Does the IS-1 ever use the rear mounted turret MG?

[kohlenklau]

I have tried to see if it ever fires...

In CMRT, does the IS-1 ever use its rear mounted turret MG?

I am trying to make a KV-1 mod...

[Vacillator]

I guess not, but will try testing my friend. 

IS2 tested to a small extent, seems no backward fire.  Have we got an IS1?  Back into the editor...

IS1 acquired, same result no backward MG fire.  Limited testing for sure.

Hopefully Steve or Charles @Battlefront.com can confirm whether or not the back turret MG is modelled.  I imagine not...

Edited April 26, 2022 by Vacillator

[MikeyD]

I want to say I saw it happen once and was genuinely shocked. But that was a long time ago and perhaps I'm misremembering.

[Warts 'n' all]

It does seem strange that the Commander's weapon slot shows the MG but as soon as you give an IS2 a Target Light command the turret rotates and the Gunner starts to use the co-axial.

Perhaps the rear facing MG only gets used if the tank is attacked by enemy infantry.

[Combatintman]

I'm sure there was a similar discussion about the .50 cals on the turret rear of some sort of US Tank Destroyer in either the Normandy or Final Blitzkrieg boards.  I can't recall the outcome but, if it does fire it seemed to be the exception rather than the rule.  Maybe the same under the hood factors are in play here.

[Vacillator]

1 hour ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Perhaps the rear facing MG only gets used if the tank is attacked by enemy infantry.

I tried to test this with the editor, with German troops behind and in front.  Didn't see the rear MG fire but the tests were admittedly very limited in duration by the Panzerschreks I'd rather foolishly included .

[Erwin]

If people are reporting that they very rarely see the rear MG being used perhaps that is solely under AI control(?)  It's common in modern titles to see similarish examples where a vehicle will use an ATGM against some targets even when one wants the gun to be used etc.

[Vacillator]

8 minutes ago, Erwin said:

If people are reporting that they very rarely see the rear MG being used perhaps that is solely under AI control(?)  It's common in modern titles to see similarish examples where a vehicle will use an ATGM against some targets even when one wants the gun to be used etc.

Thinking about that, if you're manually controlling an IS-1 are you able to target with the rear MG without the tank or turret turning round?  Of course you can't actually just command the rear MG to fire on its own so not sure about this.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Vacillator

[Erwin]

There have been discussions about how to use the 2nd MG on a US HT, or the AA MG on some tanks.  IIRC, they seem to fire only when the AI thinks it is appropriate. 

[kohlenklau]

Tim,

Please try this experiment if you get a chance...I am at work!

1. Purchase an immobilized IS-1

2. plop it on the map

3. set a "target light command" aimed BEHIND the tank so it might force it to use the rear mounted turret MG?

[Vacillator]

Will do.

Does it have to be immobilized?  That stops the hull moving I suppose, but not the turret...

Now to find out how to purchase an immobilized vehicle .  EDIT: Okay, got that bit done.  Just swapping out the Panzerschrek units for Aufklarungs - or wait, do they have PFs?  I'll find out.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Vacillator

[Vacillator]

Okay, not quite as planned but a result:

Set Target light behind to start with, turret turned.  Then set it forward to get the turret forward again, rear MG was observed to fire very briefly at the previuosly spotted targets to the rear.  Only fired a few shots so far, will edit with an update...

EDIT: Okay so the issue may be spotting?  There were three spotted German units when the turret was traversed to the rear, this turned to one in the shot above.  The shot above resulted in the demise of one poor fellow in that unit, and the unit then disappeared.  No more rear MG fire after that as there were no spotted units to fire at.  And before you say open up to spot, I already had and the commander had been shot.  Could have arranged that better .

I can adjust the above with different units and try to save my commander, unless it already answers your question?  Think I will re-do without opening up (aka commander death) and see if the rear MG then retains the spots.

EDIT 2: So yes, it seems to me that the rear MG (with or without commander alive) can not spot units.  Will next try to test this with a rear end approach (ooh err) but need to make sure the turret faces the other way...

EDIT 3: approach from the rear did not seem to be spotted so not fired upon but will try this again.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Vacillator

[kohlenklau]

THANKS TIM! Can you try this?

Play with yourself (ooh err) hotseat as both sides.

Use the immobilized IS-1, buttoned up. Have German infantry or Kubelwagens be at 12 o'clock and at 6 o'clock. Simultaneous approach. See if the rear MG opens up?

[Vacillator]

Yeah so still no fire from the rear MG, even when the grenades start hitting.  After a while the turret turned, suggesting the presence of enemies was at least known but not yet spotted?

So perhaps a previously (and retained) spotted unit is needed as the target, which is a bit problematic?

Edited April 27, 2022 by Vacillator

[Vacillator]

Further thought, what was the rear MG designed to be there for?  Just a spray and pray defense against inboarding enemies or a more targeted weapon?

[Holman]

10 minutes ago, Vacillator said:

Further thought, what was the rear MG designed to be there for?  Just a spray and pray defense against inboarding enemies or a more targeted weapon?

Also, which crew member fires it? If it's the commander, he's ignoring situational awareness to do so. Was it the loader?

You can kind of see why it was dropped from standard tank design.

[Vacillator]

17 minutes ago, Holman said:

Also, which crew member fires it? If it's the commander, he's ignoring situational awareness to do so. Was it the loader?

You can kind of see why it was dropped from standard tank design.

I imagine the loader is best placed, not the commander or the gunner.  As you say not ideal whoever it is.  And I'm still not sure why it was deemed necessary in the first place, was there a real/perceived history of German troops jumping on the back of Soviet tanks and the crew being unable to repel them?

[Holman]

4 minutes ago, Vacillator said:

I imagine the loader is best placed, not the commander or the gunner.  As you say not ideal whoever it is.  And I'm still not sure why it was deemed necessary in the first place, was there a real/perceived history of German troops jumping on the back of Soviet tanks and the crew being unable to repel them?

Well, the whole Zimmerit Paste thing was based on a fear of infantry sticking magnetic mines on tanks by hand. Early WW2 tank design still assumed that tanks might operate without nearby infantry support.

[Vacillator]

3 minutes ago, Holman said:

Well, the whole Zimmerit Paste thing was based on a fear of infantry sticking magnetic mines on tanks by hand. Early WW2 tank design still assumed that tanks might operate without nearby infantry support.

Hmmm, some modern echoes there...sorry wrong thread .

Edited April 27, 2022 by Vacillator

[Holman]

1 minute ago, Vacillator said:

Hmmm, some modern echoes there...sorry wrong thread .

Heh!

[benpark]

There is a quite small vision/pistol use vision slit to the rear, if I recall. Very limited visibility, which could be part of the lack of action from the rear MG due to the spotting issue. That would indeed remove the TC (if they move to the rear MG) from more active spotting to the front and sides, where obvious threats would be situated. Unless the tank is surrounded, thus the rear-facing MG. That rear MG seems to have been popular up until the next iteration (the IS-2, inclusive).

Could be some multiple weapon issue, but it does fire in a way that could indicate it is due to limited vision. I'll log it, just in case.

Edited April 27, 2022 by benpark

[Warts 'n' all]

I've really enjoyed Kenneth Williams's contributions to this thread from beyond the grave.

[kohlenklau]

15 hours ago, benpark said:

I'll log it, just in case.

Thanks Ben