Hannibal Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Has anyone taken the Is-2 out for a spin ? I assume it is about even in fighting power with the panther and the tiger ? HOw much do you find the slow reload time and the fact that it only carries 28 rounds hurts it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Any firsthand stories on the IS-2 on the eastern front? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warmaker Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 None so far my friends. Their crews are recovering from those penetrating '88 hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Tiger Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 My impression is, Tiger I is weaker Panther is better than a JSII. One 122mm ap bullet ricochet from the upper hull of my panther, distance around 300-400 meters. One single tiger knocket out a JSII from more than 800 meters. A other tiger (same distance) got only a gun damage from a JSII, but i lost both of the other tigers against the stalins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amedeo Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Originally posted by K_Tiger: My impression is, Tiger I is weaker Panther is better than a JSII. One 122mm ap bullet ricochet from the upper hull of my panther, distance around 300-400 meters. One single tiger knocket out a JSII from more than 800 meters. A other tiger (same distance) got only a gun damage from a JSII, but i lost both of the other tigers against the stalins.Are you using the IS-2 tanks armed with the AP or APBC 122mm round? This might be the reason for the worse performance against the Panther with respect to the Tiger. The 122mm BR-471B APBC round should be available from late '44 and its blunt nose will assure defeat of the higly sloped Panther glacis out to 1500m or so. Could you tell us how/whether this is modelled in CMBB? Regards, Amedeo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl_Smasher Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Actually there is no hard evidence that the 122mm APBC round was ever used in WW2 apart from firing trials. The last I heard was it entered producttion in January 1945, so it COULD have reached front line units by early spring '45. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Tiger Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 I only saw two versions of JSII`s one 43 and one 44 model, but both have the same penetration value. I made a test with 9 JSII (mixed versions) against 7 panthers. Battle starts at over 2000 meters and the JSII`s were able to knock out two panthers but the hit probability was really low coupled with the low rate of fire and few ammo it issnt a good choice to start a long range duell. Forget to mention, Panthers were "D`s". Jpz. IV/70 would also do the trick...maybe way better in defence and r a lot cheaper. The JSII are indeed great at gun and inf. busters but with the low ammo storrage and the new extrem fog... its questionable how effective it could be against human opponents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 I find the above interesting. I thought that the IS-2 would be quite effective. But, I am not surprised to hear how well the SU and ISU perform. No surprise there. The first tank I am taking for a spin is a platoon of ISU-152's assaulting Berlin with infrantry. I can only dream until next week . . . Chad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC_Brad Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 I remember in my Close Combat 3 days how slow the IS-2 was at loading shells compared to the big cats. The panther was also cheaper to purchase in requisition and every bit as effective with its 75mm as opposed to the 122mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Originally posted by Chad Harrison: I find the above interesting. I thought that the IS-2 would be quite effective. But, I am not surprised to hear how well the SU and ISU perform. No surprise there. The first tank I am taking for a spin is a platoon of ISU-152's assaulting Berlin with infrantry. I can only dream until next week . . . ChadWell, part of the reason is people want to use to the IS-2 for a role it really wasn't meant for: tank hunter. The main role of the IS-2 was never to be a tank hunter but instead a breakthrough tank whose main targets would be infantry, artillery, AT guns, etc and they would be assigned to the toughest part of the front. The IS-2 could take on the Panther or Tiger and win but they were not designed per se for that job and the low ammo count and long reload times automatically preclude it from being an optimal tank destroyer. I would like to see how the SU-100 performs since I think it was designed for a tank hunter/killer role. Anyway, I still want to see that IS-2/M1944 in action. Like most Soviet equipment, one is going to have to use them differently and not use them as if they were using the German glamour cats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxbat Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Originally posted by K_Tiger: I only saw two versions of JSII`s one 43 and one 44 model, but both have the same penetration value.The difference between the two version is only in armour protection, the M44 (IS-2m to us heathens) had a redesigned front hull increasing armor protection and eliminating the shot-trap that existed on the early models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amedeo Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Originally posted by Karl_Smasher: Actually there is no hard evidence that the 122mm APBC round was ever used in WW2 apart from firing trials. The last I heard was it entered producttion in January 1945, so it COULD have reached front line units by early spring '45.Hmmm... IIRC on the 'Tankers' discussion group it was pointed out that there was a soviet manual that depicted a BR-471B round with the date Jan. 1945. But this only means that _by_ January the round was in production. Actually it could have been produced even earlier. Of course this doesn't prove nothing per se. But it would be foolish for the Soviets not to produce in large quantities a round that was already designed and tested and found so badly needed after the early '44 combat experience. Regards, Amedeo P.S. Anyway BFC said that in CMBB the 122mm APCB should have been available by late 1944. Can anyone confirm this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxbat Posted September 21, 2002 Share Posted September 21, 2002 Originally posted by Amedeo: Are you using the IS-2 tanks armed with the AP or APBC 122mm round? This might be the reason for the worse performance against the Panther with respect to the Tiger. The 122mm BR-471B APBC round should be available from late '44 and its blunt nose will assure defeat of the higly sloped Panther glacis out to 1500m or so. Could you tell us how/whether this is modelled in CMBB? Regards, AmedeoOnly evidence I could find in Micheal Svirin's "The IS Tank": Frequently, one encounters reports when the 122mm blunt-nosed armor-piercing round struck the glacis of a Panther at distances of 2000 meters and more and ricocheted off, but left a tremendous crack in the armor. This was cleared up after summer 1944 when the Germans (who had a dreadfull shortage of manganese) began using high-carbon steel, lightweight nickel (or even aluminium) in their armor. Which lead to their armor being much more brittle, especially in the area of weld beads. -emphasis mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts