Author Topic: IS-2 Iosif Stalin. Perk Tank? (Read 954 times)

Karnak · « **on:** August 21, 2001, 06:17:00 PM »

In august 1942, the Soviet highcommand knew that the development of new heavy panzers were in full planning. The designwork on a new heavy tank were therefore started. With the experience from the KV conversions, (KV-3 and KV-13) Soviet started to build a new project, the IS-1 which mounted a 85mm L/53 cannon in mid 1943. In late -43, the first prototypes of the new IS, left the factory. After special field-tests, the IS series were ordered to be built in October 1943. Soon after the first production of the IS-1 had begun, Soviet needed an ever more powerful tank. Therefore, some of the IS-1 was rearmed with a new 100mm gun. This was going to show ineffective against other tanks and was not seriesproduced. Then, in the end of October a new 122mm cannon was tested in the battlefield by General F. Petrov. This cannon showed much more effective than the 100mm cannon. On October 31st, the first IS-2 was ready for battle. By the end of 1943, some 102 IS-2 had been built. The Iosif Stalin 2's first action was with the 11th Guards Heavy Tank Regiment at Korsun Sjevkenskovskij ("Korsun Pocket") in February 1944. During this battle, general Kotin personally followed the IS-2 in action, and got with this very useful information. After testings of several vehicles, it was decided at the end of -44, to improve the armor which later led to the IS-3. The IS-2 has been compared unfavorably to both the Tiger and Königstiger in armor and firepower, though it should be kept in mind that by Soviet standards the IS-2 were much more comparable to the Panther tank, especially in terms of weight, size and cost. In the spring of 1944, the modified IS-2m (m: modifikatsirovanniy) appeared. The main difference was the use of a new, simpler and better angled bow casting. The improved D-25T gun was introduced on the IS-2m, and other modifications such as fire control improvements and some internal changes were made. A total of 3.483 IS-1/2 heavy tanks were manufactured.

Specifications for the IS-2:
Crew: 4
Armor: 20mm - 160mm
Armament: 122mm M1943 D-25T L/43 gun, 1 x 12,7mm M1938 DShK, 1 x 7,62mm DT/DTM
Ammo: 28 x 122mm shells, 2331 x DT rounds, 300 x DShK rounds
Length (with gun): 35ft 3in (10.74m)
Width: 11ft 3in (3.44m)
Height: 9ft 7in (2.93m)
Weight: 51 tons (46.250kg)
Engine: 520hp V-2 IS 12cyl. diesel-engine
Speed: 23mph (37km/h)
Range: 93 miles (150km)

What do you guys think? Good perk tank?

brady · « **Reply #1 on:** August 21, 2001, 07:41:00 PM »

Ya, I sugested it once before,It would be awsome as a perk, any of the IS series would realy Imagine an IS 152 sheling hangers

It also has a decent AA gun that Russian 12.7mm packs a punch.The only draw back is the ammo load out

BUT rumpr has it they are going to add rearm pads for vehicals

Ya know whats going to suck about perk tanks....Some p 38 is going to drop 2K on your head

Tac · « **Reply #2 on:** August 21, 2001, 09:23:00 PM »

mwahhaahaa so true!

SKurj · « **Reply #3 on:** August 21, 2001, 09:40:00 PM »

28 shells for the main gun... hehe don't think you would waste many on hangars, especially when all 28 are AP +)

Guns & Armor Soviet 122mm

Lovely penetration tho...

SKurj

[ 08-21-2001: Message edited by: SKurj ]

brady · « **Reply #4 on:** August 21, 2001, 11:31:00 PM »

I was refering to the 152mm gun on the ISU 152.

Karnak · « **Reply #5 on:** August 21, 2001, 11:56:00 PM »

brady,

P-38? Hell, a Zero can carry bombs. Every tank is vulnerable to any aircraft with bombs.

Due to the lack of speed on possible Perk tanks it will also be difficult to exit them with a successful "landing" if they are used in an attack. If the attack succeeds, great, but if it fails the tanks will have a very, very long drive back to his base in order to keep his perk points.

Because some lowly Zero, or any other bomb laden aircraft, can buzz over you and wipe you out without you having the slightest chance to avoid dying and because all of the proposed Perk tanks are S L O W I personally think that perk tanks should be relatively cheap. I would say, no more than 10 or 15 perk points.

brady · « **Reply #6 on:** August 22, 2001, 12:23:00 AM »

CC that Karnak, cc that.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #7 on:** August 22, 2001, 01:50:00 AM »

JS2 will be useless in AH.

It only has 28 rounds of ammo.

If HTC models it correctly there will be a significantly longer reload time for the gun than is the in PzIV. The 122mm gun uses 2 part ammo so it would take at least twice to three times as long to reload after firing.

The 122mm gun had AP performamce only like the Panthers 75mm using regular AP, firing special AP "Hvap" type ammo Panther was superior.

JS2 is extermly slow and lacking in manuverability, it was never intended as a pure "tank fighter", rather it was intended to battle infantry and PAKs. Thus it would greatly suffer in AH tank environment.

If HTC models it accuratly the poor quality of soviet optics must be ac bigtoehed for in aiming. This was not a "production difficulty issue" as in case of Japanese late-war engines, rather Soviet optics simply stunk in comparison to western designs and especially to the German optics which were the best by far during WW2.
If you dont belive me read up US tankers opinions of German optics in comparison to
their equipment.

JS2 would have very good armour, especially on the sides. The JS2 had 100-120mm frontally and 80-90mm on the superstructure and turret sides. It would also have a great shilouette as its a rather short and narrow tank.

All in all if modeled accurately by HTC JS2 would be all but useless in AH.

T34 or Panther would be far more useful in AH.

minus · « **Reply #8 on:** August 22, 2001, 05:13:00 AM »

how many time hapaned to many of you when get short in ammo in your GV , many if try reload pad , well how about some suply truck ?>??
the GV expeditions can be more interesant if some mate will drive a Opel or \< dont know what american truck > with plenty of ammo to reload the pnzrs , ostis ,and other GVs

Boroda · « **Reply #9 on:** August 23, 2001, 10:38:00 AM »

Grunhertz is probably right about Soviet war-time optics. Another weak point of IS-2 was a vulnerable low-frontal armour plate that could be simply torn away by a German 88mm.

But about maneuverability and speed - I think it was quite good. JFYI: IS-2 was taken off-duty in 1991, and last time it participated in large-scale trainings was in 1982 in Odessa military district.

IS-2 was called a "heavy breakthrough tank" (tyazheliy tank proryva), and was used only by Guards.

You can find many interesting information about IS-2 here: http://history.vif2.ru/map.html

batdog · « **Reply #10 on:** August 23, 2001, 11:04:00 AM »

Hey... didnt Russian tankers have to be a certain hieght... as the compartments where extremly small? Also didnt they use a smooth bore heavy cannon or some such? Thus the need for the 120-150's mm in comparison to the uber ww2 tank cannon...88mm long barreled.

I agree with the above... the T-34/76 or T-34/85 would be a better choice.

Hey... dont forget that the russkies had the best tank at the beginning of the war... the T-34. What the hell where we americans thinking by putting our poor boys in those coffins named shermans....

xBAT

Solomo · « **Reply #11 on:** August 27, 2001, 11:42:00 AM »

Why wait...you can be in an IS-2 now! http://www.geocities.com/solomo1/squad2.htm
Catch....you gotta find a copy of PE... although Wings is reissuing this winter
see Teut's thread in the General Discussion topic in the Forum http://www.panzerelite.com/

Tuomio · « **Reply #12 on:** August 27, 2001, 12:23:00 PM »

Lol the sherman in SP:WAW is so poor that i usually leave them just for infarantry support if ive forced to have them.

It must've be fun in RL.

Sherman to AH!

SKurj · « **Reply #13 on:** August 27, 2001, 12:32:00 PM »

I've been looking, and looking, and looking and haven't found a copy of PE yet +(

SKurj