"Stalinist" tanks

Tank IS-2

One of the symbols of the Great Patriotic War is the Soviet T-34 tank. This is a medium tank, which began to be produced even before the start
war and which since 1942 has become the main a tank Red Army.

In Western historiography, the T-34 is often called the "Stalinist tank", while somewhat overlooking the fact that in the USSR there were truly "personalized" Stalinist tanks of the war period.

In 1943, the IS-1 heavy tank, named after the head of state, appeared in the Soviet Union. During production, not so many of these 44-ton trucks were produced - 107 units. In the same period, the IS-2 began to be produced, the mass of which was already 46 tons. And in this case, the production was really massive. During the relatively short production time of the second ISs, and this is from 1943 to 1945, the Soviet industry managed to produce almost 3,5 thousand of these tanks.

In 1944, an even heavier tank of the "Stalinist family", the IS-3, was developed. Its mass is close to 50 tons. The IS-3 was in service for a very long time - from 1945 to 1973. The industry has created at least 2,3 thousand of such armored vehicles.

On Dmitry Puchkov's channel, we decided to discuss "Stalinist" tanks and not only them. For example, the development of main battle tanks in our country and in the world as a whole is also being discussed. Klim Zhukov was invited to the studio for discussion.

Comments

[Aleks2000]

It's late. I watched this video for a week ...

Why?

[nnm]

Probably such an agreement with the channel.

[svp67]

I always listened to Klim Aleksandrovich with pleasure, but after this video I strongly doubted his knowledge, since here he "climbed" into "my territory" and alas, I can say that he said a lot of mistakes and absurdities ... starting with that that he began to compare tanks completely different in purpose.

[nnm]

The same is said by the naval officers on his profile topics.
The theme of the Middle Ages remained ...
It seems to me that you can listen to it as an aperitif before serious work on history. He tells brightly, interestingly, figuratively, fascinatingly, he voices many interesting facts, as about the same battle of Kulikovo, etc.
I think there is much more benefit from it than harm - it is better to let a person know at least something than not know anything. And then he himself will deal with more serious sources.

[Thunderbringer]

That is, he is incompetent in any of the questions that he tells everyone so confidently and with such aplomb?
But at the same time "he is useful". Because he's one of yours? And on this basis, it can crap the heads of other people?
Well, then Rogozin can talk nonsense. And he is useful, and there is no need to scold him.
Oh yes, he can't.
#this is another!

[nnm]

Everyone should be so incompetent !!!
In most questions, I listen to him with my mouth open, not knowing even 0.1% of what he said. Yes, I understand that narrow specialists in their questions can smash him to smithereens in most of his topics. But after all, he can be regarded as a popularizer of history. He does not distort history like Solonin, Suvorov, etc. He simply cannot completely immerse himself in the specialization of many topics. He may be wrong with details, nuances, and draw the wrong conclusions. But he certainly does not deliberately manipulate facts or misrepresent them on purpose. But what he does, at least for me, commands respect. And if you need to go deeper - have their own pros in narrow issues. And his business is to spark interest and refute the foundations of lies in history.
And "from ours" is, excuse me, from what?

[lucul]

That is, he is incompetent in any of the questions that he tells everyone so confidently and with such aplomb?
But at the same time "he is useful". Because he's one of yours? And on this basis, it can crap the heads of other people?
Well, then Rogozin can talk nonsense. And he is useful, and there is no need to scold him.

So what ? Our opponents are incompetent at 90% on all issues, but, nevertheless, they are trying to teach us)))

[210ox]

Of course, he can't talk nonsense (Rogozin) The degree of responsibility is not the same.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

About competence!
From the first lines of the article.

In 1944, an even heavier tank of the "Stalinist family", the IS-3, was developed. Its mass is close to 50 tons. The IS-3 was in service for a very long time - from 1945 to 1973. The industry has created at least 2,3 thousand of such armored vehicles.

By the way, the IS-2 was in service with the armies of the USSR and Russia for almost a quarter century longer than the IS-3. The latter were removed from service in 1995.
Regards, Vlad!

[Elturisto]

On the topic of the Middle Ages, he is also a specialist ...

[bang]

I always listened to Klim Aleksandrovich with pleasure, but after this video I strongly doubted his knowledge, since here he "climbed" into "my territory"

The same is said by the naval officers on his profile topics.

Tanks, ships - he works it out so that he can talk about his beloved Middle Ages. Alas, today there is no way without advertising.

[paul3390]

If it were not for his real stubbornness on the Norman theory, he would not have been worth it ..

[pereselenec]

Quote: svp67

I always listened to Klim Aleksandrovich with pleasure, but after this video I strongly doubted his knowledge, since here he "climbed" into "my territory" and alas, I can say that he said a lot of mistakes and absurdities ... starting with that that he began to compare tanks completely different in purpose.

Duck, he is, in fact, an amateur without appropriate education. All his videos are like this - scientific pop for the masses, but experts in specific topics always catch on mistakes.

[Force multiplier]

YouTube talking heads are absolute evil. Instead of finding any information on his own, a person listens to its retelling by someone who found it in the exact same network. And it's also good if this is a retelling without errors or manipulations.

[Elturisto]

Very correct and correct judgment.

[certero]

Quote: svp67

I always listened to Klim Alexandrovich with pleasure, but after this video I strongly doubted his knowledge

When Klim Sanych starts talking off-topic, he undoubtedly makes a lot of inaccuracies.
here is the word, there are dofig specialists in tanks and navy, but there are practically no people who talk about medieval weapons with enthusiasm and knowledge.
Here he should not go outside his diocese

[yehat2]

Quote: svp67

then he "climbed" into "my territory" and alas, I can say that he said a lot of mistakes and absurdity

so it's not about telling everything correctly and accurately, but about not ending the song about the whale and the elephant.