Iberian Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 While playing around with the Soviet IS heavy tanks, I found out several characteristics that raise some questions that many of you may answer - The IS-2 M1943 is rated in CMBB as having a "very slow ROF", while the IS-2 M1944 (early or late) are rated as "slow ROF". Did they introduce some kind of improvement in the D-25 guns to make loading them faster? (a semi-autoloader or somefink?) - In the IS-3 Heavy Tank, the commander cupola was removed (as is reflected in CMBB). If the cupola improved the crew spotting abilities, why did they decided to remove it? Did they replaced with some kind of panoramic periscope? - Why was the coaxial MG ammo reduced so drastically in the IS-3 with respect to the IS-1/IS-2? Did it reflect a change in doctrine or employment? Thank you very much for the answers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgdpzr Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 While I can't claim definitive knowledge pertaining to these questions, I will throw out what I know. The IS-III had a VERY cramped turret. It had a wonderful shape for balistic-protection purposes, but that rounded sloping also meant a very tight internal area. I would hazard that was why the coaxial MG ammo was reduced so drastically. I would also think the shape and design of the turret may have made the inclusion of a cupola difficult, but of that I am far from sure. I know I have read where the Soviets were very disappointed in the turret of the IS-III because its functionality was too greatly compromised for the sake of maximizing protection. Regarding the change in ROF of the IS-II, I would bet that it had something to do with a change in ammo storage. They probably devised a more effective way of storing the two parts, making loading more efficient. That, too, is just a guess. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 For your IS2 viewing pleasure. http://www.battlefield.ru/is2_1.html Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 IIRC the early IS-2s gun used a full screw breech which took forever to close. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 Another thing with the early IS-2, the gunners's sight was placed much too close to the weapon, making it extremely difficult to peer through. Later IS-2s had the gunner's sight moved slightly away from the gun (also look at photos of early and late Greyhound ACs and Stuart light tanks for the same gunner's sight move, for the same reason). So the sheer difficulty of sighting the gun might've been enough to slow down the ROF. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 http://www.battlefield.ru/is2_1.html Kibunka -hahahaha "Кубинка"-Kubinka , but not kibunka. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted January 22, 2003 Share Posted January 22, 2003 Yeah - they changed the gun on the IS-2, and also on the ISU-122, although with the ISU they kept the old and new variants in production together. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.