brake again did not show a sufficient resource, claims were made to other units. However, the gun passed the test and was allowed to further work - after correcting the shortcomings.


IS-2 early series at the front. Wikimedia Commons Photos

The modified D-25T gun was installed on the experimental "240", after which a new stage of testing began. The most interesting results from a practical point of view were obtained in December 1943, when the “Object 240” fired on captured models of German armored vehicles. The tank clearly showed its firepower.

According to the “tabular” data, at a range of 500 m with a 90 ° meeting angle, the BR-471 pointed-headed projectile had to penetrate 155 mm of homogeneous armor; for 1 km - 143 mm, for 2 km - 116 mm. For the blunt-headed projectile BR-471B, penetration reached 152, 142 and 122 mm, respectively.

When using two armor-piercing shells of the 471st series, the “240” tank confidently hit the frontal projection of the “Tiger” at distances of up to 1500-2000 m. The 80-mm frontal sheet (57 ° slope) of the medium tank Pz.Kpfw.V Panther made its way from 1500 m. At distances up to 1 km, the D-25T could hit the 200-mm armor of the self-propelled Panzerjäger Tiger (P) Ferdinand.

Beginning of the series


Thus, the future IS-2 was distinguished by outstanding firepower and could effectively deal with any modern and promising enemy armored vehicles. Moreover, he was protected from enemy fire in a wide range of ranges and showed good mobility for his class.


IS-2 with a straight nose in the museum. Wikimedia Commons Photos

According to the results of the first stages of testing, on October 31, 1943 the “240” tank was adopted by the Red Army under the designation IS-2. By this time, ChKZ began preparations for mass production, and already in December produced the first 35 cars. By the end of spring 1944, the pace of production was able to increase several times. Starting in June, Chelyabinsk shipped at least 200-220 tanks monthly.

New armor


In February 1944, work began on upgrading the IS-2 by improving security. The frontal armor borrowed from the IS-1, in some situations, could not cope with German shells, and it should be strengthened. SKB-2 ChKZ and Plant No. 100 were again involved in the work. The latter began to study options for deep modernization of equipment, while ChKZ limited himself to only processing the nose of the hull - this made it possible to quickly introduce reinforced armor into mass production.

As a result of a short search, they chose a new design with a straightened upper frontal part 100 mm thick with a 60 ° tilt, devoid of a characteristic “box” with a hatch and driver sightings. The lower element had the same thickness but a different angle. The possibility of making a forehead by welding from rolled parts or by casting as a single unit was considered.

During the tests, it was shown that the top of the welded forehead withstands a shot from the 75 mm KwK 42 gun from any distance, but the lower part breaks through, and cracking of the welds was also observed. Cast forehead withstood even 88 mm shells. To defeat the improved IS-2 in the forehead, a German tank would have to approach the distance of guaranteed penetration by the D-25T gun.

How the IS-2 was created and improved

IS-2 on the streets of Berlin, spring 1945. Photo by Armor.kiev.ua

In June 1944, manufacturers began preparations for the serial production of the IS-2 with a new frontal armor. Over time, it was possible to solve all production issues, and a tank with straightened armor replaced the predecessor in production.

Production rate


ChKZ manufactured the first serial IS-2 at the end of 1943. Production continued and gained momentum until it reached the level of up to 250 tanks per month - such indicators were maintained from August 1944 to March 1945. In the future, the plan began to be reduced, and in June Chelyabinsk released the last five tanks. Thus, in 1943, the ChKZ gave the army 35 IS-2 tanks, in 1944 - 2210, and in 1945 - 1140. Total, almost 3400 units.

After the final lifting of the blockade, it was decided to deploy IS-2 at the Leningrad Kirov Plant with the involvement of a number of other local enterprises. In particular, the Izhora plant, already participating in the production of heavy tanks, was supposed to make armor. The first cars were planned to be received in October 1944.

The restoration of Leningrad as a whole and the LKZ in particular turned out to be extremely difficult, and plans to produce the IS-2 had to be reviewed several times. The assembly of equipment began in the fall, and the first batch of five tanks was completed only in March 1945, but its acceptance was delayed. The second batch went to the Red Army in May, and the first was accepted only in June. At this, the production of IS-2 at LKZ ceased.

Battle victories


Since the beginning of 1944, the IS-2 tanks arrived in the Red Army. Their main operators became separate guards heavy tank breakthrough regiments (ogvttp). The main objective of such units and their heavy armored vehicles was to strengthen the army’s formations in order to break through the enemy’s defense in critical areas. IS-2 heavy tanks were distributed between 25 breakthrough regiments.


IS-2 in the center of the German capital. Photo Armor.kiev.ua

IS-2s were also supplied to units from the Guards Tank Brigades, where they were to serve along with T-34 medium tanks. In this case, the task of the IS-2 was to follow the T-34 and defeat enemy equipment from long distances.

Regardless of their affiliation and role on the battlefield, the IS-2 tanks with powerful armor and weapons proved to be a convenient and effective means of fighting the enemy. They could hit all the main armored vehicles of the Wehrmacht at considerable distances, including from a safe distance, which gave certain tactical advantages. The number of enemy tanks and self-propelled guns destroyed - and the consequences of this in the context of further battles - is difficult to overestimate.

The enemy quickly appreciated the new Soviet equipment and saw in it a serious threat. Even the appearance of the IS-2 on the battlefield could determine the outcome of the battle. Since mid-1944, in the reports of tankers of the Red Army there are references to attempts by the enemy to get away from a collision with Soviet heavy tanks.

The creation of new models of equipment as a whole did not have a decisive significance on the course of battles. So, the episode of the Lviv-Sandomierz operation of August 1944 is well known, when the 71st military police department collided with the latest Pz.Kpfw machines. VI Ausf. B Tiger II 501st heavy tank battalion. As a result of the battle, the Germans had to write off six Tigers-2; The Red Army did not suffer losses. One of the tanks participating in this battle is now an exhibit of the museum in Kubinka.

However, the IS-2 was not fundamentally invincible. So, in 1944 more than 430 tanks were recorded in irreparable losses. Subsequently, their number increased. Hundreds of tankers were injured or killed.


IS-2 tanks transferred to friendly China, 1959. Photo by Wikimedia Commons

The defeat of the tank in the upper frontal leaf was virtually impossible; at the same time, cases of breaking through the lower part with different consequences are known. German gunners and tankers, if possible, tried to hit the side, if possible from a short distance. So, at distances up to 900-1000 m, side armor could not always protect against 88-mm shells of the Tiger tank or from a more powerful weapons.

After 1945-th


IS-2 heavy tanks quickly enough became the most important component of the armored forces of the Red Army, capable of effectively solving special tasks. They were responsible for breaking through the defense and supporting the advancing troops, worked as part of assault groups in cities, etc. In all cases, a powerful reservation and a 122-mm gun were the most serious arguments against any arguments of the enemy.

IS-2 was actively used in all operations of the Red Army in 1944-45. The last shots of D-25T guns at real German targets were fired already in Berlin, including on the garrison of the Reichstag. Soon, a number of tanks were sent to the East to participate in the war against Japan.

In the postwar period, the IS-2 remained in service, transferred to friendly countries and underwent modernization. At the same time, the fleet of heavy tanks was modernized by decommissioning obsolete and exhausted equipment and supplying the latest vehicles - IS-3 and T-10. Some tanks were handed over to friendly foreign countries.

In 1957, the next modernization program was launched, the result of which was the IS-2M tank. Replacing part of the units and installing new equipment allowed to continue operation. Minor innovations were carried out later, until the end of the sixties.


Some IS-2Ms still underway, 2016. Photo by Vitalykuzmin.net

However, the number of IS-2M tanks in units was gradually reduced - as completely new vehicles arrived, they were transferred to training vehicles, sent for storage or disposed of. Later, the abandonment of heavy tanks as a class began, and modern MBTs replaced them. However, the official order to remove the IS-2 from service was issued only in 1997. Until that time, only tank monuments and separate “tactical targets” at the training grounds survived.

Best in class


The heavy tank IS-2 was the result of many years of development of the most important area in the field of armored vehicles and combined the best practices of Soviet engineers. His appearance in the Red Army units in the most positive way affected their combat effectiveness, giving new tactical and strategic opportunities.

Despite the relatively small number, the IS-2 tanks and their crews most actively participated in all major operations and made a significant contribution to the overall victory. The merits of tankers who solved special tasks were awarded with thousands of state awards, including the highest. After the war, modernized armored vehicles and tank crews continued their service and for many years supported their comrades with newer and more advanced equipment.

Given such stories service, combat use and design features, the IS-2 can rightfully be considered the best domestic heavy tank since the Great Patriotic War, as well as one of the most important milestones in the history of our tank construction.
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

73 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Kuroneko 9 May 2020 05: 27 New
    • 11
    • 0
    +11
    The development of such a tank was entrusted to SKB-2 of the Chelyabinsk Kirov Plant and pilot plant No. 100. The result of these works was the appearance of the IS-1 tank, which was put into service already in August 1943. However, this machine was not mass-produced - from October 1943 to January 1944, a little more than a hundred tanks were produced.

    It would be worth saying that in fact the IS originates in experimental HFs, or rather, it is further (albeit rather radical, processing of the HF-13).
    Compare purely in appearance:


    VLD is actually one-on-one, like the tower.
    1. svp67 9 May 2020 09: 58 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      Quote: Kuroneko
      It would be worth saying that in fact IP originates

      Yes, the author of the article generally omitted or “forgot” a lot to mention. At least the fact that along with the IS-1, the KV-85 entered the troops. That the IS-2 was simultaneously tested not only with a 122 mm TP, but also with a 100 mm TP
      And honestly, we can regret that they didn’t release ISs from 100 mm TP, even if every 10, but this would make it possible to have units of "tank destroyers" in those same heavy tank brigades
      1. dvina71 9 May 2020 13: 12 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Quote: svp67
        honestly, you can regret that they did not release ICs with a 100 mm TP

        At 43 years old, the D10T was still in development .. So for the IS-2 there were two options for the 85mm S-53 (D-5t) or 122mm D-25T. Naturally passed option with a 122mm gun. Including the high explosive impact of her shell
        Su-100 with d10t appeared only in the 44th year ..
      2. Alf
        Alf 9 May 2020 15: 42 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: svp67
        And honestly, we can regret that they didn’t release ISs from 100 mm TP, even if every 10, but this would make it possible to have units of "tank destroyers" in those same heavy tank brigades

        And what would it give? The tank’s tank with a 122-mm gun was 28 shots, with 100-29 shots. A big difference ? The real rate of fire was approximately the same, try spinning with a meter crowbar in the tower, and do not forget that the BC was pushed all over the tank. BB shells for the 100-mm guns went into the series only in the fall of the 44th, and before that, what to charge? Landmines? Yes, and real armor penetration was the same. Do not forget that the main projectile of the IS was the IF, and during the assault on German cities and SD it turned out that the fact that a 100-mm projectile could not be destroyed, a 122-mm shell falls apart from the first hit.
      3. Alexey RA 10 May 2020 20: 15 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: svp67
        And honestly, we can regret that they didn’t release ISs from 100 mm TP, even if every 10, but this would make it possible to have units of "tank destroyers" in those same heavy tank brigades

        Given the real rate of fire of the D-10T in the tower (and not at the stand) and equal armor penetration of 100 mm and 122 mm - not worth the candle.
        Especially if you remember that the armor-piercing projectile for the 100 mm only got into production in November 1944 (because of which the release of the SU-100 was delayed).
  2. Crowe 9 May 2020 05: 38 New
    • 16
    • 2
    +14
    It is a pity that the IS-3 did not have time to fight, everyone on Victory Day !!!
    1. Kuroneko 9 May 2020 06: 04 New
      • 21
      • 3
      +18
      Quote: Crowe
      It is a pity that the IS-3 did not have time to fight, everyone on Victory Day !!!

      Similarly, with Victory, comrade!
      But the IS-3 still fought, in fairness, I note. Quoting from the Rukopedia:
      IS-3s were used to suppress the 1956 Hungarian uprising. Losses of cars were single. Hungarian events became the only episode participation of IS-3 in hostilities as part of the USSR Armed Forces.

      So the Egyptians still used it (of course, mediocre), but I'm specifically about the application in the USSR.
      Well and still:
      During the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine in 2014, the IS-3, which stood in the form of a monument in Konstantinovka, was brought into working condition and removed from the pedestal. According to the members of the DPR armed groups themselves, on June 30, 2014 the tank was first used in a battle near Ulyanovka.

      True, this IS-3 did not have shells, so it was used more like a scarecrow and a tractor. Anyway, the old Victory tank is used for its intended purpose - against the Nazis!
      1. mvg
        mvg 9 May 2020 09: 19 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        So the Egyptians still used it (of course, mediocre)

        He fought in Syria. And as fixed firing points and as a breakthrough tank. Both there and there without success.
        1. Zaurbek 12 May 2020 10: 15 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          IS 3 for fighting the end of the war and after you need a different gun. or 130mm or 100-115 mm, but already PT. Type T-12
      2. Aviator_ 9 May 2020 20: 08 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        This tank from the pedestal was used as a movable machine-gun mount (the bracket for the “Cliff” was welded), and the gun was initially in an unfit condition.
      3. Valdaev 9 May 2020 23: 33 New
        • 4
        • 17
        -13
        And are you satisfied that Is-3 fought for the fact that fouvlov socialism was imposed on Hungary for another 33 years?
        1. max702 10 May 2020 15: 34 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          Quote: Valdaev
          And are you satisfied that Is-3 fought for the fact that fouvlov socialism was imposed on Hungary for another 33 years?

          Hungary for this trick had to be burned to ashes ... In the USSR, they remembered Hungary's participation in World War II very well .. We regret these, and then a knife in the back ..
      4. Revolver 10 May 2020 08: 38 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: Kuroneko
        So the Egyptians still used it (of course, mediocre)

        Well, Arabs they are such Arabs. Whatever they give to them, they’ll either break, or lose, or use it differently, such as foolishly shoot at their own.
        Jews then captured a lot of tanks, more and more T-54/55/62, but also IS-3. So they put Teshki in operation, first as it is, then altered it to their standards and called Tyrant, some still in service after being converted into heavy armored personnel carriers. But the IS-3 did not suit them with something, so they were sawed for scrap, except for one that was put in the museum.
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 10 May 2020 21: 15 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          But the IS-3 did not suit them with something, so they were sawed for scrap, except for one that was put in the museum.

          Almost everyone put on the banks of the Suez Canal on sloping grounds as artillery pieces!
    2. Kote Pan Kokhanka 9 May 2020 06: 23 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Crowe
      It is a pity that the IS-3 did not have time to fight, everyone on Victory Day !!!

      Happy hearing !!!
      If objectively, in terms of performance, the IS-3 was inferior to the IS-2m! The latter served the Motherland longer by a good quarter of a century!
      By the way, the IS-3 participated in the Arab-Israeli wars! Moreover, they were used as self-propelled guns on the Sinai Peninsula by the Israelis, but as far as I know, they were not included in the linear tank troops, in contrast to the T-34, 54, 55 and 62!
      1. Valdaev 9 May 2020 23: 41 New
        • 1
        • 8
        -7
        Here you go! Right now! On May 9th! Halt! )
      2. Alexey RA 10 May 2020 20: 19 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
        If objectively, in terms of performance, the IS-3 was inferior to the IS-2m!

        It is in peacetime. In wartime, the tank on average simply did not have time to operate as much - it was either knocked out or, for one reason or another, went into repair.
        Therefore, the T-34-85 and ISs in wartime, the GABTU was quite satisfied. And how the war ended - so Fedorenko immediately began to demand to bring the operational qualities of domestic tanks to the level of "Sherman", considering that he was almost the standard of a peacetime tank smile
    3. Nikolaevich I 9 May 2020 08: 08 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      Quote: Crowe
      It is a pity that the IS-3 did not have time to fight

      But the IS-3 traveled to Berlin and took part in the Berlin parade on the occasion of the victory ...
      1. Valdaev 9 May 2020 23: 44 New
        • 3
        • 13
        -10
        Yeah, since then the tradition of ceremonial supertanks was born. Armata carries with honor, cho. Cum patriots
  3. Kuroneko 9 May 2020 05: 43 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    As a result of a short search, they chose a new design with a straightened upper frontal part 100 mm thick with a 60 ° tilt, devoid of a characteristic “box” with a hatch and driver sightings. The lower element had the same thickness but a different angle. The possibility of making a forehead by welding from rolled parts or by casting as a single unit was considered.

    During the tests, it was shown that the top of the welded forehead withstands a shot from the 75 mm KwK 42 gun from any distance, but the lower part breaks through, and cracking of the welds was also observed. Cast forehead withstood even 88 mm shells. To defeat the improved IS-2 in the forehead, a German tank would have to approach the distance of guaranteed penetration by the D-25T gun.
    ....................
    The defeat of the tank in the upper frontal leaf was virtually impossible; at the same time, cases of breaking through the lower part with different consequences are known. German gunners and tankers, if possible, tried to hit the side, if possible from a short distance. So, at distances up to 900-1000 m, side armor could not always protect against 88-mm shells of the Tiger tank or from more powerful weapons.

    Well and again: in fact, the Achilles heel of all IS-2s (that of the original ones, that was the model of 1944) remained the frontal sections of the tower on the sides of the gun’s mask. However, it’s exactly that “heel”. Yes, getting there was very not easy, but even in German memos to Panther tankers this vulnerability was indicated (Pz. IV shells still held these places).
    1. mark1 9 May 2020 06: 11 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Well and still - a cast armor part is always worse in armor resistance of a part from rolled armor (WWII years by 15-20%) of the same thickness. Casting of body parts on ISs began to be used solely for the sake of saving scarce steel, and in the process of overcoming this deficit, casting was gradually abandoned.
      Happy Victory Day to all!
      1. Kuroneko 9 May 2020 06: 16 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Quote: mark1
        Casting of body parts on ICs began to be used exclusively for the sake of saving scarce rental

        Not only that. Casting during the war years has simply become much more technologically advanced. Well, stupidly faster. What really that, and in the 44th year with rental, we did not have any special plugs. Now, as it became clear that the Reich was about to die, then yes, they were gradually returning to quality (because they had done enough).
        1. mark1 9 May 2020 06: 43 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Quote: Kuroneko
          Casting during the war years has simply become much more technologically advanced.

          In the manufacture of towers to a greater extent.
          Quote: Kuroneko
          What really that, and in the 44th year with rental, we did not have any special plugs.

          Let me remind you that the tank was developed from the beginning of the year 43 taking into account the then problems, and at the beginning the forehead of the hull did not have sufficient armor resistance, the increase in it due to the increase in the thickness of the armor had limitations due to the undesirability of overloading the front rollers, which already got extra. load in the form of D-25, so as soon as
          Quote: Kuroneko
          in the 44th year with rental, we no longer had any special plugs
          immediately began the transition to parts from armored hire. Note that the body of the IS-3, for all its complexity, was made welded rather than cast.
          1. Kuroneko 9 May 2020 07: 43 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: mark1
            immediately began the transition to parts from armored hire. Note that the body of the IS-3, for all its complexity, was made welded rather than cast.

            Duck "pike nose" sense cast do not have the slightest woman.
            1. mark1 9 May 2020 09: 33 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              I don’t see any problems repeating in casting (although casting would give a no less successful ballistic shape) But do you know anything about the IS-3 case besides the “pike nose” (for example, how is it different from the T-10)?
              1. Alf
                Alf 9 May 2020 15: 45 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: mark1
                I don’t see problems repeat in casting

                It is only "necessary" to rebuild the plant.
                1. mark1 9 May 2020 18: 41 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Think big ... the factory already had a chic foundry ... the technology for welding thick armor plates was worse developed.
    2. Kote Pan Kokhanka 9 May 2020 06: 30 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      I think the Achilles heel of the IS-2 and IS-3 was small ammunition for the gun and low rate of fire!
      Search for IS vulnerabilities is a way of self-flagellation! Similar flaws in the gun mask have modern MBTs Abrams, Leopard-2 and Leclerc.
      In fact, the IS was an excellent breakthrough tank, and if you make a royal flush, the IS-4 was the strongest production tank of World War II!
      1. Kuroneko 9 May 2020 07: 53 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
        I think the Achilles heel of the IS-2 and IS-3 was small ammunition for the gun and low rate of fire!

        They were not created as true anti-tank tanks. Only the Germans did this - forcedly (well, and then - the Allies, already after the Second World War ... And then, the IS-3 scared them so much that the very same Britons frantically washed down the FV4005, with a 180-mm fool).

        And the IS-2 BC (and I think even the IS-3) was quite sufficient for a specific combat mission. It was only at the SU-152 and ISU-152 (and that, only when they had to act at the forefront) sometimes the kit was not enough.
        1. Lopatov 9 May 2020 17: 56 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Kuroneko
          They were not created as true anti-tank tanks.

          Rate of fire is needed only for "anti-tank tanks" (s)?
          1. Kuroneko 10 May 2020 07: 38 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: Spade
            Rate of fire is needed only for "anti-tank tanks" (s)?

            Mostly yes. Before the same KV-2, no one set the task of quick firing from his 152-mm howitzer. At least once a minute gasp - and the rules. He drove up to direct fire, slowly took aim at the tinkling of machine guns on his armor, collapsed the bunker, and slowly moved on.
            In the same way with the IS-2, even if the tank duel suddenly happened - well, the Panther will strike it three times while it is charging (and the shells are separate loading, it’s only the Americans did the unitary 120 mm for their T34) and takes aim, the armor of one fig is such that nothing is scary - clap! - and there is no Panther.
            1. Lopatov 10 May 2020 15: 43 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Kuroneko
              Before the same KV-2, no one set the task of quick firing from his 152-mm howitzer.

              Even as it was set. Life.
              Shooting the floor wall of a bunker under enemy fire is not the process that you want to extend.
              1. Kuroneko 10 May 2020 16: 05 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                KV-2 was created taking into account practical invulnerability to a typical bunker. And he was not supposed to meet the enemy’s tanks. Moreover, other units of the Red Army were obliged to take on the task of anti-tank combat (but even if they screwed up, he could carry them out himself, even if it was not done for that). In the history of the Great Patriotic War, perhaps only the SU-152 (I recall that it was created feverishly quickly, in an extremely short time before the fighter on the Kursk Bulge) still had some sort of aim to fight the latest German tanks. And yes, it justified the hopes with success (for the caliber!) - which nevertheless did not prevent it from being just a “side effect” - One FIG dryers were used in the vast majority of cases for their intended purpose precisely as an artillery support artillery.
                Well, let me remind you about Ferdinand. Almost indestructible (in a tank duel) fool. Very good high rate of fire. Caliber? Well, it’s known which one. Obviously not the one that can break apart pillboxes and fortifications with one or two shots. But it can clearly nail even from 3 kilometers on armored vehicles (there were confirmations, and by no means single ones). Armor, I note, is ultimatum. Frontal It has never been pierced by our guns. So - do you conclude?
                I can help. Fedor's armor was designed to counteract the TANKs and powerful Russian anti-tank guns. And yes, with a high rate of fire - the Germans are not fools, and sought to minimize time under the shelling of serious guns.
                And the KV-2 and SU-152 had completely different tasks. Tank battle for them was completely atypical. No, they could show themselves in it, but they didn’t do it for this at all (I repeat once again that the SU-152 is still partially and for this it was forced, because at that moment there was simply nothing better).
                1. Lopatov 10 May 2020 17: 12 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Kuroneko
                  KV-2 was created taking into account practical invulnerability to a typical bunker. And he was not supposed to meet the enemy’s tanks.

                  Well....
                  I went to the fire no more than three degrees from the perpendicular to the wall to minimize rebounds. And begins to break it. At this time, they can fire at him. You can’t move, you have to shoot again.

                  I do not think that in such a situation the rate of fire does not matter.

                  Quote: Kuroneko
                  Armor, I note, is ultimatum. Frontal

                  Not "ultimatum", but "with a low PROBABILITY of breaking through."
                  However, the more shots the enemy fires, the higher the probability of the event. With special "luckiness" you can wait for a direct hit of artillery from the PDO
        2. Octopus 9 May 2020 17: 59 New
          • 4
          • 5
          -1
          Quote: Kuroneko
          And then, the IS-3 scared them so much that the very same British rashly washed down already the FV4005, with a 180 mm fool).

          I remind you that the car in the photo was not accepted for service. And with the IS-3 in real life, the Centurions and even the Shermans, in one case or another the Israeli ones, completely coped.

          The Allies already saw a tank in the 44th year, and a massive tank with an impenetrable VLD for them. Nothing, they almost reached Berlin.
      2. Alf
        Alf 9 May 2020 15: 51 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
        I think the Achilles heel of the IS-2 and IS-3 was small ammunition for the gun and low rate of fire!

        And what was the REAL rate of fire of the Tiger, given how many shells he had shoved over the hull?
        1. Aviator_ 9 May 2020 20: 12 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          The Tiger had a unitary cartridge, due to this, its rate of fire was ensured.
          1. Alf
            Alf 9 May 2020 20: 15 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Quote: Aviator_
            The Tiger had a unitary cartridge, due to this, its rate of fire was ensured.

            Let the Tiger have at least three times a unitar, but if you need to get it almost from the floor, you should not talk about any 7-8 shots per minute. And you should not forget about such a parameter as “aim correction time”.
          2. Alexey RA 10 May 2020 20: 35 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Aviator_
            The Tiger had a unitary cartridge, due to this, its rate of fire was ensured.

            The unitary unit for tanks of that time is good with calibers less than 100 mm.
            Already the D-10 with its unitary in real rate of fire (in the tower) was not much superior to the D-25 with its separate loading. Because loading the unitary into the gun installed in the tower is Tetris with a 30-meter-long projectile in a limited space of the fighting compartment.
            1. Aviator_ 10 May 2020 22: 03 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Here the Germans with their 88-mm unitar (after all, less than 100) and surpassed IP in rate of fire. But in general, it would be nice to know the numbers, no one knows?
        2. Octopus 9 May 2020 23: 23 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Alf
          how many shells did he have shoved around the hull?

          What do you think, why is there "laying the first line"?
          1. Alf
            Alf 9 May 2020 23: 29 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Octopus
            Quote: Alf
            how many shells did he have shoved around the hull?

            What do you think, why is there "laying the first line"?

            But after a couple of minutes of the battle it will end, what will be the further rate of fire? And do you need to take into account the time to correct the interference?
            1. Octopus 9 May 2020 23: 38 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              Quote: Alf
              But after a couple of minutes of the battle it will end, what will be the further rate of fire?

              And how long does the battle go at maximum fire intensity? At any pause, the loader pulls out shells from the corners of the car and replenishes the laying of the first stage.
              Quote: Alf
              And do you need to take into account the time to correct the interference?

              It is necessary. And what, the Tiger could not correct the tip-off at the same time as reloading, but the ISa could?

              What causes you controversy? What ammunition of the Tiger and ISa in terms of amatol in the OFS is the same? What is the Tiger ammunition three times higher? That the IS-2 was still a very peculiar machine, which no one except the USSR began to do, and this, probably, should cause not only shouts of “Hurray!”, But also some questions?
  4. Tritebemalo 9 May 2020 06: 17 New
    • 9
    • 1
    +8
    On this topic, it is better to read Yuri Pasholok-series of articles, here is the last one: https://warspot.ru/17113-dolgoigrayuschiy-is and not chewing Ryabov's repeats
  5. bya965 9 May 2020 06: 38 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    A little known fact, one of the leaders in the development of tanks, including the IS-2, was also one of the designers of the nuclear and hydrogen bombs.
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Духов,_Николай_Леонидович
  6. DWG1905 9 May 2020 08: 23 New
    • 13
    • 4
    +9
    Dear author! The desire to write an article is commendable, but this topic is laid out on the shelves by a number of researchers probably 95%. In addition to Yura Poshalok, back in the shaggy 2000s, two books were published at the Technics of Youth Publishing House http://zhurnalko.net/=weapon/tankomaster/tankomaster-Special-tanki-is in the creation of which I took an active part. True, from 200 pages there are very few left, but you can’t deceive what you can do with the economy. About 5% percent, briefly.
    1. The economy of war is not properly described, the IP is a wartime machine and is designed using casting to the maximum, which is not always good.
    2. It is not determined until the end of the palm who proposed to install the A-19 ballistic gun in the tank. Since the idea was a success, the first one started to pull the rope.
    3. The project for the modernization of KV ChKZ instead of IP was not found. The NKTP order where they were given a melon for it, and what was offered not. In my opinion, this undertaking makes sense, but most likely the economy won. And there was a suspicion that this was the beginning of the creation of the IS-4.
    4. Why, in the very first report of the NKTP on the inspection of the Tiger (February - March), all of our tank designers described everything and even noted good viewing devices, but about the cannon which multiplied by 0 the IP project (object 233) is not a word.
    5. The works of KB ChKZ and Plant No. 100 were not sorted in parallel on the shelves. I have a drawing of the tower 240 of the object of Plant No. 100, only it has been expanded due to the fact that the walls of the tower are parallel. Who did why and why? And there are many such questions.
    Yes, and IP did not go east, there were HFs, but they did not have much success.
    Who are interested in tanks? Please visit https://drawingstanks.blogspot.com/

    Booking schemes are made by Mikhail Pavlov and it’s not good to pry someone else’s, links that I didn’t know were not accepted. At least the authorship indicated.
    1. Alexey RA 10 May 2020 20: 40 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: DWG1905
      3. The project for the modernization of KV ChKZ instead of IP was not found. The NKTP order where they were given a melon for it, and what was offered not. In my opinion, this undertaking makes sense, but most likely the economy won.

      Most likely, in the case of KV everything rested on a thick armored car. IP was not in vain done with the maximum use of casting - in the USSR in those days there was not even a 60-mm armor plate on the "mold".
  7. Undecim 9 May 2020 09: 08 New
    • 7
    • 2
    +5

    The results of the shelling of Pz.Kpfw.Tiger Ausf.E from the A-19 cannon, the tank version of which was designated the D-25T, from a distance of 1500 m. The torn piece of armor and the turret pushed by striking the shell from the shoulder strap on 540 mm are clearly visible.
    All members of the forum with Victory Day!
    The author has once again demonstrated that he can ruin any topic, even such an interesting one.
  8. mvg
    mvg 9 May 2020 09: 17 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Guess the author of the article the first time. And there are no more words.
  9. Potter 9 May 2020 09: 46 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Planetary rotation mechanisms stood on the IS, starting with IS-1, and did not appear only on the IS-2, as the author indicates.
    In the Red Army at the end of the war there were no guards tank brigades of mixed composition, as the author claims. There were linear guards brigades on the T-34-85 tanks, almost the entire release of the T-44 went into service with the guard brigades, but these brigades never got to the front. And there were heavy tank brigades equipped with IS-2 tanks. The main issue of the IS-2 tanks went to the guards heavy breakout tank regiments, the purpose of which was to break through the enemy’s defense.
    The use of IS-2 tanks as artillery support tanks, perhaps, could have taken place in battle, but in no way was the main task of the heavy tanks of the Red Army.
  10. Hagen 9 May 2020 09: 46 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    The presentation of long-chewed topics is probably not entirely a good thing. I think that in terms of armaments one should try to pay attention to those samples, information about which is being posted for the first time. Or, according to old models, do some literary research, where to place the most reliable and interesting authors in order to popularize serious knowledge, and not a faceless educational program for cooks.
  11. Tycoon 9 May 2020 10: 34 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    A good tank turned out, an interesting car.
  12. Nikolaevich I 9 May 2020 11: 02 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    I had to read that the IS-2 crews were mainly officers! In general, this was far from always! For IS-1 tanks, according to the staffing schedule, there should be 2 officers and 2 sergeants in the crew .... but this shows that the selection of IS tank crews was very strict! In the stories about the participation of the IS-2 tanks in battles, the officer crews were indeed mentioned; that is, all crew members were in officer ranks ... It is believed that, except for the IS-2, the SA had an IS-2M tank ... and so, “by and large”, all the IS-2 tanks were “the same” ...! But, it seems, as there is a book about the IS-2 tanks, in which the author claims that he counted as many as 6 (!) “Varieties” of the IS-2 tank ... depending on the year of manufacture and the plant ... (alas , I don’t remember the author of the book now and the "correct" title of the book ...) By the way, the first IS-2s were equipped with 122 mm guns with piston bolts ... subsequently, with wedge bolts ... the type of DT changed ... to "further "ISakh (T-10 ...) tank guns were equipped with ejectors ... a" facilitator "(accelerator) of loading was installed ...
    As for the lack in the lower part of the frontal “detail” of the ISs, that is, the mention of the defeat of the tank in “this place” from the anti-tank “rifle” sPz.B 41 (28/20 mm) ... Some sources indicate IS-2 but more "reliable" refer to IS-1 ...
    1. Alf
      Alf 9 May 2020 15: 59 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      As for the lack in the lower part of the frontal “detail” of the ISs, that is, the mention of the defeat of the tank in “this place” from the anti-tank “rifle” sPz.B 41 (28/20 mm) ... Some sources indicate IS-2 but more "reliable" refer to IS-1 ...

      TABLE penetration data, not real-field.

      Case bottom 90 mm ...
  13. vladcub 9 May 2020 11: 05 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: mvg
    So the Egyptians still used it (of course, mediocre)

    He fought in Syria. And as fixed firing points and as a breakthrough tank. Both there and there without success.

    In fact, in addition to the tank, you need a "tiny" detail: a trained crew, and if the crew is from pentyuhs (you will find the definition yourself) then .. Success will only be dreamed of
  14. vladcub 9 May 2020 11: 32 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Comrades, with Victory Day.
    I have long had a question about the armament of the IS: is the machine gun clear, and the rear? That he is shelling his own rear. Perhaps someone knows where he will be needed? I have not found such episodes. And along the way, about a heavy machine gun, I heard or read somewhere that he had justified himself during street battles for Berlin and especially in Budapest, but I don’t know for sure
    1. garri-lin 9 May 2020 12: 18 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      A tank surrounded by enemy infantry is a dead tank. The size of the tower made it possible to protect the rear. The size of the crew allowed to select, if necessary, the shooter. Insured.
    2. Alf
      Alf 9 May 2020 16: 02 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: vladcub
      I have long had a question about the armament of the IS: is the machine gun clear, and the rear? That he is shelling his own rear. Perhaps someone knows where he will be needed?

      IS tank breakthrough enemy bands. Situation. The tank went through the first line of trenches, deepened a hundred or two, on the first line suddenly Hans recovered and began to water our infantry from the MG, that's why a feed machine gun is needed. But in fact, I never met a mention of the applicability of this machine gun, which is indirectly confirmed by the facts of its absence on later models of heavy tanks.
      And along the way, about a heavy machine gun, I heard or read somewhere that he had justified himself during street battles for Berlin and especially in Budapest, but I don’t know for sure

      Shooting at targets in the dead zone of the gun and at the upper floors.
      1. Alexey RA 10 May 2020 20: 49 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: vladcub
        I have long had a question about the armament of the IS: is the machine gun clear, and the rear? That he is shelling his own rear. Perhaps someone knows where he will be needed?

        Uv M. Svirin wrote that the “Voroshilov machine gun” was useful for suppressing enemy groups that were suddenly discovered during the march - for in a marching position the turret unfolded 180 degrees, and the gun was fixed to the stop.

        In general, they put it on the basis of “there is no hope in their infantry” - so that tankers could, without deploying a tower, clear the MTO roof and generally the rear sectors of enemy infantry that crawled out of shelters after the passage of tanks.
        Quote: vladcub
        And along the way, about a heavy machine gun, I heard or read somewhere that he had justified himself during street battles for Berlin and especially in Budapest, but I don’t know for sure

        According to the results of tests of the anti-aircraft turret with DShK for TT and self-propelled guns, the conclusion was one: installation for firing at aircraft is unsuitable, but it is urgently needed for tank operations in urban conditions.
        1. vladcub 11 May 2020 17: 45 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          So I definitely heard that DShK justified itself in street battles?
          1. Alexey RA 11 May 2020 18: 19 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: vladcub
            So I definitely heard that DShK justified itself in street battles?

            Yes - he was the only means of self-defense of the tank, allowing you to work at close range on targets "above the tower." Plus a 12,7-mm caliber allowed to penetrate light shelters that protected from rifle caliber bullets.
            The fact that with the meager volume of the DShK issue was considered necessary to be taken away from the air defense and put on the TT / self-propelled guns already speaks of the effectiveness and necessity of this machine gun for tankers. As well as the fact that the issue of its installation was decided at the level of the GKO decree.
            On October 14, 1944, Stalin signed GKO decree No. 6723ss “On the installation of large-caliber anti-aircraft machine guns DShK on self-propelled artillery systems and IS tanks.” In November, the first 25 IS-2s received anti-aircraft systems of a large-caliber machine gun DShK.
            (...)
            Different versions of this installation were put on Soviet tanks and self-propelled guns for several decades. In December 1944, the anti-aircraft installation was put on 125 IS-2, and since January 1945 it was received by all new tanks of this type.
            (...)
            Problems with the manning of anti-aircraft installations took place in January 1945. There were not enough collimator sights and DShK machine guns themselves.
            © Y. Pasholok
            1. vladcub 11 May 2020 20: 50 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              “they considered it necessary to take away from the air defense”, in fact, October 1944 was not October 1942 and even 1943. The Luftwaffe had a shortage of experienced pilots. The Red Army has already passed a hunger strike on airplanes.
              Read: Pokryshkin, Savitsky, Drabkin
              1. Alexey RA 12 May 2020 14: 13 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: vladcub
                “they considered it necessary to take away from the air defense”, in fact, October 1944 was not October 1942 and even 1943. The Luftwaffe had a shortage of experienced pilots. The Red Army has already passed a hunger strike on airplanes.
                Read: Pokryshkin, Savitsky, Drabkin

                It is better to read the memoirs of infantry and tank commanders. smile And there are regular complaints in them that the aircraft on the offensive either lag behind the ground units, or arrive only when the German has already left. In the spring-autumn period, there is no hope for aviation at all - the old airfields have become wet, they’re having great difficulty getting to the new rear with fuel.
                The release of the DShK for the war is about nine thousand. And from this amount, KKP was made for TT and heavy assault SAUs.
              2. Alexey RA 12 May 2020 14: 28 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Here is a typical picture of the offensive of 1944.
                On the horizon, as if from the earth, a purple cloud crawled out. The sun, hiding beneath it, scattered long red stripes across the sky. The snow from them became scarlet. And suddenly a Junkers sailed out of the cloud, followed by a second, third. Sanya counted twelve. They swam slowly, in gang, and resembled huge, bellied dragonflies. The head "Junkers" suddenly slid down the gutter, disappeared behind the forest, and then soared up, caught up with the last bomber, landed in its tail and again rushed to the peak. The Junkers described circle after circle. It seemed that a giant, ferris wheel was spinning between heaven and earth. Explosions were heard deaf, as if from underground. "Junkers" bombed, and to replace them from the same purple clouds crawled out "Heinkels", similar to scanty crows. They walked even slower, and then began to pour bombs out of the bag. Nobody bothered them.

                © Kurochkin - from the actually autobiographical novel "In War as in War". For it describes the very offensive and the very battle with the Tigers, for which Kurochkin was presented to the Red Banner (but he received the Order of the Patriotic War II degree).
                T. Kurochkin skillfully and fearlessly leads his crew. In the battle with the German invaders for the liberation of the Antopol-Boyark point, he took the battle with two German Tigers. By skillful maneuver, going down from the flank, he destroyed one German tank of the Tiger type, with his crew counting, and before the enemy’s manpower platoon. His ability to lead the crew in battle kept the milestone reached and kept his car in spite of the strong enemy fire. For all the time of the battles in the operation, the car of Lieutenant Kurochkin did not have forced stops and breakdowns.
                Awarded the government award Order of the Red Banner.

                Commander of the 1893th Fastovsky Self-Propelled Artillery Regiment
                Lieutenant Colonel Basov
                8 January 1944 g
                1. vladcub 12 May 2020 19: 34 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Wait a minute, a movie about self-propelled guns: “In war is like in war” in my opinion was called that? Is there still the main character, M.L. Maleshko?
                  I have long looked and I'm not sure that I remember the name correctly
                  1. Alexey RA 12 May 2020 19: 48 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: vladcub
                    Wait a minute, a movie about self-propelled guns: “In war is like in war” in my opinion was called that? Is there still the main character, M.L. Maleshko?

                    He is. The film is based on the eponymous novel by Kurochkin. And junior lieutenant Maleshkina Kurochkin wrote from himself.
                    True, unlike the main character, the guard, Lieutenant Kurochkin did not die, but reached Germany and was seriously injured on January 31, 1945 when crossing the Oder.
                    1. vladcub 12 May 2020 20: 16 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      I didn’t read the story, but I watched the film. I think to reconsider.
                      In my opinion, the most successful films about the war were made in the period: 1963-1978, until 1963 I don’t remember (1-2 no more), and then it got worse and worse
  15. BAI
    BAI 9 May 2020 13: 25 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    At distances up to 1 km, the D-25T could hit the 200-mm armor of the self-propelled Panzerjäger Tiger (P) Ferdinand.

    There were no tank and anti-tank guns in the Red Army piercing Ferdinand's frontal armor.


    It is obvious to everyone that a high-explosive shell of any caliber was hit in the forehead not to break through the armor, but to stun the crew.
    1. Alexey RA 10 May 2020 20: 59 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: BAI
      It is obvious to everyone that a high-explosive shell of any caliber was hit in the forehead not to break through the armor, but to stun the crew.

      And the failure of mechanisms located close to the place where the projectile hit. The “Royal Tiger”, for example, hit the OFS caliber 122-152 mm in the lower part of the frontal projection disabled the rotation mechanism. Even without breaking through the armor.
      1. Alf
        Alf 10 May 2020 21: 51 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Alexey RA
        The “Royal Tiger”, for example, hit the OFS caliber 122-152 mm in the lower part of the frontal projection disabled the rotation mechanism. Even without breaking through the armor.

        Not only. There was a breakdown from the gearbox mount (FRONT), which completely immobilized the tank.
  16. aglet 9 May 2020 13: 35 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Quote: Kuroneko
    or rather, this is a further (albeit rather radical, processing of the KV-13

    well, the stump is clear, not from BT it was developed
  17. tanki-tanki 12 May 2020 12: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Is-2 is a good tank. good
  18. Zum
    Zum 14 June 2020 20: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The IS-2 is by no means the best tank, but it fulfilled its mission. It was such a tank that the Army needed for an offensive war, which entered the active phase since 1944. IS-3 also did not become a breakthrough .......... the future was for the main tank as a class ......

    PS My grandfather, a military man who served on the IS-2 and IS-3, loved these cars, but his love was subjective .......