I keep hearing what a great tank this was. But it also had some serious limitations. Was it over-rated? And by the time it first entered the battlefield was the term "break thru tank" redundant and "infantry support tank" a poor use of resources? Thank you........Rich
Hi Rich, welcome to the forum. I don't know the exact purpose of the JS-2 as it first came out but I believe it was considered a Heavy tank, which was to be used to force breakthroughs and fight other tanks. As such it was only obsolete in that the development of medium tanks was overtaking it gradually, but at the end of World War II the heavy tank still served a clear purpose. The main downside of the JS-2 was the ammunition used by its huge 122mm gun. It was so large and heavy that only about 20 rounds could be carried, which were also composed of two parts, making loading a slow and tedious process. This reduced the capacities of this vehicle in combat significantly.
Hello Roel, thanks for the welcome. My point exactly, that the IS-2 had a real crutch in its load/firing cycle. Also the moniker "infantry support tank" was flawed both in name and doctrine. It was supposed to be the other way around, where-as motorized infantry troops supported the tanks. But the infantry support name did point to the flaws of the tank. Its armor also had defeciencies but I guess as a "stop gap" tank, pieced together from odds and ends, it did pretty well. It was really neither "heavy" nor "medium" tank and while it may have been a fine H/E gun platform no doubt the self propelled 122mm, or towed, was far cheaper to build. Now the IS-3 that replaced it? That was an admirable tank.
