Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Tank Duel, Who Would Win ?

Discussion in 'Armor and Armored Fighting Vehicles' started by ww24interest, Jan 24, 2016.

  1. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    If they damage the tank with the first hit(s) and the crew bails HE may have a better chance of killing them. There was also mention of some issues with the armor of the IS2's it could be that HE has a chance of shattering it. Or it could be something else entirely. If they got flank shots HE might be more likely to start fires as well if any fuel tanks/lines were ruptured and that will often get the crew to bail.

    From a generals perspective though or even a captains if you engage in many one on ones you are going to loose tanks and loose them at rates that simply aren't acceptable. That doesn't mean you can't get away with it every now and then. Whittman's end rather illustrates the folly of going after an opponent with a single tank though doesn't it?
     
  2. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    that Battlefield link says the JS2s HE was better than the APs against Germans,initially..also said upgrade in armor made JS2glacis impervious...seems odd though to go to HE..they don't say to kill crew, but to blind....??

    ''The glacis was sloped at 60 degrees from the vertical, which resulted in the German 88 mm KwK 36 gun being unable to penetrate it even at point-blank range when fired at a ±30 degrees angle'' here it is again...

    http://english.battlefield.ru/tanks/10-heavy-tanks/19-js-2.html

    weren't they like an infantry organizational pyramid?? to protect each other??

    from my searches, I'm getting JS2 better than Tiger 1 for armor protection and gun penetration at 1K
     
  3. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,773
    Likes Received:
    568
    Location:
    London UK
    No . I am just skeptical about unattributed quotes from historic figures that appear to support one side or another in some online tank top trump fest. ;)

    If this is what Guderian said or wrote, then someone should be able to point to the source of the quote. His memoirs do not seem to mention any Soviet tank other than the T34. He commented very favorably about the Tiger II.

    As inspector general of Tank troops he was well aware that the Red Army had more tanks than the Germans. It would be less than helpful to suggest that German heavy tanks should only face Soviet heavy tanks with a numerical advantage.that could not be guaranteed.
     
  4. von Poop

    von Poop Waspish

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    6,300
    Likes Received:
    1,919
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    In an attempt to further apologise for my earlier twat-up, I keep chasing this Guderian thing around and around, and it keeps coming back to that Tanks Encyclopedia page as the first web reference (Created 30th June 2014).

    Possible pic of a JS2 captured in the region cited under German inspection:
    http://www.geocities.ws/Pentagon/Quarters/4635/tanks/is/is_serie.htm
    http://www.oocities.org/pentagon/quarters/4635/tanks/is/is_serie.htm
    (Did wonder if I might be able to verify that in some Kummersdorf stuff I have, but nothing. This guy says quite convincingly it ended up there, tracking it from battlefield to vehicle park: https://vk.com/wall-52400569?offset=2580&own=1&w=wall-52400569_22537 - So if Guderian had a shufti, it would seem likely it was there. )

    (Manteufel quote on that Geocities page is interesting - ""It was a surprise discovering that, while my Tigers started to hit them from a 2,200 metres range, our projectiles were not able to pierce them until we got to about half of such a distance. But I was able to counter their technical superiority by manouvering to use in the best possible way the ground cover." - said below to have been in 'The other side of the hill')
    http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?app=forums&module=forums&section=printtopic&client=printer&f=18&t=11243
    Still no Guderian reference though,

    Russian Battlefield is solid as ever on the machinery, but still no luck:
    http://english.battlefield.ru/tanks/10-heavy-tanks/19-js-2.html

    And Alex's pages are always worth a look, though he's not updated them for a long while:
    http://www.armchairgeneral.com/rkkaww2/

    If it's on the web with any decent attribution, even a suggestion of a book or report, I haven't found it yet - trying rather awkwardly in several different languages.


    If nothing else, it's been nice revisiting some almost forgotten sites, and getting a little distracted on the way.
    Now wishing I'd bought a monstrous two volume book on Sov tanks I passed on years ago. Silly money now I see.


    Decent pages of IS2 images:
    http://bronetehnika.narod.ru/is2/is2_7.html
    http://leteckemuzeum.galerie.cz/5846289-sovetsky-tezky-tank-is-2
     
  5. ww24interest

    ww24interest Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2016
    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    7
  6. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    I agree....that's what I meant about the links...I don't believe everything I read or hear....I'd like some confirmation.....the books are better for confirmation and detailed info IMO....for future and to all, my posts should be prefaced by ''this is what I found''....if I know something for a 'fact', or if it is just common sense, I'll probably state that...I've said it before, I've not researched or read much on the Ostfront.....I thought we would have some tank experts by now giving us the physical specs.....my last tank research-reading was Wittmann
    .
    but then we have that Kompanie commander point 7 also that is very, very close to what Guderian said.....and that does include a bibliography....so, we get some 'confirmation' right there.....no? and the armor protection and gun penetration for JS2 is higher,, at range,, from my research....what Guderian said makes sense.....JS2 was powerful
     
  7. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    very good..some detailed information in there....compartments, etc....page 8 great diagrams...
    it tells of the German metal downgrade change,...isn't that correct?? and how the JS2 armor was upgraded, as I saw these 2 aspects in a previous link.....Remember, the Tiger did not have sloped armor, correct? plus older?
     
  8. Terry D

    Terry D Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2015
    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    264
    Location:
    Huerta, California
    I love laughing Henry.
     
  9. ozjohn39

    ozjohn39 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    594
    Likes Received:
    31
    10070
    Question from someone who knows little about tank tactics.


    Was it an advantage to try and knock out the tracks of an opposing tank? Once it is stationary it must be at a big disadvantage?
    10101
     
  10. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    it still can kill......sure, tanks want to shoot and scoot, just like crew served weapons at times, and infantry......especially in the defense...'easy' to locate a tank after it fires...so the enemy is 'broadcasting' where that tank is....and planning to hit that spot... to stay alive that tank will move to another location... of course it's a big disadvantage if tracks out ...
    ......but you want to kill it...this is the general idea....to my knowledge, even at medium range, it was not easy to pinpoint certain areas of the tank, or even to make a first round hit...but hitting while moving or while target is moving very, very difficult, 'impossible'
     
  11. ozjohn39

    ozjohn39 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    594
    Likes Received:
    31
    Thanks,

    from that I assume that the first shot has still a bit of luck involved, especially at long ranges.

    another question, is an 'escaping' crew member of a disabled tank fair game for the enemy?

    John

    11055
     
  12. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    depended on a lot of factors....crew experience one of them......you get to know your weapon the more you fire it...and the terrain, and how it affects range....etc.....hilly vs level...is the enemy higher, lower, hull down, etc.... ranging shots 'easier' on level terrain...is the enemy tank facing you or angled...built up area tactics different from open terrain, defense and offense add into it
    my dad with 1-7 in Korea told of how they came upon 3 or 4 T-34s [ he says 3, some books say 4, vice versa ] he was 0351 anti tank...they blasted the tanks and then they blasted the escaping crew men..he said he kind of felt sorry for them, since they had no chance
    to my knowledge they were fair game....other members have more knowledge and I am waiting expectantly for their replies
     
  13. Pacifist

    Pacifist Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    90
    Yes, a tank crew was subject to enemy fire after bailing. While they could surrender if they wished, in the heat of the moment they might still be killed same as infantry.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bp7nFzJcCS8

    In fact crews of flamethrower equipped tanks were highly likely to be executed if they were captured. In the same way infantry flamethrower crews were.
     
    bronk7 likes this.
  14. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    had HE instead of AP.....says HE might've stunned them if they had fired the HE.....instead of unloading HE by firing, they tried manual unload instead of hitting with HE..!!!....sounds like the German knew where they were at and they did not know the German was coming...hit 4 more times....excellent story !! I'm surprised they didn't fire the HE...if I heard all that correctly
     
  15. Pacifist

    Pacifist Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    90
    You did. That was how they were trained. In ideal circumstances it would have been the right thing to do. Firing HE would have given away their position and only possibly shaken the other crew. However real life didn't give them the time to complete the reload. With seconds to react and the loader not knowing anything save that an enemy tank had been spotted he did as he was trained.

    This is one reason some tankers had long debates among themselves on what ammo to carry ready in the gun.

    AP: good vs tanks and concrete walls.

    HE: good vs antitank guns, soft vehicles, wood walls, and infantry on open ground/forests.

    Phosphorus: blinds tanks(potentially making them think they were on fire so the crew bails), blinds AT guns, chokes/burns infantry in enclosed spaces.

    Being hit 4 times after the crew bailed is another reason the Sherman's were found burnt 80% of the time.
     
  16. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Mind you, these are veteran's recollections and there will be some discrepancies...and it has been an age since I have listened to "The Tanker Tapes" & "More Tanker Tapes"(but the CDs are around here somewhere).

    However, from Aaron's website www.tankbooks.com
    PFC Orval Williams had this to say about the engagement


    http://www.tankbooks.com/interviews/orval.htm

    Also, there is some discrepancy as to whether the which tank was moving
    From Aaron's summation of the action


    http://www.tankbooks.com/stories/stories2/julythird.htm
     
  17. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    sounds like they stayed in the same position for a 'long' time, he said.......I didn't hear any of the details on their mission, but sounds like they did not re-position and he said the Germans knew where they were at....like I stated above...same place for a 'long' time, the enemy will be able to hit you more efficiently....but I don't know the whole story....
    however, it sounds like the German knew where he was at already.....the posts above states JS2 HE better than the AP rounds, generally speaking...at range....the AP were ''defective''.then..... and one of the points in above post said they should ''blind'' the enemy tank with HE....I'm guessing HE more of chance to disrupt/impair vision ports, scopes, etc ??
     
  18. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    If you have a weapon that won't likely penetrate the armor facing you but can brake the track then it's worth while doing so. An example might be if the commander is operating open hatch and has a 50 cal pintel mount. A light tank facing a heavy might want to consider aiming for the running gear as well even if it got a flank shot. If there is infantry available to close assault the tank immobilizing it may also have some benefit.
     
  19. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,773
    Likes Received:
    568
    Location:
    London UK
    Yes.

    Losing mobility was potentially fatal. The enemy could either engage it with a precision artillery shoot with heavy or medium artillery - as happened to a German armoured column in Tunisia or aircraft or sneak up to it with infantry.

    Tank crews would often bail out if they lost a track in battle. The legendary Michael Wittman lost a track in his solo attack on Villers Bocage, probably to Sgt Bray's 6 Pdr anti tank. He and his crew bailed out and evaded around 10km through British lines. This was not seen as cowardice and formed part of the citation for the Knight's Cross he was awarded.
     

Share This Page