Heavy tanks IS-2, as well as IS-85, received their baptism of fire at the final stage of the battles for the liberation of Right Bank Ukraine. Of the two regiments (11th and 72nd) equipped with these tanks, the 72nd OGvTTP operated more successfully, especially in the period from April 20 to May 10, 1944, when it fought in the city area as part of the 1st Guards TA Overtine. Over twenty days of continuous fighting, the regiment destroyed 41 Tiger tanks and Ferdinand self-propelled guns, 3 armored personnel carriers with ammunition and 10 anti-tank guns, while irretrievably losing only 8 IS-2 tanks. The reasons for the losses of these vehicles were as follows: - tank No. 40247 On April 20, in the Gerasimov area, came under artillery fire from the Ferdinand self-propelled gun from a distance of 1500 - 1200 m. The crew was able to respond with only one shot, as the gun trigger mechanism failed. Escaping from self-propelled guns, the IS-2 received 5 hits in the frontal part of the hull, which did not cause any harm. During this time, another Ferdinand self-propelled gun quietly approached from the flank to a distance of 600 - 700 m and pierced the right side of the tank in the engine area with an armor-piercing shell. The crew abandoned the stopped car, which soon caught fire;
- tank No. 40255 from a distance of 1000 - 1100 m received a direct hit from an 88-mm Tiger tank shell on the lower front inclined armor plate, as a result of which the left fuel tank was pierced, the driver was wounded by armor fragments, and the rest of the crew received minor injuries burns. The tank burned down;
- tank No. 4032, after withstanding three hits from a Tiger tank in the front hull from a distance of 1500 - 1000 m, was destroyed by fire from another Tiger from a distance of 500 - 400 m. An 88-mm armor-piercing projectile pierced the lower right side frontal sheet, the gunpowder in the cartridge case ignited, and then the fuel. The tankers, having left the car, carried the wounded driver to the rear;
– tank No. 4033, after receiving a hole from a Tiger shell from a distance of 400 m in the lower armor plate of the hull, was towed to the collection point for damaged vehicles (SPM) for major repairs;
– tank No. 40260 burned out when hit from the flank by an 88-mm Tiger tank shell from the left side from a distance of 500 m. The shell destroyed the engine, the tank caught fire, the tank commander and gunner were injured;
- Tank No. 40244 received a direct hit from an armor-piercing shell from a Tiger tank from a distance of 800 - 1000 m on the right side of the hull. The driver mechanic was killed, and the tank caught fire with diesel fuel spilling from the destroyed right fuel tank. The tank was evacuated and then blown up by sappers;
– tank No. 40263 burned out when two shells hit the side;
– tank No. 40273 operated in isolation from the regiment. On April 30, near the village of Igzhiska, he participated in repelling an attack by 50 T-lll, T-IV, T-VI tanks, supported by aviation and artillery. Received two direct hits: the first - in the turret, immediately followed by the second - in the side plate in the area of the engine compartment. The combat crew in the turret was killed, and the driver was wounded. The tank is left on enemy territory;
– tank No. 40254 was hit by fire from the Ferdinand self-propelled gun, which was in ambush. The first shell did not penetrate the turret box, but the second shell penetrated the side of the tank's hull and disabled the engine. The crew was evacuated, and the car burned down;
– tank No. 40261 received a direct hit in the gun barrel. After the battle the barrel was replaced with a new one.
In addition, one tank was evacuated and put into overhaul, and the remaining five, knocked out during the fighting, were restored by the regiment.
From the middle to the end of May 1944, the regiment as part of the 18th Army, on the orders of the Supreme High Command Headquarters, conducted defensive combat operations to repel enemy counterattacks southeast of the city of Stanislav. From June 1944 until the end of the war, he was part of the 4th TA, together with which he took part in the Lviv-Sandomierz, Lower Silesian, Upper Silesian, Berlin and Prague offensive operations. For the liberation of Lvov, the regiment was awarded the honorary name Lvovsky, and for military services during the war it was awarded the Order of the Red Banner, Suvorov 3rd degree, Kutuzov 3rd degree, Bogdan Khmelnitsky 2nd degree and Alexander Nevsky.
The combat path of the 71st OGvTTP, equipped with IS-122 tanks of the first production, is also of great interest. In August 1944, the regiment's personnel, together with tank crews of the 6th GvTK, participated in the defeat of the Royal Tigers battalion on the Sandomierz bridgehead.
This is how it is said in the “Report on the hostilities of the 71st OGvTTP from 07/14/44 to 08/31/44.”
“On the morning of August 13, 1944, the regiment, in cooperation with the 289th joint venture of the 97th SD, began an offensive in the direction of Oglendów. The enemy tanks located in the vicinity. Oglendow blocked the path of the advancing infantry with their fire. Then a platoon of tanks of the Guards Art. Lieutenant Klimenkov, moving forward, opened fire on enemy tanks from previously prepared positions; as a result of a short battle, Klimenkov burned one tank and knocked out one (these were the first enemy tanks of the new type “Royal Tiger” destroyed). After which the infantry, without encountering strong resistance, broke into Oglendów.
At the same time, 7 enemy “Royal Tiger” tanks attacked our positions from a higher direction. 272.1. The tank of Guards Artillery Lieutenant Udalov was in ambush in the bush to the east. Mokre allowed the enemy tanks to reach 700–800 m and opened fire on the lead tank.
With several well-aimed shots, one tank was burned and the second was knocked out. And when the enemy tanks, continuing to move, began to move away, Udalov took his tank along a forest road towards the enemy and opened fire again from the edge of the forest. Leaving another burning tank, the enemy turned back. But soon the attack of the “Royal Tigers” was repeated, this time they went in the direction of Ponik, where the Ankh of the Guards stood in ambush. Lt. Belyakov, who opened fire from a distance of 1000 m, set the tank on fire with the third shell, and forced the rest to turn back.
So, during the day, tankers, together with artillery, repulsed 7 enemy tank attacks, inflicting heavy losses in equipment and manpower.
...From 07/14/44 to 08/31/44, 4 Tiger tanks, 4 Royal Tiger tanks, 3 Panther tanks, 1 Ferdinand self-propelled gun, 1 128 mm self-propelled gun, 1 armored personnel carrier were burned. – 3. Knocked out: “Tiger” – 1, “Royal Tiger” – 2, “Panther” – 3. Guns of various calibers were destroyed – 23, machine gun emplacements – 22, 600 enemy soldiers and officers. Regiment losses: IS-122 burned out - 3; IS-122 was shot down - 7, of which three were restored on our own, 4 were handed over to the Kyrgyz Republic for SPAM; killed: officers - 3, including the regiment commander of the guards regiment Yudin, sergeants and soldiers - 10; wounded: 8 officers, 36 sergeants and soldiers.
Experience has shown the marching capabilities of the IS-122 tanks - up to 70-100 km per day at an average speed, on the highway 20 - 25 km/h and on dirt roads - 10 - 15 km/h. Power reserve 125 – 150 km. On average, the tanks traveled 1,100 km, operating at 270 m/h instead of the guaranteed 150 m/h.
Practical speed on the battlefield on rough terrain reaches 8 – 12 km/h. The practical rate of fire from a cannon is 2-3 rounds/min. One b/c during an offensive battle is enough for military operations during the day. Conditions for shooting and observation from the tank are generally satisfactory. During practical shooting from a tank, it turned out that the 9T-17 periscope sight is inconvenient for shooting and observation, because it does not have all-round visibility and is not applicable for shooting due to the difficulty of its alignment and the rapid displacement of the aiming lines.
...The existing cast armor is penetrated by an 88-mm projectile at a distance of 800 - 1000 m, because... The quality of cast armor is low (has low density, bubbles).
Conclusions:
clause 1. The fire armament of the IS-122 tanks is the most powerful of all existing types of tanks. The 122-mm projectile has great penetrating power, which determines the quality of these tanks as the best weapon in the fight against heavy enemy tanks.
clause 2. The disadvantage is the formation of a large amount of powder smoke, which unmasks the tank.
...p.7. Experience of defensive battles on the bridgehead across the river. Vistula showed that enemy tanks always avoid actions in the area where heavy IS-122 tanks are defending and, as a result of this, they often change the direction of their attacks, looking for weaker areas not defended by heavy tanks.
Commander of the 71st OGTTP Guards. p/p-to Shapar.” The 26th and 27th OGvTTP were completed and sent at the beginning of May 1944 to the Leningrad Front, where they took part in the Vyborg-Petrozavodsk, and the 31st OGv.TTP - in the Narva operation, the enemy had well-equipped defensive positions here, and the forest itself - the swampy area was difficult to access in summer. Nevertheless, by the end of June 10 - the first day of the offensive - the 27th OGv.TTP advanced 14 km along the Vyborg highway, then immediately broke through the second and third defense lines and on June 20 captured the city and fortress of Vyborg, for which he was awarded an honorary name Vyborg. Over the next 11 days of the offensive, the regiment advanced 110 km, at an average rate of 10 km per day.
Then the 26th, 27th, 31st and 76th OGvTTP were sent to the Baltic states. Here the 3rd, 15th, 32nd, 35th, 64th, 75th and 81st OGvTTP took part in offensive operations. A feature of the fighting in this direction was the lack of a continuous line of defense for the enemy, but the terrain, replete with swamps, forests and rivers, caused great trouble. Already during the transition to the concentration area, the tank crews of the 64th regiment had to, one after another, pull ashore two IS-2s that had sunk while crossing small rivers.
In tank-hazardous areas, the Germans installed many mine-explosive barriers. In the 35th Regiment, in just 10 days of October, 9 IS were blown up by mines (8 of them were quickly restored by the regiment). During the Tallinn operation from September 17 to 26, 13 tanks in the 31st regiment were blown up by anti-tank mines, and another 6 were burned by faust cartridges. During the attack on Memel on October 16, in the 75th regiment, during the first attack, three IS-2 tanks were blown up in a minefield.
During the period of the Tallinn operation from September 17 to 24, the 26th OGvTTP fought over 620 km, destroyed three tanks, seven artillery batteries and eight mortar batteries. The regiment lost: five officers and seven sergeants killed, three tanks burned, ten tanks destroyed, 4 of them required major repairs.
The situation in East Prussia was no less complicated. Its defensive lines were created over many years, and specially equipped rural houses that were part of single fortified areas served as fortifications. Thus, on October 16, 1944, the 81st OGvTTP fought a battle near Klein Degesen, during which 6 IS-2 tanks received from 12 to 19 hits, and up to 6 of them were through holes. The "Tigers" fired from ambushes along the flanks from a distance of 800 - 1200 m until our vehicles caught fire.
On October 17 and 18, the regiment fought in the area of the town of Kibartai and the city of Eidtkunen, as a result 3 heavy tanks were destroyed, 2 medium tanks were knocked out, 5 anti-tank and 22 artillery guns were destroyed, and two Tigers were captured. The regiment lost two IS-2 tanks burned out and two destroyed.
The most violent clash occurred on October 20, when the regiment, advancing towards the city of Stallupenen, met stubborn resistance from heavy tanks and anti-tank guns buried in the ground. In this battle, Soviet tank crews destroyed three Tigers and ten guns, but they themselves suffered heavy losses - seven IS-122 tanks were burned and one was knocked out.
In total, during the period of hostilities when breaking through enemy defenses in the Boblovka area and during combat operations in East Prussia from October 16 to October 31, the regiment destroyed 18 tanks, 8 armored personnel carriers, 2 tractors, 49 guns, 9 mortar batteries, 52 missile launchers. -40, 24 machine gun points, 3 bunkers; two Tigers and one armored personnel carrier were captured combat-ready. During this time, the regiment itself lost 10 officers, 7 soldiers and sergeants killed. 16 officers, 24 soldiers and sergeants were wounded. 10 IS-2s were burned by artillery and tank fire, 14 tanks were knocked out (9 of them were restored and put back into service). During this period, 14 IS-2 tanks were blown up by mines (13 returned to service after repairs). After replenishment and restoration of the material part, the regiment continued combat operations in the East Prussian operation. As of February 14, the regiment had 21 serviceable tanks, one vehicle required major repairs and one was subject to write-off.
On February 15, 1945, at 15.20, the 81st Regiment, part of the 144th Infantry Division, attacked the enemy in the Nemritten area and, after a 30-minute battle, captured the southern part of the city. By 19.00, Nemretten was completely liberated by tank fire and infantry attack. In this battle, the tankers destroyed 2 tanks, 2 armored personnel carriers, an ammunition depot, 4 guns and one battery with a crew, while losing one IS-2 tank burnt out and three damaged.
The next night at 3.30, 16 tanks of the regiment launched an attack on Kukenen. The commander of the 144th SD, believing that heavy tanks were capable of defending themselves, did not suppress enemy firing points. Having encountered strong flank fire, the regiment lost 4 IS-2 tanks (2 burned out, 2 were knocked out). Under the cover of the 4th Panzer Company, three tanks of the 2nd Panzer Company reached the western outskirts of Nemretten, but without cut off infantry they did not advance further. At the same time, two more tanks were knocked out. For more than three hours, the tankers fought with infantry, anti-tank guns and enemy tanks, repeatedly returning back to carry their infantry along with them. Having lost 9 tanks destroyed, already at dusk the regiment was withdrawn to the Wilmsdorf area by order of the commander of the 72nd Rifle Corps.
On February 17, the regiment's personnel were engaged in the restoration and maintenance of equipment. According to the list, there were 15 tanks in the regiment, of which seven remained serviceable, two required medium repairs, three were subject to evacuation and three were to be written off.
By the evening of the same day, the remaining combat-ready vehicles were quickly reassigned to the commander of the 120th Tank Brigade, together with which they attacked Albenlauk on February 19 at 11.00 and captured it 40 minutes later. Continuing the offensive, the tanks of the regiment fought for the Kukenen station on February 21 and 22, occupying it at 18.00.
During the fighting in East Prussia from February 15 to 27, 1945, the regiment made 83 tank operations, during which the regiment lost 5 officers, 11 soldiers and sergeants killed, 17 officers and 8 soldiers wounded; 5 IS-2 tanks were burned and 16 were damaged (mainly from fire from Tigers and 88-mm anti-tank guns). Our tankers destroyed 4 tanks, 4 armored personnel carriers, 17 guns, 10 machine gun emplacements, an ammunition depot and captured one assault gun. On March 2, 1945, the regiment had one serviceable tank out of two on the list.
On March 8, the regiment received 20 ISU-122 self-propelled guns from four marching batteries and came under the command of the commander of the 3rd Army. During the fighting to destroy the encircled group of Germans southwest of Keninsberg from March 13 to 25, the regiment took part in the capture of the large settlements of Eisenberg, Waltersdorf, Birknau, Grunau and was one of the first to reach the Baltic Sea coast. During 12 days of fighting in the regiment, 7 officers and 8 soldiers were killed, 11 officers, 13 soldiers and sergeants were wounded; 10 ISU-122s burned out and 5 had combat damage. The tank crews of the regiment destroyed 5 tanks, 3 assault guns, 65 anti-tank guns, 8 armored personnel carriers, 9 tractors, captured one serviceable Panther tank and 18 various guns. On March 24, 1945, by order of the Supreme High Command, the regiment was thanked for its excellent military operations.
The 79th OGvTTP achieved even greater success in holding a bridgehead on the Narew River north of the city of Serock. The enemy, having a total of over 200 tanks, tried to liquidate the bridgehead. On October 4, 1944, by 19.00, the position of our troops became threatening.
The 79th Regiment, as part of the reserves of the 65th Army, was sent to hold the bridgehead by the end of the day, and an hour after arrival, at 21.00, the tankers, together with the 105th SK of the 44th Guards Infantry Division, went on the attack. Advancing under heavy fire, they encountered heavy enemy tanks a few minutes later. During the battle, the regiment irretrievably lost one IS-2 tank burnt, another was knocked out by 88-mm cannon fire, in turn, destroying and knocking out six German T-V and T-VI tanks.
Over the next three days, the Germans tried unsuccessfully to liquidate the bridgehead. From October 6 to October 9, the regiment, skillfully creating a defense, did not lose a single tank, although it itself burned 11 heavy enemy vehicles. In total, from October 4 to October 9, 19 T-V and T-VI tanks and two armored personnel carriers were destroyed. The regiment lost five IS-2s that were burned out. The Military Council of the 65th Army highly appreciated the regiment's military actions in holding the bridgehead on the Narew River: the most distinguished (131 people) were awarded government awards.
The combat operations of the 80th OGvTTP in the Vistula-Oder operation were also successful. From January 14 to January 31, 1945, out of the 23 IS-2 tanks that participated in the operation, not a single one was irretrievably lost. The tankers of the regiment destroyed 19 tanks and self-propelled guns, 41 guns, 15 machine gun emplacements, 10 mortars and 12 enemy dugouts.
The 33rd OGvTTP, which also took part in the Vistula-Oder operation, lost only 3 tanks, and this despite the fact that on the very first day of the offensive - January 14 - the regiment broke through not only the main, but also the second defensive line of the 9th Field Army units the Germans, having advanced 22 km into its depth. Then, developing the offensive, the regiment advanced another 120 km in 4 days of fighting and on January 29, breaking through the Mezeritsky fortified area, together with the troops of the 69th Army entered German territory, fought another 70 km and on February 3 reached the river. Oder in the Frankfurt area.
The 78th OGvTTP, advancing on Debrecen in Hungary, from October 6 to 31 destroyed 6 Tigers, 30 Panthers, 10 T-IV tanks, 1 Ferdinand self-propelled guns, 24 self-propelled guns of various calibers, 109 guns, 38 armored personnel carriers, 60 machine gun points, 2 ammunition depots and 12 aircraft at the airfield. In the battles, 460 armor-piercing and 970 high-explosive fragmentation shells, 1070 F-1 hand grenades, 500 26-mm flares, 85,000 7.62-mm machine gun cartridges and 82,000 7.62-mm PPSh cartridges were used up. The regiment's irretrievable losses during this period included two IS-2 tanks that were burned out by Faust cartridges, and another 16 tanks that received varying degrees of damage.
Only on October 16, attacking the town of Kanyar, which was defended by 10 “Panthers,” the tankers of the regiment destroyed half of them. The next day, having lost three of their vehicles, they burned seven more Panther tanks.
During the attack (together with the 63rd mechanized brigade) of the village of Hajdu-Bagos, two IS-2s had to fight five T-V Panther tanks. During the tank duel, our IS-2s managed to destroy three T-Vs, one IS-2 was hit by a Faust cartridge. The next day, October 19, after capturing Hajdu Bagos, the regiment's tanks burst into the city of Debrecen, where two more Panthers were destroyed by direct fire.
On the territory of the Reich, the fighting was especially stubborn. Having crossed the river on the move. Vistula and having traveled over 300 km, the 70th OGvTTP at the end of January reached the city of Schneidemühl. Its siege took two weeks and cost the regiment nine damaged vehicles. The 82nd OGvTTP On February 8 at 11.00, at an angle forward, the 1st and 4th tank companies began an attack in the area of the city of Kreuzburg. At 13.00, up to 11 enemy tanks, accompanied by artillery assaults, counterattacked the regiment's units, but, having suffered losses, retreated. By 20.00 Kreuzburg was taken. During the day of hostilities, the regiment destroyed 4 self-propelled guns, 6 guns, 10 machine gun emplacements and knocked out 4 German tanks. The regiment's losses during the day of battle were also not small: 4 people died, 2 were burned; 11 tanks were hit, one was stuck.
During the night, three of them were restored and on the morning of February 9, the regiment continued the offensive with ten IS-2 tanks. By the end of the day, the tankers had lost five more of their comrades and one tank, four vehicles were hit and required repairs, and five people were killed. On this day, the enemy lost 4 tanks and self-propelled guns, 9 guns and 4 mortars.
On February 10, during an attack by seven tanks on the city of Korshellen, the 4th company of Senior Lieutenant Isyanov especially distinguished itself, destroying four enemy tanks during one battle. By the end of February 16, after the offensive in the Langendorf area, only one combat-ready vehicle remained in service. The regiment was withdrawn for replenishment. In just ten days of continuous fighting, the regiment lost 8 officers, 12 soldiers and sergeants killed, 4 tanks were burned, 19 tanks were knocked out (all required major repairs), two tanks got stuck in craters during the fighting. The regiment's forces and resources carried out 18 routine repairs and even one medium repair.
In these battles, the regiment destroyed 24 tanks and self-propelled guns, 4 armored personnel carriers, 38 vehicles, 40 guns and 20 mortars. Then the personnel were engaged in restoring the damaged tanks. By March 15, the regiment was fully equipped. Each tank company had 3 IS-2 tanks and 2 ISU-122 self-propelled guns.
From March 16 to 23, the 82nd Dnovsky Red Banner OGvTTP participated in the destruction of the enemy in the area of Laukitten, Rippen, Heide, Fedderau and Mykunen, especially distinguishing itself during the capture of Fedderau, where 8 tanks and 15 enemy guns were destroyed. The intensity and intensity of the fighting is evidenced by the fact that the ammunition consumption per day reached three combat sets - 84 shells! In total, during this period the regiment destroyed 13 tanks and self-propelled guns, 42 guns, 4 mortar batteries, captured 5 self-propelled guns and 40 locomotives.
The irretrievable losses of the regiment during this time amounted to one IS-2 tank and three ISU-122 self-propelled guns. During the fighting, 12 tanks were evacuated from enemy fire; 25, which had various damage, were restored and returned to service.
Heavy fighting also fell on the 43rd OGvTTBr. Thus, on January 21, in the Gross Ottenhogen area, the brigade broke a strong enemy stronghold, where a anti-tank missile division and 6 tanks were destroyed, and 15 105-mm guns were captured. In addition, up to 300 German soldiers and officers were killed and captured. During this period, the brigade lost two IS-2 tanks and eight ISU-152 self-propelled guns; another 13 IS-2 and 3 self-propelled guns ISU-152 were shot down. “As a rule, the enemy brought the tanks to 700 meters or closer and began to shoot our tanks point-blank in the forehead and sides. In each damaged tank, from 3 to 8 holes were found,” the commander of the guard brigade, Colonel Timchenko, noted in the combat report. As of January 26, the brigade still had 17 serviceable tanks and 8 self-propelled guns in service. On January 26 and 27, brigade regiments as part of the 2nd Guards TK. fought fierce battles to identify and destroy enemy ambushes in the forests of Forst Friedrichstein, north and west of Fuchsberg. Over two days of combat, the brigade destroyed 2 anti-tank missile batteries, 3 Ferdinand self-propelled guns, 2 Panthers, 5 armored personnel carriers and up to an infantry company. The brigade lost five IS-2 tanks and three ISU-152 self-propelled guns; five more IS tanks were destroyed. All our vehicles had 3-4 holes in their sides, received from fire from 88-mm and 105-mm cannons from a distance of 300 - 600 m. Such serious losses were due to the fact that in most cases, contrary to instructions and regulations, the brigade’s tanks were used in the first echelon, like NPP tanks, and often acted independently or in cooperation with medium tanks.
A huge role in the rapid restoration of the combat capability of our tank units was played by the high survivability and maintainability of ISs and self-propelled guns created on their basis. There were frequent cases when a regiment, which had lost most of its vehicles the day before, was ready for battle again within a day or two. Thus, in the 88th OGvTTP, by January 25 there were only two serviceable tanks, others were either knocked out or failed for technical and other reasons (including two that sank in the river). However, by February 1, 15 restored and combat-ready vehicles returned to service.
Heavy IS tanks made an invaluable contribution to the operation to capture Berlin. The eastern approaches to the city were blocked by the Seelow Heights, which formed the second line of defense, which had two or three continuous lines of trenches, and all settlements were prepared for all-round defense. The steepness of the slopes in the Seelow area was 30 - 40 m. Our tanks and self-propelled guns could overcome such steep slopes only along well-covered roads, where the angle of elevation allowed them to advance, and the German artillery and tanks in this area had a significant tactical advantage, since could sweep the area far into our troops. At the same time, observation and firing by our troops was extremely difficult due to the many groves and gardens.
The offensive of the 88th OGvTTP, which began at dawn on April 16, in the light of 136 anti-aircraft searchlights, was unexpected for the enemy. This made it possible to advance into the depth of enemy defenses up to 2 km during the first hour of the battle. The further pace of the offensive gradually decreased due to growing resistance. Slowly moving forward and suffering heavy losses, our troops finally broke through the main line of defense by the end of the first day.
In preparation for the assault, the 7th OGvTTBr brought its reserves of fuel, lubricants, ammunition and food to three standards, and the ammunition load of each vehicle to 42 rounds (standard ammunition load is 28). When reaching the river line. Haupt-Graben, which was part of the brigade of the 105th TTL, lost 10 tanks to fire (4 tanks were hit by artillery fire, 1 tank was blown up by a mine). The 106th TTP of this brigade lost 6 tanks that were burned and 1 tank was knocked out. At the same time, at this point they destroyed: 2 T-VIH tanks, two T-V tanks, two T-IV tanks, five Ferdinand self-propelled guns, 21 field guns, 4 anti-tank guns, 8 mortars and up to 30 machine guns.
At 14.00, the brigade commander, Guards Colonel Yurenkov, by his decision, brought into battle the 104th TTP, which had previously been in reserve. With access to the river. Fliess of the 104th TTP was met by German tank fire from ambushes in the forest. The 104th and 105th TTP were partially destroyed by concentrated fire, and the survivors retreated back. In the battles in the Seelow area and to the west, these TTPs had no losses, and significant damage was inflicted on the enemy: one Panther tank, two T-IVs, one assault gun, two anti-aircraft batteries and more than 12 machine gun emplacements were destroyed.
During the assault on Berlin, heavy IS tanks and self-propelled guns served as a kind of battering ram; with their powerful guns they crushed the city buildings, which were turned into fortifications and pillboxes, more like a fortress. The intensity of the street battles was such that tank crews spent from two to three rounds of ammunition per day.
Losses on the approaches to the city and during street battles were high. Thus, the 7th OGvTTBr during its participation in the Berlin operation from April 16 to May 2, 1945 alone lost 131 people killed and 266 wounded, 28 IS-2 tanks burned from artillery fire and tanks, 11 from fausts, 28 IS-2 tanks were knocked out (they were later restored and put into operation).
During the same period, the brigade destroyed 35 tanks and self-propelled guns, 27 field guns, 17 bunkers and more than 800 enemy soldiers; 3 tanks, 10 anti-aircraft guns, 82 aircraft, 200 prisoners, 57 locomotives were captured; 3 camps were liberated and more than 46 settlements and 5 cities were occupied.
During the operation, the 67th OGvTTBr lost 122 people killed and 221 wounded; 12 IS-2s burned out from enemy artillery and tank fire, another 18 were destroyed by Faustniks; 41 damaged tanks were later repaired. As a result of the fighting, the brigade destroyed 28 tanks and self-propelled guns, 84 field guns, 19 artillery batteries, 16 anti-aircraft batteries, 52 vehicles, 246 machine gun emplacements, 950 mortars; more than 3,500 soldiers; 5 tanks and 900 aircraft were captured, as well as 8,000 prisoners of war.
Fierce fighting continued until the last days and hours of the war. On the morning of April 27, one of the IS-2 assault groups of the 34th OGvTTP was blown up by a mine in the square in front of the church on Kurfürsten Strasse. He was left with a landing force of 8 people, surrounded by about 100 SS men. The loader and gunner were killed in the tank, then the commander was killed by the explosion of the Faust cartridge, and the battle continued to be fought by the remaining driver-mechanic, Sergeant German Shashkov. Another Faustpatron hit set the engine compartment on fire. Then, backing up, Shashkov crashed the rear of the tank into the wall - it collapsed and extinguished the flames with its debris. The sergeant, having locked himself in the tank, continued to fight back with grenades even after he had used up all the ammunition for the cannon and machine guns. When the tank was recaptured, the half-burnt, wounded Shashkov was found lying on the bottom of the car with a knife in his hand...
On April 30, fighting moved close to the walls of the Reichstag. In the morning, the 88th OGvTTP, having crossed the Spree along the surviving Moltke bridge, took up firing positions on the Kronprinzenufer embankment. At 1300, his tanks opened direct fire on the Reichstag, participating in the general artillery preparation that preceded the assault. At 18.30, the regiment supported the second assault on the Reichstag with its fire, and only with the start of fighting inside the building did the tanks stop shelling.
Separate Guards heavy tank regiments (OGvTTP), equipped with IS-2 tanks, actively participated in the hostilities of 1944-1945. In general, the new tank fully met the expectations of the command as a means of qualitatively strengthening units and subunits intended to break through well-fortified enemy lines in advance, as well as storm cities.
Any attempts to present the IS-2 as an “all-destructive and impenetrable” tank or, conversely, a “steel box of no particular value” based on individual combat episodes are nothing more than an unfounded extrapolation without taking into account specific battle conditions, crew training and command actions both fighting sides. However, it must be recognized that these types of statements are quite widespread in popular literature. The following combat episodes with their participation can be cited as examples of completely different results from the combat use of IS-2 tanks:
During the Lvov-Sandomierz operation, there is a known episode when two IS-2 tanks of the 57th Guards Separate Tank Regiment, hiding in an ambush, stopped tank forces of significantly superior enemy forces. In two days, the crews of two Soviet heavy tanks were able to destroy a total of 17 German tanks and self-propelled guns, eliminating the threat of eliminating the bridgehead on the Vistula. Of these, 9 are on Lyakhov’s account and 8 are on Lukanin’s account.
In August 1944, the 71st OGvTTP took part in the defeat of the Royal Tigers battalion on the Sandomierz bridgehead. During this battle, IS-2 tanks destroyed six Royal Tigers. In a month and a half of fighting, this regiment knocked out and destroyed 17 German tanks, 2 self-propelled guns and 3 armored personnel carriers. Losses amounted to 3 tanks burned out and 7 damaged.
In October 1944, the 79th OGvTTP held the Serock bridgehead on the Narew River north of the city of Serock. The enemy, having a total of over 200 tanks, tried to liquidate the bridgehead. On October 4, 1944, by 19:00, the position of the Soviet troops became threatening. At 21:00 the tankers, together with the 44th Guards Rifle Division of the 105th Rifle Corps, went on the attack. Advancing under heavy fire, they encountered heavy enemy tanks. Six German T-V and T-VI tanks were knocked out and destroyed. Losses in this case amounted to one IS-2 tank that was burned out and one that was damaged. By October 6, another 4 Soviet, 3 German tanks and 2 German armored personnel carriers were lost. From October 6 to October 9, the regiment, skillfully creating a defense, did not lose a single tank, while destroying 11 heavy enemy vehicles. During these battles, the crew of the IS-2 tank under the command of Guard Lieutenant Ivan Khitsenko of the 30th Guards Heavy Tank Brigade also distinguished themselves. His tank platoon was tasked with holding the defense on the right flank. The platoon attacked the Nazi column. In this battle, Khitsenko’s tank knocked out seven enemy Tiger tanks with cannon fire and rammed one before it itself burned out. The Germans were never able to break through on the right flank.
The 78th OGvTTP, advancing on Debrecen in Hungary, from October 6 to October 31, burned 46 tanks (including 6 Tigers), 25 self-propelled guns, destroyed 109 guns, 38 armored personnel carriers, 60 machine gun points, 2 ammunition depots and 12 aircraft at the airport. The regiment's losses included two IS-2 tanks that were burned out by Faust cartridges, and another 16 tanks received varying degrees of damage.
On the territory of the Reich, the fighting was especially stubborn. The 70th OGvTTP, crossing the Vistula River on the move and traveling over 300 km, reached the city of Schneidemühl at the end of January. Its siege took two weeks and cost the regiment nine damaged vehicles. The 82nd OGvTTP On February 8 at 11.00, at an angle forward, the 1st and 4th tank companies began an attack in the area of the city of Kreuzburg. At 13:00, up to 11 enemy tanks, accompanied by artillery assaults, counterattacked the regiment's units, but, having suffered losses, retreated. By 20:00 Kreuzburg was taken. During the day of hostilities, the regiment burned 4 tanks, destroyed 4 self-propelled guns, 6 guns and 10 machine gun points. The regiment's losses during the day of battle were also considerable: 11 tanks were knocked out, one was stuck.
In the Vistula-Oder operation, the 80th OGvTTP from January 14 to 31, 1945 destroyed 19 enemy tanks and self-propelled guns, 41 artillery pieces, 15 machine gun nests, 10 mortars and 12 dugouts. Of the 23 vehicles that took part in the battles, not one was irretrievably lost.
The 81st OGvTTP attacked Kukenen at 3.30 on February 16, 1945, consisting of 16 tanks. The commander of the 144th Infantry Division, to which the regiment was attached, believed that the IS-2s were capable of doing everything themselves. The IS-2s that launched the attack were met by flanking fire from the Germans, who burned two IS-2s and knocked out two more. The 4th tank company covered the exit of three IS-2s of the second tank company to the outskirts of the village of Nemretten, but without cut off infantry it was not possible to develop the success. Two IS-2s were shot down in this phase of the battle. For three hours, the tankers fought with enemy infantry, tanks and anti-tank guns, losing another nine IS-2s shot down. Attempts to entice their infantry were unsuccessful. As a result, on February 16, Kukenen was never taken, and the regiment was withdrawn from the battle to restore and maintain materiel. Of the 15 IS-2s listed as of February 17, 1945, seven remained combat-ready, two needed medium repairs, three remained not evacuated from the battlefield, and three were subject to write-off (that is, they can be counted as irretrievable losses). Apparently, the German side did not suffer serious damage in this battle, since the regiment’s successes for February 15-27, 1945 include the destruction of 4 tanks, 4 armored personnel carriers, 17 guns and one captured assault gun. According to documents, these successes were achieved during the battle on February 15 and February 19-27, when the regiment recovered from the losses inflicted on February 16 near Kukenen.
In the battles in March 1945 on Polish territory, the commander of the IS-2 tank, Mikhail Alekseevich Fedotov, especially distinguished himself. In the first two and a half months of 1945 alone, his tank destroyed 6 German tanks and self-propelled guns, 11 artillery pieces, 2 mortar batteries, 3 armored personnel carriers and several vehicles.
A huge role in the rapid restoration of the combat effectiveness of Soviet tank units was played by the high survivability and maintainability of ISs and self-propelled guns created on their basis. There were frequent cases when a regiment, which had lost most of its vehicles the day before, was ready for battle again within a day or two. Thus, in the 88th OGvTTP, by January 25 there were only two serviceable tanks, others were either knocked out or failed for technical and other reasons (including two that sank in the river). However, by February 1, 15 restored and combat-ready vehicles returned to service.
The 88th and 89th OGvTTP regiments were the first to storm German positions from the Küstrin bridgehead under the light of searchlights on the first day of the Berlin operation.
City assaults
Together with the self-propelled guns at its base, the IS-2 was actively used for assault operations in fortified cities, such as Budapest, Breslau, and Berlin. The tactics of action in such conditions included the actions of the OGvTTP in assault groups of 1-2 tanks, accompanied by an infantry squad of several machine gunners, a sniper or a marksman with a rifle, and sometimes a backpack flamethrower. In case of weak resistance, tanks with assault groups mounted on them broke through at full speed along the streets to squares, squares, and parks, where they occupied a perimeter defense. In the presence of heavy fire, the fighters of the assault groups dismounted, and the tanks fired longitudinally and cross-fire along the streets, covering the advance of the infantry forward. The main task of the fighters of the assault groups was to destroy enemy grenade launchers (“faustniks”) and crews of towed anti-tank guns, while the IS-2 with its fire power destroyed machine gun nests, fired at identified sniper positions, and destroyed armored caps and pillboxes. In the event of counterattacks by tanks or assault guns, the IS-2 transferred the weight of their fire to them, thereby protecting their infantry. If barricades, ditches, or rubble were discovered, the IS-2 destroyed them with their fire, or provided fire cover for the engineer units that destroyed the obstacle. Particularly important attention was paid to the instructions for tank crews and self-propelled gunners on maneuver even in cramped conditions of urban combat, actions on the principle of “moved out of cover, shot, went into cover.”
In these battles, the IS-2 suffered significant losses, and popular opinion attributes them to the exceptional effectiveness of the German Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers. But still, the statistics of lost Soviet tanks in the Berlin operation do not support this version. More than 85% of disabled tanks were accounted for by cannon tank and anti-tank German artillery, and the existing cases of mass destruction of the IS-2 by cumulative grenades are explained mainly by gross violations of urban combat tactics by the commanders of the Red Army, when tanks rushed forward without proper cover from their infantry. Unfortunately for the Soviet side, in many cases attempts to take the city by raid without using assault group tactics led to more than serious losses.
The intensity of the fighting is shown by the fact that IS-2 crews in urban battles (for example, the storming of Berlin) spent two to three rounds of ammunition per day, sometimes somehow finding space in the tank for additional shells (up to 42) instead of the standard 28. As an illustration, we can cite an episode involving the IS-2 of the 34th OGvTTP on April 27, 1945. An assault group consisting of an IS-2 and eight riflemen broke through to the church on Kurfürstenstrasse, but ran into a strong stronghold held by over a hundred SS soldiers. The tank hit a mine, killing the loader and gunner, then the Germans cut off the infantrymen from the IS-2 with their fire, thereby creating favorable conditions for the “Faustniks”. A hit from a cumulative grenade killed the commander; only driver-mechanic Sergeant German Shashkov survived. The second hit from the Faustpatron set the IS-2 on fire in the engine compartment, but the sergeant managed to turn the tank so as to bring down a nearby wall and put out the flames with its debris. Then, among the bodies of his dead comrades, he stood behind the gun and machine guns and fired until the ammunition was completely exhausted, after which, opening the hatch, he continued to repel attacks with grenades. According to the monograph “IS Tanks in Battle,” after Soviet soldiers approached the tank, the bloodied Shashkov was found lying on the bottom with a knife in his hands. In his memoirs, V.I. Chuikov adds that the brave tanker rejected the enemy’s offers to surrender and died soon after his own approach, and more than three dozen dead SS men lay around the damaged IS-2. Clarification: Gv. Sergeant German Shashkov died three months earlier, during the storming of Poznan in January 1945. By Decree of the PVS on March 23, 1945, he was posthumously awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union.
IS-2 tanks provided fire support for the storming of the Reichstag:
On April 30, the fighting came close to the walls of the Reichstag. In the morning, the 88th Heavy Tank Regiment, having crossed the Spree along the Moltke Bridge, took up firing positions on the Kronprintzenufer embankment. At 11.30, units of the 79th Rifle Corps went on the offensive and crossed the ditch onto Königsplatz in front of the Reichstag. At 13.00, the tanks of the regiment, taking part in the general artillery preparation that preceded the assault, opened direct fire on the Reichstag. At 18.30, the regiment supported the second assault on the Reichstag with its fire, and only with the start of the battle inside the building did the tanks stop shelling.
Clashes with the Tigers
The question of combat episodes involving the IS-2 and German heavy tanks “Tiger I” or “Tiger II” is essentially one of the most hotly discussed on military or computer gaming forums. The intensity of the debate is constantly supported by references to documents of certain units of the Red Army or the Wehrmacht, as well as memoirs of prominent military leaders and tank crews of that era. As a rule, they involve dozens and hundreds of destroyed or knocked out IS-2s and Tigers. But still, it is necessary to take into account the fact that on both sides there were numerous additions and errors in determining the type of enemy equipment; Moreover, the place, time and units that took part in the battle often do not agree. Therefore, the most reliable sources are not reports on the number of enemy equipment damaged and destroyed, but reports on the available materiel and reports from captured teams. It should also be noted that often the decommissioning of destroyed equipment officially occurs later than the battle in which it was lost, and damaged tanks sent for repair may not be considered irretrievable losses, and this introduces additional difficulties into accurately accounting for the outcome of a particular battle. Based on the results of their analysis of documents, famous historians M. Baryatinsky and M. Svirin claim that there were quite a few episodes with the simultaneous participation of “Tigers” and IS-2.
This is not surprising, since these vehicles were heavy breakthrough tanks, not generally intended for combat with each other. The most famous episodes with the proven participation of these tanks are the battles of the 71st OGvTTP with the Tigers II of the 501st heavy tank battalion near Oglendow and the clash near Lisow. In both cases, both sides suffered heavy losses, for example, near Oglendow, the commander of the 71st OGvTTP Guard, Lieutenant Colonel Yudin, was killed, and his regiment lost 3 IS-2s that were burned out and 7 more that were damaged (of which 4 were repaired by the regiment’s own forces). In the battle near Lisuv, the commander of the 424th heavy tank battalion, Major Samish, was killed, and the battalion itself lost almost all its equipment; on the Soviet side, the commander of the 61st tank brigade, N. G. Zhukov, also died. It should also be noted that the well-known disadvantage of the IS-2 - low rate of fire - in a real battle situation did not have such an impact on its outcome: lieutenants Klimenkov, Belyakov and Udalov knocked out and destroyed several Tiger IIs, and in order to disable these machines it took several hits.
From the memoirs of Fadin Alexander Mikhailovich (Artyom Drabkin - “I fought on the T-34”):
“We were standing in caponiers dug on the slope of a vineyard. A kilometer in front of us there was a monastery. Suddenly a “Tiger” crawls out from behind the stone wall of the fence. He stopped. Behind him was another one, then another. Ten of them crawled out. Well, we think, - Khan, they will get us. Fear always has big eyes. Out of nowhere, two of our IS-2s are coming. I saw them for the first time, they stood up and walked a little forward. duel. Ours forestalled them with a shot and demolished both towers, and the remaining one - once, once and beyond the wall."
Reasons for losses
The report on the combat operations of the 72nd OGvTTP from April 20 to May 10, 1944 is quite informative, which details the reasons for the irretrievable losses of the IS-2 in battles:
Tank No. 40247 On April 20, in the Gerasimov area, it came under artillery fire from the Ferdinand self-propelled gun from a distance of 1500-1200 m. The crew was able to respond with one shot, as the gun trigger mechanism failed. Escaping from self-propelled gun fire, the IS-2 received 5 hits in the frontal part of the hull, which did not cause any harm. At this time, another Ferdinand self-propelled gun quietly approached from the flank to a distance of 600-700 m and pierced the right side of the tank in the engine area with an armor-piercing shell. The crew abandoned the stopped car, which soon caught fire.
Tank No. 40255 from a distance of 1000-1100 m received a direct hit from an 88-mm Tiger tank shell on the lower front inclined armor plate, as a result of which the left fuel tank was pierced, the driver was wounded by armor fragments, and the rest of the crew received minor burns . The tank burned down.
Tank No. 4032, after withstanding three hits from a Tiger tank in the front hull from a distance of 1500-1000 m, was destroyed by fire from another Tiger from a distance of 500-400 m. An 88-mm armor-piercing shell pierced the lower frontal side on the right side sheet, the gunpowder in the cartridge case and then the fuel ignited. The tankers, having left the car, carried the wounded driver to the rear.
Tank No. 40260 burned down when it was hit from the left flank by an 88-mm Tiger tank shell from a distance of 500 m. The shell destroyed the engine, the tank caught fire, and the tank commander and gunner were injured.
Tank No. 40244 received a direct hit from an armor-piercing shell from a Tiger tank from a distance of 800-1000 m on the right side of the hull. The driver was killed, and diesel fuel caught fire in the tank, spilling from the destroyed right fuel tank. The tank was evacuated and then blown up by sappers.
Tank No. 40263 burned down when two shells hit its side.
Tank No. 40273... received two direct hits: the first - in the turret, and immediately after it the second - in the side plate in the area of the engine compartment. The combat crew in the turret was killed, and the driver was wounded. The tank was left on enemy territory.
Tank No. 40254 was hit by fire from the Ferdinand self-propelled gun, which was in ambush. The first shell did not penetrate the turret box, but the second shell penetrated the side of the hull and destroyed the engine. The crew was evacuated, and the car burned down.
Thus, this document confirms that the fire safety of the IS-2 was worsened by the above-mentioned location of fuel tanks in habitable areas of the vehicle, which was partly compensated by the worse flammability of diesel fuel compared to gasoline. Also, reports from front-line units indicate that the IS-2s that were set on fire were successfully extinguished by their own crews using a standard tetrachlorine fire extinguisher. It should be noted that the extinguishing had to be carried out in gas masks - when falling on hot surfaces, carbon tetrachloride was partially oxidized to phosgene, which is a potent toxic substance with an asphyxiating effect. Already at that time, safer carbon dioxide fire extinguishers began to be used on tanks in other countries. Like other tanks of that time (with rare exceptions), the IS-2 was not explosion-proof due to the placement of ammunition in the fighting compartment: an explosion of the ammunition rack was guaranteed to destroy the tank along with the entire crew.
IS-2 in Polish and Czechoslovak units
The Polish Army received 71 IS-2s to form the 4th and 5th heavy tank regiments. During the battles in Pomerania, the 4th Regiment burned 31 enemy tanks, while losing 14 of its own. Both regiments took part in the Berlin operation. After the war, the Poles were left with 26 tanks (while 21 vehicles were returned to the Red Army).
Czechoslovak units received several IS-2s in the spring of 1945.
Project evaluation
The IS-2 was the most powerful Soviet tank that took part in the Great Patriotic War, and one of the strongest vehicles in the world at that time, both in the 40-50 t weight category and in the class of heavy breakthrough tanks. However, the assessment of this machine is greatly complicated by the propaganda of both sides that took part in the war and a large number of post-war myths, one way or another connected with the ideological struggle of the Soviet Union or against it.
Despite the wide popularity of the IS-2, its place among Soviet vehicles is often questioned from various sides. Initially, the IS-2 was to some extent considered by the ChKZ management as a machine imposed from above, especially since the turret with a 122-mm gun was completely installed on the basis of “its own” KV-85 (an experimental version of the KV-122), which was well-established in production. Despite the fact that Zh. Ya. Kotin was one of the leaders of ChKZ, the IS tank, created under his leadership at pilot plant No. 100, was perceived at ChKZ as someone else’s machine. As a result, parallel work was carried out at ChKZ in secrecy to create “our own” heavy tank, which on the whole was promising and not unsuccessful; but this gave rise to two big problems: every now and then projects and prototypes of heavy tanks that were more advanced on paper than the IS-2 were born, and the development of the latter proceeded “with difficulty.” To rectify the situation, People's Commissar of Tank Building V.A. Malyshev had to use all his administrative power to bring the production and quality of IS-2s supplied to the troops to a decent level.
The second aspect of the “early” doubts about the correctness of the path chosen for the heavy breakthrough tank is the presence of prototypes of the IS tank with 100 mm guns. Despite the higher theoretical rate of fire, the 100 mm gun in 1944 could not compete with the 122 mm D-25T gun. Military historian M. N. Svirin gives the following reasons for choosing the 122 mm gun:
He calls the decisive factor for choosing the D-25T that at the beginning of the selection of the artillery system for arming the IS-2 in September 1943, there were no 100-mm guns suitable for installation in it, and the other options presented were a 107-mm cannon and various howitzers calibers were clearly inferior to the 122 mm cannon. The 100-mm S-34 gun repeatedly failed state tests and by February 1944 was still not ready for adoption. The D-10T, which appeared later, after repeated modifications, was put into service only on July 3, 1944, and the production of armor-piercing shells for it began only in November of the same year.
In a tank with a dense layout, which was the IS, separate loading of the gun made it possible to place more ammunition than a unitary gun of a smaller caliber, no matter how paradoxical it may seem. The unitary cartridge was long compared to the individual projectile and cartridge case; the most that could be done with it was to place 36 100-mm cartridges, of which 6 practically could not be delivered to the gun (they were stored next to the driver’s seat). The ammunition load of the 122-mm cannon was 28 rounds and in some cases increased to 42.
The second apparent paradox of the 100-mm unitary cartridge - almost the same rate of fire as with the 122-mm separate loading - is a logical consequence of the same great length and cramped fighting compartment. When parked in a calm environment, it actually gained in loading speed, but in the turmoil of battle, loading was carried out while the tank was moving with significant shaking, and in such conditions, tests showed that the gain in loading speed was insignificant.
Frequently encountered statements that the armor penetration of a 100-mm gun is higher than that of the 122-mm D-25T are based on firing tables of the mid-1950s, and in 1944, in terms of this parameter, the guns were equivalent when operating against Soviet armor, and when firing at German tanks with armor of increased fragility, the 122-mm projectile had an effective range of penetrating 85-mm inclined armor (the upper frontal part of the Panther) almost twice as much as the 100-mm due to its greater mass and kinetic energy (it can be noted in passing that the German 75- mm and 88-mm shells had an even worse effect on German armor, that is, even in the absence of alloying elements, German metallurgists managed to achieve decent armor resistance against medium-caliber armor-piercing shells). In addition, the high-explosive and fragmentation power of the 122 mm projectile was significantly stronger than that of the 100 mm.
Based on these premises, it can be argued that the IS-2 was the only Soviet heavy tank that, based on the totality of its combat and operational properties, could satisfy the requirements of the Red Army in the second half of the war to conduct offensive operations to overcome powerful and deeply layered enemy defenses. To adequately counter the IS-2, the enemy needed heavy anti-tank weapons, which, as a rule, were expensive, difficult to replace and not always available in a particular place at the right time. The same thing, in reverse order, happened earlier in 1943 with the massive use of heavy Tiger tanks by the Germans, which was taken into account by the Soviet command when developing tactics for using heavy tanks.
Post-war fate of the IS-2
IS-2s took part in the Korean War - there are references to the use of IS-2s by the People's Liberation Army of China, but without any details. According to Russian researcher Mikhail Baryatinsky, the Chinese transferred a number of IS-2s to the troops of the Vietnamese People's Army (VNA), who used them during the Indochina War. However, Western sources note that during this war the VNA did not use armored vehicles. The official history of the VNA does not mention tanks in the list of weapons and equipment available at the end of the war, and the list of military units and subunits that existed during the same period does not include armored vehicles. According to official Vietnamese data, the VNA armored forces were created in 1959, and received their “baptism of fire” in 1968.
In 1957, the Soviet IS-2 underwent a major overhaul and modernization in order to improve its performance characteristics to a level corresponding to service in peacetime conditions. The modernization work consisted of the following:
The V-2-IS engine was replaced by the V-54K-IS;
-a new transmission was installed;
-replaced support rollers and idler wheels;
-an additional fuel tank was introduced;
-ammunition increased to 35 shells;
-the design of the turret has been changed - in particular, a fan has been installed instead of the rear machine gun;
- the lifting mechanism of the gun was replaced;
-a new radio station was installed;
-new fire-fighting equipment was installed, wings of a different shape were installed, and a number of other minor changes were made.
In the early 1960s, two IS-2M regiments were sent to Cuba; by the late 1990s they were still being used in that country's coastal defense. At the same time, the DPRK received two IS-2M regiments.
In the USSR, the IS-2M was in service for a long time, since the 1960s mainly in reserve. A large number of these tanks were installed on the border with the People's Republic of China as stationary long-term cannon firing points (a legacy of the German experience of World War II). Some of the tanks were used there as mobile firing points - the vehicles were in parks, and when alerted they had to move into specially dug tank trenches. Nevertheless, the IS-2 tank officially continued to be among the operating models of armored vehicles, and periodically vehicles of this type were involved in exercises (in particular, in 1982 in the Odessa Military District). The official order to remove the IS-2M from service with the Russian Army was issued only in 1995. By the early 2000s, surviving IS-2 tanks - firing points in fortified areas on the Russian-Chinese border - also began to be cut into metal.
02.05.2015 1 20479
Great Patriotic War In 1941, the Red Army met the KV-1 heavy tank, which unpleasantly surprised the Wehrmacht high command. It ended the war in 1945 with another heavy tank, which received the nickname "Victory tank" and in terms of its fighting qualities it was a formidable opponent of the German armored “menagerie”.
We're talking about a tank IS-2, which bore the name of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the USSR Joseph Stalin. Experts consider it one of the best tanks of World War II.
Lineal heir
The IS-2 traces its ancestry back to the pre-war KV-1 tank. This tank, which the Nazis encountered in June 1941, struck fear into the German tank crews. None of the Wehrmacht tanks could penetrate the armor of the Klim Voroshilov. But during the border battles, many HFs were lost due to technical faults - primarily due to an extremely unreliable transmission.
IS-2 (picture)
Back in March 1942, the design bureau of the Kirov plant, evacuated to Chelyabinsk from Leningrad, began working on a project for a new heavy tank, which was supposed to replace the KV tank. By that time, the command of the Red Army had already accumulated many complaints about the KV-1.
The work of the design bureau, headed by leading designer Nikolai Valentinovich Tseyts, progressed hard. There was a war going on, and it was necessary, first of all, to organize work on the production of military equipment that had already been put into service. In addition, it was difficult to combine many of the mutually exclusive requirements that the customers of the new tank placed on the designers.
Be that as it may, an experimental IS-1 tank with an 85 mm caliber gun entered the test site in March 1943. It got rid of many of the shortcomings of the KV tank, had good armor and a reliable chassis.
But, already having information about the start of production in Germany of new heavy tanks “Tiger” and “Panther” with thick armor and powerful guns capable of penetrating the armor of all Soviet tanks then in service, the design bureau designed a tank with a 122 mm caliber gun. This tank was put into service.
However, for some time the IS-1 was also mass-produced. But he showed that the caliber of the gun was insufficient to fight German heavy tanks, and an 85-millimeter projectile could not destroy the Nazis’ field fortifications.
It should be remembered that at this time the Red Army switched to active offensive operations, and the troops had to be accompanied by military equipment capable of breaking through the enemy’s fortified defense lines and fighting in populated areas where the enemy had machine gun nests in stone buildings. To do this, a gun with a caliber larger than 85 mm was needed.
IS-2 at a post-war parade in Poland
Guards breakthrough units
In February 1944, the heavy breakthrough tank regiments already in the Red Army were transferred to new states. This was due to the fact that IS-1 and IS-2 tanks began to arrive from factories. According to the new states, the regiment now had four companies of tanks (21 vehicles).
A special feature of the IS tank crew was that it consisted of two officers - the tank commander and the senior driver. The remaining two crew members - the gunner and loader - were sergeants. Even during their formation, breakthrough regiments armed with IS tanks received the name Guards.
The Germans first encountered IS-2 tanks in the summer of 1944. The new Soviet heavy tank turned out to be an unpleasant surprise for them. The powerful 122-mm IS-2 projectile penetrated the armor of German Panthers and Tigers. The super-armored “Royal Tiger” could not withstand the fire of the new heavy Russian tank either. Wehrmacht tankers called the IS-2 the “Russian Tiger.”
Here is just one of the combat episodes in which the IS-2 fought a successful battle with German heavy tanks. In October 1944, the 79th Separate Guards Heavy Tank Regiment held a bridgehead on the Narew River north of the Polish city of Serock. The enemy, having a total of over two hundred tanks, tried to liquidate the bridgehead.
On October 4, 1944, by 19:00, the position of the Soviet troops became threatening. At 21:00 the tankers, together with units of the 44th Guards Rifle Division, went on the attack. Advancing under heavy fire, they encountered heavy enemy tanks. Six German tanks T-V "Panther" and T-VI "Tiger" were shot down and destroyed. Our losses in this case amounted to two IS-2 tanks - one burned out and one damaged.
By October 6, four more Soviet, three German tanks and two German armored personnel carriers had been lost. From October 6 to October 9, the regiment, skillfully creating a defense, did not lose a single tank, but at the same time burned eleven heavy enemy vehicles.
During these battles, the crew of the IS-2 tank under the command of Guard Lieutenant Ivan Khitsenko of the 30th Guards Heavy Tank Brigade also distinguished themselves. His platoon was tasked with holding the defense on the right flank. The platoon attacked the Nazi column. In this battle, Khitsenko’s tank, using its cannon fire, knocked out seven enemy Tiger tanks and rammed one before it itself burned out.
How was it built?
The IS-2 heavy tank had a classic layout - that is, the engine and transmission were at the rear, and the control compartment was in front. In the bow of the hull there was a driver's seat, three other crew members had jobs in the fighting compartment, which combined the middle part of the armored hull and the turret. The gun, its ammunition and part of the fuel tanks were also located there.
Soviet tank builders sought to obtain maximum armor with a relatively moderate weight and dimensions of the entire tank. And they succeeded - with a mass of 46 tons, the IS-2 was much more protected than the Panther, which weighed almost the same, surpassed the 57-ton Tiger in this parameter and was slightly inferior to the 68-ton Royal Tiger.
A driver's hatch was mounted in the upper frontal plate. In front of the hull roof there were two periscopic viewing devices. Three crew members were located in the turret: to the left of the gun there were workstations for the gunner and tank commander, and to the right for the loader. The commander of the vehicle had a cast observation turret. The crew entered and exited through hatches in the turret: a round double-leaf hatch for the commander's cupola and a round single-leaf hatch for the loader. The hull also had a bottom hatch for emergency abandonment of the tank by the crew.
The main armament of the IS-2 was the D-25T cannon of 122 mm caliber. It had a muzzle brake to reduce recoil. The D-25T gun had vertical aiming angles from -3° to +20°; with the turret in a fixed position, it could be aimed in a small sector of horizontal aiming (the so-called “jewelry” aiming).
The shot was fired using an electric or manual mechanical trigger. The gun's ammunition capacity was 28 rounds of separate loading. Shells and cartridges filled with gunpowder were placed in the turret and along both sides of the fighting compartment.
The IS-2 tank was equipped with three DT (Degtyarev tank) machine guns of 7.62 mm caliber: a fixed forward one, coaxial with the gun, and a rear one in a ball mount at the rear of the turret. The ammunition load for all diesel engines was 2520 rounds in loaded discs.
These machine guns were mounted in such a way that, if necessary, they could be removed and used outside the tank. Since January 1945, the IS-2 began to be equipped with a DShK heavy machine gun. The DShK's ammunition load was 250 12.7-mm cartridges in belts in a box attached to the machine gun.
Assault tank
A heavy shell fired from the IS-2 gun penetrated any armor of all enemy tanks. The vehicle bearing the name of the leader proved itself most successful during the assault on fortified positions and large populated areas. A high-explosive 122-mm shell broke through the armored caps of machine-gun pillboxes, broke barricades, and smashed into rubble the thick brick walls of German houses turned into fortified points.
True, during street battles the IS-2 became vulnerable to enemy tank destroyers armed with hand-held anti-tank weapons, such as the Faustpatron or Panzerschreck. In order to avoid becoming victims of enemy tanks, tanks in the city used a special combat formation called the “herringbone”. Tanks walked along the streets of enemy settlements in pairs, and the pairs interacted with each other. A tank platoon - two IS-2 tanks - was shooting through the street. One tank fired on its left side, the second on its right.
The tanks moved in a ledge, one after another, covering each other with fire. Each tank company was assigned a platoon of machine gunners, consisting of five sections. Each tank had a squad. During the movement, the machine gunners rode on IS-2 armor, and during street battles they dismounted and guarded their combat vehicles from the enemy armed with “faust cartridges”. In turn, the tanks cleared the way for the infantry with cannon and machine gun fire.
Heavy breakthrough tank regiments armed with the IS-2 distinguished themselves during street fighting in cities such as Budapest, Danzig and Breslau. But they performed especially well during the assault on the capital of the Third Reich - Berlin. The intensity of the fighting can be evidenced by the fact that the IS-2 crews spent two or three rounds of ammunition per day.
IS-2 tanks provided fire support for the storming of the Reichstag. According to the recollections of participants in those events, on April 30 the fighting came very close to the walls of the Reichstag. In the morning, the 88th Heavy Tank Regiment, having crossed the Spree River along the Moltke Bridge, took up firing positions on the Kron-Prinzenufer embankment.
At 11:30, units of the 79th Rifle Corps went on the offensive and crossed the ditch on Königsplatz in front of the Reichstag. At 13:00, the regiment's tanks, participating in the general artillery preparation that preceded the assault, opened direct fire on the Reichstag. At 18:30, the regiment supported the second assault on the Reichstag with its fire, and only with the start of the battle inside the building did the tanks stop shelling.
A photo of the IS-2 tank of the 7th Guards Heavy Tank Brigade, with the emblem of this brigade - a polar bear and the inscription on the tower "Battle Friend", taken on May 2, 1945 against the backdrop of the Brandenburg Gate, went around the whole world.
Children of legend
The ISU-122 and ISU-152 self-propelled artillery mounts were produced on the IS-2 chassis. The latter was nicknamed “St. John’s wort” by the troops. It earned this name because its 152-mm projectile was guaranteed to destroy any German tank at a direct shot distance. And the Wehrmacht soldiers gave it the name Dosenoffner (“can opener”).
But mainly these self-propelled guns were used as support weapons during the breakthrough of fortified enemy positions. The 152-mm (6-inch) howitzer-gun ML-20S had a powerful high-explosive fragmentation projectile OF-540 weighing 43.56 kg, loaded with 6 kg of TNT.
These shells were very effective both against infantry outside shelter (with the fuze set to fragmentation action) and against fortifications such as pillboxes and dugouts (with the fuze set to high explosive action). One hit from such a projectile into an ordinary medium-sized city house was enough to destroy all life inside.
And in the late 1950s, 8K11 operational-tactical missile systems (according to the NATO classification SS-1b Scud B) began to be mounted on the chassis of the IS-2 tank. A total of 56 such starting units were produced.
In the service of friends
After the end of the Great Patriotic War, the IS-2 continued to serve in the armored units of the Soviet Army. The tanks underwent several modernizations, during which the transmission was updated, new engines, night vision devices and new radio stations were installed.
In this form, IS-2M tanks were in service with the Soviet Army right up until 1995! They were supposed to be used as mobile firing points in fortified areas built along the border with China. In addition, IS-2 tanks were in service with the Polish Army (71 vehicles) and the Czechoslovak People's Army. A certain number of IS-2s were transferred to the PRC in the early 1950s.
As part of Chinese “volunteer” units, they took part in combat operations during the Korean War against American troops. Some of the Chinese IS-2s were transferred to Vietnam, where they fought with French troops trying to regain dominance over their former colony.
Currently, the IS-2 is still in service with the armies of Cuba and the DPRK.
Sergey Ivanov
Soviet heavy tank of the Great Patriotic War period. The abbreviation IS means “Joseph Stalin” - the official designation of serial Soviet heavy tanks produced in 1943-1953. Index 2 corresponds to the second production model of the tank of this family. During the Great Patriotic War, along with the designation IS-2, the name IS-122 was used equally; in this case, the index 122 means the caliber of the vehicle’s main armament. The IS-2 was the most powerful and most heavily armored of the Soviet production tanks during the war, and one of the most powerful tanks in the world at that time. Tanks of this type played a big role in the battles of 1944-1945, especially during the assault on cities. After the end of the war, the IS-2s were modernized and were in service with the Soviet and Russian armies until 1995. Also, IS-2 tanks were exported to a number of countries and participated in some post-war armed conflicts.
Story
Prerequisites for creation
The IS-85 (IS-1) and KV-85 were put into service in September 1943, but by the end of 1943 it became clear that they had insufficient armament for a heavy tank. The experience of combat use of the 85-mm D-5 cannon on the SU-85 self-propelled artillery mount and experimental firing at captured heavy German tanks showed that the D-5 gun does not allow achieving decisive superiority over the armament of German tanks; moreover, in terms of its armor penetration it inferior to the German 88 mm tank guns and the 75 mm KwK 42 L70 gun mounted on the Panther tank. It should also be noted that the 85-mm D-5T cannon at a distance of 500-1000 m with a caliber armor-piercing projectile could penetrate the forehead of the German Tiger I heavy tank only with a hit close to normal; the upper frontal part of the Panther did not break through at all. This put the new Soviet heavy tank at a disadvantage against the ever-increasing numbers of Panthers on the Eastern Front.
Since the main use of heavy tanks was to break through heavily fortified enemy defense lines, saturated with long-term and field fortifications, the high-explosive fragmentation effect of the shells played an equally (if not more) important role as the armor-piercing effect. 85-mm shells, borrowed from the 52-K anti-aircraft gun, did not have a high-explosive version at all (they were fragmentation); although with certain types of fuses they could be used as high-explosive fuses, their action was little better than that of 76 mm ammunition. This fact was also verified by self-propelled artillery - to combat bunkers and strong bunkers, Soviet commanders preferred the SU-122 rather than the SU-85. However, the turret and gun mounting design of the IS tank had a large reserve for installing more powerful artillery systems.
Weapon selection
In the early autumn of 1943, the famous Soviet artillery designer F. F. Petrov sent a letter to the chief designer of ChKZ and pilot plant No. 100 Zh. Ya. Kotin about the possibility of installing artillery systems of 107, 122 and even 152 mm caliber into IS tanks. J. Ya. Kotin chose the 122-mm A-19 gun to strengthen the armament of the IS tank. After agreeing on the technical details, he received approval personally from I.V. Stalin for the installation of the A-19 in the IS tank. In the design bureau of plant No. 9 under the leadership of F. F. Petrov, the A-19 was modified for installation in a tank - it was equipped with a muzzle brake to mitigate high recoil, more compact recoil devices, and the placement of controls was improved for the convenience of the gunner in the cramped fighting compartment of the tank. This modified version of the A-19 was named D-25T, and its mass production was launched at Plant No. 9 immediately. At first there were difficulties in mastering it, so the issue of installing the A-19 cannon directly into the IS was worked out. However, these difficulties were overcome, and further installation of the A-19 in the tank was not required.
Tests
At pilot plant No. 100, the prototype of the D-25 cannon was installed on the former “Object 237” No. 2 - an experimental version of the IS-1 with the D-5T cannon. This experimental vehicle was designated "Object 240". In October - November, it was tested by running and shooting at the Chebarkul test site. From the very beginning, the D-25 was equipped with a T-shaped muzzle brake, which exploded during test firing. Some sources claim that Marshal Voroshilov, who was present at the tests, was almost killed. Subsequently, the IS was equipped with a two-chamber muzzle brake of the German type, and then Plant No. 9 created its own design of a two-chamber muzzle brake, which began to be mounted on production vehicles.
The IS-2 was adopted by the USSR armored forces in accordance with GKO decree No. 4479 of October 31, 1943. After successful tests of the Object 240, an order was received to immediately launch it into mass production at ChKZ. At the end of autumn 1943, assembly of the first production vehicles began. The new modification of the tank received the index IS-2 (during the war, the designation IS-122 was used on equal terms with it; the first samples were sometimes also referred to in units as KV-122). Production lasted from December 1943 to June 1945; several cars of this brand were also produced by the Leningrad Kirov Plant.
The IS-2 received its baptism of fire at the beginning of 1944, and it was forced, disrupting the planned thorough training of crews for the new vehicle. The high combat qualities demonstrated in battle immediately led to an order to maximize production volumes of the IS-2. At the same time, the test work was disrupted, as a result of which a lot of unfinished vehicles were sent to the front, and their failures caused a large number of complaints from the troops. To ensure the quality of serial IS-2s and their further improvement, at the beginning of 1944, Zh. Ya. Kotin and a number of his employees were removed from design work on new machines in order to eliminate defects in the design of the IS-2. The development of the vehicle was difficult: for example, in April 1944, the military acceptance department reported that there was no significant improvement in the quality of the IS-2 tanks and self-propelled guns produced at ChKZ. However, in the summer of 1944, the work carried out to improve the quality bore first fruit - about a third of the tanks produced were able to be accepted the first time, and from the end of autumn 1944, the quality of the tanks received was officially recognized as satisfactory - Zh. Ya. Kotin was returned to the post of head of the ChKZ Design Bureau and pilot plant No. 100. In the winter of 1944/1945. reports from the troops indicated that the IS-2 exceeded the guaranteed mileage of 1000 km with trouble-free operation. The well-functioning production mechanism for the production of the IS-2 led to the fact that the 1945 vehicles were considered quite reliable and unpretentious in operation.
Strengthening tank protection
In conjunction with work to increase reliability, research was carried out to enhance the armor protection of the IS-2. The first option, although it had the best armor protection among all Soviet tanks, was relatively easily hit by 88-mm tank and anti-tank guns of the Wehrmacht. The 75mm long-barreled guns also posed a great threat to it. After analyzing the damage, ChKZ designers came to the conclusion that strengthening the turret’s armor protection was no longer possible without a radical redesign of the entire structure, which was impossible under the harsh conditions of mass production. The installation of a 122 mm gun made the turret heavier and upset its balance - the center of mass did not lie on the axis of rotation of the turret, which was designed and balanced for the 85 mm D-5 gun. Additional armor, in addition to the overall weight of the vehicle, would make it impossible to manually rotate the turret with any significant roll of the vehicle and would require a much more powerful electric motor to drive the rotation. Therefore, the tower was left unchanged. The protection of the armored hull was significantly improved by replacing the “stepped” upper frontal part with its straightened configuration. There were cases when the upper frontal part did not penetrate at point-blank range even from the most powerful 88-mm Pak 43 anti-tank gun. However, the lower frontal part still remained vulnerable. The thickness of the frontal armor reached 120 mm, the side armor - 90 mm, but the frontal armor of some tanks was cast rather than rolled (the latter, with equal thickness, provides better protection against penetration).
Further work
Subsequent work to enhance the security of heavy tanks was carried out simultaneously by two teams - engineers from ChKZ and pilot plant No. 100. Interestingly, the head of both design bureaus was Zh. Ya. Kotin. Each of the teams promoted their own projects, but in 1945, the combined version “Object 703” went into production under the designation IS-3, which, in fact, was the IS-2 with radically revised armor protection, taking into account the experience of the Great Patriotic War.
Design
Layout
The IS-2 was essentially a further improvement of the IS-1 tank, which, in turn, was a deep modernization of the previous model of the KV-1 heavy tank. Compared to the IS-1, the armament was more than significantly strengthened, and on modifications arr. 1944 with straightened frontal armor also increased protection from enemy fire in the frontal sector. Like all other Soviet serial heavy and medium tanks of that time, the IS-2 had a classic layout. The armored hull, from bow to stern, was successively divided into a control compartment, a fighting compartment and an engine-transmission compartment. The driver was located in the control compartment, the other three crew members had jobs in the fighting compartment, which combined the middle part of the armored hull and the turret. The gun, its ammunition and part of the fuel tanks were also located there. The engine and transmission were installed in the rear of the vehicle.
The desire of ChKZ designers to obtain maximum armor with a relatively moderate weight and dimensions of the entire tank led to both positive and negative results. The positive side was the efficiency and relatively low material consumption of the IS-2 as a whole - with the same mass of 46 tons, the Soviet tank was much more protected than the Panther, superior in this parameter to the 55-ton Tiger I and slightly inferior to the 68-ton "Tiger II". The disadvantages were a logical continuation of this approach - due to the dense layout, it was necessary to abandon the driver's hatch and place part of the fuel tanks in the fighting compartment. As a result, if the IS-2 was hit, there was a significant chance of diesel fuel igniting and hitting the tankers. On German tanks, gas tanks were located outside the habitable areas of the vehicle (although they also contained a number of units with flammable liquids). The absence of a driver's hatch more than once led to the fact that a wounded tanker could not quickly leave the burning vehicle (it was necessary to climb out through the turret after other crew members) and died from flames or suffocation. Less significant disadvantages include the location of the turret in the bow of the hull due to the layout. Together with the long gun, this made it difficult to overcome obstacles such as ditches and counterscarps. Some of them could only be overcome by turning the turret backwards, that is, in battle conditions with the presence of such obstacles, the IS-2 lost firepower. All German heavy tanks had a turret in the center of the armored hull, and the long reach of the gun barrels did not make crossing obstacles so difficult.
Armored hull and turret
The IS-2 has differentiated ballistic armor protection.
The armored body of the tank (except for the front part of some vehicles) was welded from rolled armor plates with a thickness of 90, 60, 30 and 20 mm. The design of the frontal part varied depending on the modification of the vehicle:
IS-2 arr. 1943 had a cast frontal part of a streamlined “stepped” shape, in different parts its thickness varied from 60 to 120 mm.
-IS-2 arr. 1944, to increase the projectile resistance of the frontal armor, it was equipped with an improved “straightened” design of this part. Instead of a streamlined stepped tip of a complex geometric shape, the forehead of the IS-2 mod. 1944 was formed by two flat armor plates, the upper of which had the shape of a trapezoid tapering towards the top of the tank and an inclination to the normal of 60 degrees. Some of the issued IS-2 mod. 1944 was equipped with a cast frontal part, the armor thickness of which reached 120 mm; starting from the second half of 1944, as rolled armor of high hardness became available, the frontal part began to be made welded from 90 mm armor plates.
The frontal part was connected to the rest of the parts by welding. The streamlined turret was an armor casting of complex geometric shape; its 90 mm thick sides were placed at an angle to the vertical to increase projectile resistance. The front part of the turret with the embrasure for the gun, formed by the intersection of four spheres, was cast separately and welded with the rest of the armored parts of the turret. The gun mantlet was a cylindrical segment of bent rolled armor plate and had three holes - for a cannon, a coaxial machine gun and a sight. The turret was mounted on a shoulder strap with a diameter of 1800 mm in the armored roof of the fighting compartment and was secured with grips to avoid stalling in the event of a strong roll or overturning of the tank. The “contact” surface of the lower shoulder strap of the turret and the upper shoulder strap of the armored hull was somewhat recessed into the roof of the fighting compartment, which prevented the turret from jamming during shelling. The turret shoulder straps were marked in thousandths for firing from closed positions.
For convenience when repairing and servicing units of the engine-transmission group, the roof of the engine-transmission compartment was made removable, and the upper aft armor plate could be hinged.
The driver was located centrally in the front of the tank's armored hull. Compared to the KV-1s tank, the dense layout of the habitable space of the IS tank did not allow it to accommodate a fifth crew member - a gunner-radio operator. His functions were divided between the commander and the driver: the first worked with the radio station, and the second fired without aim from a machine gun by pressing the electric trigger on one of the control levers. The course machine gun itself was located to the right of the driver and was rigidly attached to a special armored pipe, which was welded to the frontal armored part of the tank. Subsequently, due to the low effectiveness of non-targeted fire and the weakening of the frontal armor, the frontal machine gun was completely abandoned. Three crew members were located in the turret: to the left of the gun were the workstations of the gunner and tank commander, and to the right of the loader. The vehicle commander had a cast observation turret with a vertical armor thickness of up to 82 mm. The crew entered and exited through hatches in the turret: a round double-leaf hatch for the commander's cupola and a round single-leaf hatch for the loader. The hull was also equipped with a bottom hatch for emergency escape by the tank crew and a number of hatches, hatches and technological openings for loading ammunition, access to the necks of fuel tanks, and other components and assemblies of the vehicle.
A number of parts were welded to the armored body - travel limiters of the balancers and torsion bar suspension brackets, bonnets for support rollers and mud cleaners, a stopper for mounting the caterpillar tensioning mechanism.
Security
As an assessment of the security of the IS-2, we can cite a somewhat emotional judgment from the monograph “IS Tanks” that the IS-2 tank was the only large-scale tank of the anti-Hitler coalition, whose armor provided some protection from the famous 88-mm cannons and long-barreled 75-mm guns, then how all the others (except for the later modifications of the British Churchills) “provided their crew no more protection than a cardboard box.”
In terms of armor protection, 53% of the total weight of the IS-2 was accounted for by the hull and turret armor, while for the PzKpfw VI Ausf H "Tiger I" this figure was 46.3%, and for the PzKpfw V "Panther" - 38. 5 %. Of the German tanks, only the PzKpfw VI Ausf B "Tiger II" had the best indicator (54.7%), but this was achieved at the cost of a significant increase in the mass of the entire vehicle as a whole, with all the ensuing consequences. The frontal armor of the IS-2 withstood German shells quite well: the upper part of the “stepped nose” was penetrated by caliber armor-piercing shells of the 88-mm KwK 36 cannon from 1000-1200 m, the 75-mm KwK 42 cannon from 800-900 m, the 75-mm Pak cannon 40 - from 400 m. But for 1944 this was already considered clearly insufficient, therefore, as a result of intensive work, the forehead protection of the IS-2 hull was greatly improved. The “straightened” upper frontal part was pierced by 75-mm armor-piercing and sub-caliber shells at close ranges; 88-mm (KwK 36 L/56) armor-piercing for a cast nose with a thickness of 120 mm - did not penetrate at point-blank range, for a rolled nose with a thickness of 90 mm - they penetrated from 450 m. It was not possible to achieve protection from the Pak 43 gun at medium and long-range combat distances . But still, it should be taken into account that in order to achieve such a result, the cast nose must be of good quality, without looseness and voids, which was not always the case. The lower part of the frontal part was pierced by a 75-mm projectile from a distance of 785 m; the gun mantlet, 100 mm thick, was also pierced by German 88-mm KwK 36 cannon shells from a distance of about 1000 m.
In 1945, at the Kubinka training ground, special tests were carried out by shelling the IS-2 with a straightened upper frontal part from a captured German early modification of the Hornisse self-propelled gun, armed with a powerful 88-mm artillery system "Panzerjagerkanone" 8.8 cm Pak 43/1 L/71 with a length 71 caliber barrel As in the case of the 88-mm KwK 36 cannon, the upper frontal part of the IS-2 was never penetrated by a caliber armor-piercing projectile, but, as one would expect, the range of actual destruction of less protected areas of the tank increased significantly compared to the KwK 36.
Armament
The main armament of the IS-2 was the D-25T cannon of 122 mm caliber. The gun was mounted on axles in the turret and was completely balanced. However, in general, the turret with the D-25T gun was not balanced: its center of mass was not located on the geometric axis of rotation, which made it difficult to turn when the vehicle was rolling. This negative circumstance was a consequence of the fact that the turret was created and balanced for the 85-mm D-5T gun, which was the original armament option for IS tanks. The installation of the D-25T gun with a much longer and more massive barrel violated the calculated mass distribution around the turret rotation axis. The D-25T gun had vertical aiming angles from -3 to +20 degrees; with a fixed turret position, it could be aimed in a small sector of horizontal aiming (the so-called “jewelry” aiming). The shot was fired using an electric or manual mechanical trigger.
The gun's ammunition capacity was 28 rounds of separate loading. The shells and propellant charges for them were placed in the turret and along both sides of the fighting compartment. Compared to the wide range of ammunition for the 122-mm A-19 gun, the ancestor of the D-25T gun, the IS-2 ammunition was significantly less diverse. It included:
Sharp-headed armor-piercing tracer projectile BR-471 weighing 25 kg (mass of explosive (TNT) - 156 g).
- blunt-headed armor-piercing projectile with a ballistic tip BR-471B weighing 25 kg; created in 1944, but appeared among the troops in large quantities in the very final phase of the war - the spring of 1945.
- high-explosive fragmentation cannon grenade OF-471 weighing 25 kg (mass of explosive - TNT or ammotol - 3 kg).
All types of projectiles were fired at a full Zh-471 charge, which gave them an initial speed of 792-800 m/s.
The IS-2 tank was equipped with three 7.62-mm DT machine guns: a fixed forward machine gun, coaxial with a gun, and a rear one in a ball mount in the tide at the rear of the turret. The ammunition load for all diesel engines was 2520 rounds in discs. These machine guns were installed in such a way that, if necessary, they could be removed from the mounts and used outside the tank. Beginning in January 1945, the IS-2 began to be equipped with a large-caliber 12.7-mm DShK anti-aircraft machine gun with a K-8T collimator sight. The DShK's ammunition load was 250 rounds in belts in a box attached to the machine gun. Also, for self-defense, the crew had several F-1 hand grenades and was sometimes equipped with a pistol for firing flares.
Firepower
The 122-mm tank gun was a modification of the hull gun of the 1931/1937 model A-19, received the designation D-25T, and was essentially the largest-caliber serial tank gun of the Second World War - its muzzle energy was 820 t m, while 88-mm KwK 43 cannon of the German heavy tank PzKpfw VI Ausf B "Tiger II" it was 520 t m. The KwK 36 and KwK 42 guns of the heavy tanks PzKpfw VI Ausf H "Tiger I" and PzKpfw V "Panther" had energy of 368 t m and 205 t m, respectively. At the same time, it should be noted that the quality of manufacturing of armor-piercing shells from the Germans was significantly higher, and their range included sub-caliber and cumulative versions, while until 1945, the only armor-piercing caliber sharp-headed projectile BR-471 was produced for the D-25T. In terms of its ability to fight heavy armored vehicles, it was inferior to German tank guns and was mainly used as an assault weapon.
Practical results of firing from the D-25T and A-19 cannons at the firing range at German captured tanks with the blunt-headed BR-471B projectile from a range of 1400 m showed the following results (there are doubts about some of them - due to confusion in the ChKZ documents - which tank and on which distances fired):
The PzKpfw IV Ausf H tank was penetrated through the front and rear armor plates.
-The PzKpfw V “Panther” tank, when hit in the upper frontal part of the armored hull, received a 150x230 mm hole with a crack along the weld; when it hit the side of the turret, a hole of 130x130 mm was formed; the opposite side of the turret was also pierced and torn off along the weld. When the turret was hit in the forehead, a hole measuring 180x240 mm was formed, the turret was torn off its shoulder strap and displaced 500 mm from the axis of rotation.
-Tank PzKpfw VI Ausf H "Tiger I" when a 122-mm shell hit an already existing hole from an 85-mm shell in the frontal armor plate, it was left without an 82-mm rear armor plate, torn out along the welds, the shell passed right through all the internal equipment of the tank. When it hit the roof of the tower (thickness 40 mm, angle of inclination 80 degrees to the normal), a dent with a crack from the ricocheted projectile remained; when the turret was hit in the forehead, a hole of 580x130 mm appeared, the turret itself was torn off its shoulder strap and shifted 540 mm from the axis of rotation.
-The self-propelled gun JagdPz "Ferdinand" did not penetrate the front - a 122-mm shell pierced the first frontal 100-mm armor plate, forming a hole 120x150 mm, but was reflected from the second; when it hit the wheelhouse, a dent 100 mm deep was left in the armor plate.
Satisfactory armor penetration results were achieved only due to the large mass of the projectile, which as a result affected the extremely low rate of fire of the gun and reduced the tank's ammunition load in comparison with the armed 85-mm IS-2 gun by more than half, to 28 shells. At the beginning of November 1944, a captured heavy tank PzKpfw VI Ausf B "Tiger II" was fired at at the Kubinka training ground. A 122-mm sharp-headed projectile pierced the upper frontal part (at the joints of the armor plates) from 600 m, the Tiger II's own 88-mm KwK 43 gun dealt with this armored barrier from 400 m, and the 75-mm Panther cannon pierced the forehead of the Tiger II » from 100 m.
The high power of the high-explosive 122 mm made it possible to achieve positive results when firing at enemy armored targets. It is worth noting that the destructive effect of a high-explosive projectile is enhanced when it hits at an angle compared to hitting it normally. Thus, the OF-471 high-explosive fragmentation grenade, when set to high-explosive action when firing at the “Tiger II” in Kubinka, when hit, disables the transmission elements of the latter and breaks the welds of the frontal part. In terms of purely high-explosive action, a 122-mm 25-kg projectile with 3 kg of ammotol was 3 times superior to a similar German 88-mm high-explosive fragmentation projectile weighing 9.5 kg with 1 kg of ammotol (the dependence of the mass of the projectile on the caliber is cubic, because the projectile has three dimensions , that is, the quotient of the calibers must be raised to the third power: 122 mm/88 mm = 1.386; 1.386 = 2.66 times more).
The biggest and fatal drawback of the D-25T gun was its low rate of fire in comparison with the 75-mm and 88-mm guns of German tanks, which could withstand the IS-2. This rate of fire was due to the large mass of the projectile and the very difficult operating conditions of the single loader. The sequence of operations with the piston bolt was as follows: opening the bolt, lowering the tray, placing a 25-kg projectile in the tray, sending it “with a ring” into the chamber with a rammer, preparing the cartridge case, putting it in the chamber, closing the bolt. It should be taken into account that the loader performed most of these operations with his left hand. The wedge bolt only made the loader's work easier and slightly increased the rate of fire, which in the best conditions did not exceed 3 rounds per minute. In reality, this figure was much lower (which is true not only for the IS-2, but for all tanks in general); during tests in Kubinka, when moving at a speed of 12 km/h, the combat rate of fire was 1.35 rounds per minute. There is an opinion that the low rate of fire was associated with separate loading of the D-25T gun, but the results of tests at the test site of the 122-mm D-25-44 gun using a unitary projectile do not confirm this.
The accuracy of the 122-mm D-25T cannon was at least not inferior to foreign guns - the average deviation of a 122-mm armor-piercing projectile from the aiming point when firing from a standstill at a distance of 1 km was 170 mm vertically and 270 mm horizontally. Soviet tests of the 88 mm KwK 43 gun under the same conditions gave a deviation of 200 mm vertically and 180 mm horizontally. The IS-2 demonstrated good results when firing on the move. During testing in Kubinka at a distance of 700 m, the IS-2 hit the Panther tank four out of five times and hit the PzKpfw III tank two out of three.
The traverse speed of the IS-2 turret was 13-16 degrees. per second, that is, it took 22-28 s to complete a full rotation of the tower. The electric drive made it possible to rotate the turret with the engine off and the vehicle tilted up to 15 degrees. The manual drive made it possible to rotate the turret with a roll of 8.3 degrees. with a force of 16 kgf. For comparison: German heavy tanks were equipped with a hydraulic or manual turret drive. The speed of rotation of the turret by the hydraulic drive depended on the engine speed (that is, when the engine was not running, the hydraulic drive was useless), being in the range from 5 to 19 degrees. per second. Reports on studies of German heavy tanks in Kubinka claim that the hydraulic drive is complex and cumbersome, and it is inconvenient to control.
It can also be said that the powerful armament of the IS-2 indirectly increased its security, forcing enemy tanks and self-propelled guns to open fire on the IS-2 from longer distances compared to a battle with any other Soviet tank.
An excerpt from the “Report of the Self-Propelled Artillery Directorate of the Spacecraft on work during the Great Patriotic War” indicates:
“...the installation of 122-mm cannons on IS tanks restored to our tanks the temporarily lost superiority over the enemy in the artillery armament of heavy tanks. In terms of the power of its shot, the 122-mm D-25 cannon left far behind the 88-mm cannons of German tanks.
The combat operations of IS tanks showed that 122-mm guns are the most effective means of combating enemy heavy and medium tanks, ensuring penetration of their armor from a distance of 2500 m...”
Excerpt from the “Report on the combat operations of the 71st OGvTTP from 07/14/44 to 08/31/44”:
"...The fire armament of IS-122 tanks is the most powerful of all existing types of tanks. The 122-mm projectile has great penetrating ability, which determines the quality of these tanks as the best means in the fight against heavy enemy tanks..."
Engine
The IS-2 was equipped with a four-stroke V-shaped 12-cylinder diesel engine V-2-IS with a power of 520 hp. With. Engine starting was ensured by an inertia starter with manual and electric drives or compressed air from two tanks in the fighting compartment of the vehicle. The electric drive of the inertia starter was an auxiliary electric motor with a power of 0.88 kW. The V-2-IS diesel engine was equipped with an NK-1 high-pressure fuel pump with an RNA-1 all-mode regulator and a fuel supply corrector. To clean the air entering the engine, a Multicyclone type filter was used. Heating devices were also installed in the engine-transmission compartment to facilitate engine starting in the cold season. They could also be used to heat the fighting compartment of the vehicle. The IS-2 had three fuel tanks, two of which were located in the fighting compartment, and one in the engine compartment. The tank was also equipped with four external additional fuel tanks with a capacity of 360 liters, not connected to the engine fuel system.
Transmission
The IS-2 tank was equipped with a mechanical transmission, which included:
Multi-disc main clutch of dry friction “steel on ferodo”;
-four-speed gearbox with multiplier (8 forward gears and 2 reverse gears; a second reverse gear can only be obtained theoretically; it is not available in a real car);
-two onboard two-stage planetary rotation mechanisms with a multi-disc dry friction locking clutch “steel on steel” and band brakes;
- two double-row combined final drives.
All transmission control drives are mechanical. Compared to the previous model of the KV-85 heavy tank, a new transmission element was planetary rotation mechanisms. The use of this unit made it possible to increase the overall reliability of the transmission as a whole, which was precisely the most significant drawback of the chassis of the KV series tanks and vehicles based on it.
Chassis
The IS-2 has an individual torsion bar suspension for each of the 6 solid-cast gable road wheels of small diameter (550 mm) on each side. Opposite each road wheel, travel limiters of the suspension balancers were welded to the armored body. The drive wheels with removable pinion gears were located at the rear, and the idlers were identical to the road wheels. The upper branch of the caterpillar was supported by three small solid support rollers on each side; These rollers were taken from the design of the KV-85 tank. The caterpillar tension mechanism is screw; each caterpillar consisted of 86 single-ridge tracks with a width of 650 mm.
Mobility
The IS-2 heavy tank was considered quite satisfactory in terms of its mobility by representatives of the Red Army, although with a 520-horsepower diesel engine and a mass of 46 tons, its power-to-weight ratio was the lowest among Soviet large-scale medium and heavy tanks. The specific ground pressure was about 0.8 kg/sq.cm, which far exceeded the performance of German heavy and medium tanks. The maximum speed did not exceed 35 km/h, but for a heavy breakthrough tank this characteristic was not decisive, since the main tactical application was combat in the same formation with infantry, and the more mobile T-34s and Shermans were intended to develop a breakthrough. In the event of weak or absent enemy resistance, the IS-2 could be used to a limited extent to deepen a breakthrough, but its mobility characteristics did not favor such use.
In comparison with German heavy tanks (according to the Soviet classification), the IS-2 occupies an intermediate position between the Panther and Tigers of both modifications. The Panther with its 700-horsepower Maybach HL 230 engine has the best power-to-weight ratio, maximum and average speeds. However, it should be taken into account that the Panther was not a breakthrough tank and was intended to solve other combat missions, where speed and operational-tactical mobility were among the determining parameters. The 55-ton Tiger I had a power density comparable to the IS-2, and the 68-ton Tiger II was inferior to the IS-2 in this parameter. It should also be noted that all three types of German tanks differed from the IS-2 in their higher specific ground pressure, which left a certain imprint on their tactical use. In particular, in order to save the expensive and difficult-to-repair equipment of German heavy tank battalions, they were rarely operated off-road (the engine and transmission were overloaded, increasing the chance of the tank getting stuck), while the IS-2 was more adapted to off-road conditions. It should also be noted that in Germany and Western Europe with a developed road network, this lack of German cars was practically insignificant. On the other hand, “ironing” the trenches in the conditions of the “lunar surface” of the front edge for the “Tigers” was fraught with failure of the transmission, while the IS-2 was quite suitable for such a purpose.
Electrical equipment
The electrical wiring in the IS-2 tank was single-wire, the second wire being the armored hull of the vehicle. The sources of electricity (operating voltages 12 and 24 V) were a GT-4563A generator with a 1 kW RRA-24F relay-regulator and two series-connected 6-STE-128 batteries with a total capacity of 128 Ah. Electricity consumers included:
Electric motor for turning the turret;
-external and internal lighting of the vehicle, illumination devices for sights and scales of measuring instruments;
-external sound signal and alarm circuit from the landing force to the vehicle crew;
-control and measuring instruments (ammeter and voltmeter);
-electric release of cannons and machine guns;
-communication means - radio station and tank intercom;
- electrics of the motor group - electric motor of the inertial starter, reels of spark plugs for winter engine starting, etc.
Surveillance equipment and sights
The commander's hatch and the loader's workplace were equipped with
The heavy tank IS-2 (“Joseph Stalin the Second”) had the most powerful armament and armor among all Soviet tanks that took part in the battles of the Great Patriotic War. In terms of armament, it was superior to any type of tank of the Second World War, with the exception of the Soviet KV-2. IS-2 became one of the symbols of Victory.
History of creation
Before the start of the Great Patriotic War, the Red Army had a qualitative advantage in the material part of the armored forces over the Wehrmacht. It was armed with powerful T-34 medium tanks and Klim Voroshilov KV-1 and KV-2 heavy tanks, which the Germans had no analogues at that time.
German military experts began to strengthen the armor and weapons of the T-III and T-IV tanks. In August 1942, the German T-VI Tiger heavy tank appeared on the Eastern Front. With its 88 mm gun it penetrated the armor of any Soviet tank. In the summer of 1943, the Germans began using the new T-V Panther medium tank, which was superior in armament and armor to the Soviet T-34.
The Soviet troops, in turn, needed new, more powerful and advanced tanks. One of the ways of such strengthening was the further improvement of the T-34 main battle tank. Since December 1943, it began to be equipped with an 85-mm gun, similar in its characteristics to the German 88-mm cannon.
Intermediate steps towards the creation of the IS-2 were the heavy tanks KV-85 and IS-1, produced in limited series in 1943. Tests showed that the 85-mm gun mounted on them was insufficient to successfully fight the new German tanks, and at the same time it was decided to arm the IS with a 122-mm gun. Thus, in December 1943, the IS-2 was born.
Advantages and disadvantages
The 122-mm cannon turned out to be a sufficient means to successfully fight at different distances not only with Tigers and Panthers, but also with the German modification of the Tiger, the “Royal Tiger” with reinforced armor, which appeared to the Germans in August 1944. Although the IS-2 failed to combine the power of armament and armor with high speed of movement, and the tank turned out to be heavy, its maneuverability was still qualitatively higher than that of German heavy tanks. For comparison: with a mass of 46 tons, the IS-2 was significantly lighter not only than the “Royal Tiger” (70 tons), but also the regular “Tiger” (57 tons), and approximately equal to the “Panther” (45 tons).
The IS-2 chassis was also distinguished by its high advantages and reliability. Wehrmacht General F. Mellenthin, who analyzed in detail the actions of armored forces during World War II, noted that in general “Russian tank designers knew their job well. They focused all their attention on the main thing: the power of the tank gun, armor protection and maneuverability. During the war, their suspension system was much better than that of German tanks and the tanks of the Western powers."
The main disadvantage of the IS-2 was the low rate of fire of the 122 mm cannon (maximum 3 rounds per minute) due to its separate loading. The tank's ammunition load was also insignificant: 28 shells. The IS-2 was inferior to medium tanks in maneuverability: the maximum speed was 40 km/h with 50 km/h for the Panthers and 55 km/h for the T-34-85. For these reasons, IS-2s were not a striking force in breaking through enemy defenses, but were used mainly to repel enemy flank counterattacks.
Combat use
The same Mellenthin admitted that the IS-2 “caused a lot of trouble for our Tigers.” The IS-2's baptism of fire took place in April 1944 when repelling the German counter-offensive near Ternopil. The chronicle of battles using the IS-2 is full of episodes when these tanks inflicted major damage on superior enemy armored forces, while suffering significantly fewer losses. The appearance of the “Royal Tigers” by the Germans in the battles on the Sandomierz bridgehead in August 1944 did not make significant changes to the balance of forces. There is a known case when a guards heavy tank regiment, repelling a German counterattack, destroyed six “Royal Tigers”, losing only three of its IS.
The IS-2 provided important fire support to Soviet troops during the street battles for Budapest and Berlin. True, in the city, heavy tanks turned out to be very vulnerable to enemy “faust cartridges”.
In 1943-1945. The Soviet military industry produced, according to various sources, from 3385 to 3750 IS-2 tanks. For comparison, the German military industry in Reich-controlled Europe produced only 1,355 Tigers and 487 Royal Tigers.
Post-war fate
The IS family tanks continued to improve. Even before the end of the war, the new IS-3 tank was put into mass production. It did not have time to take part in battles in Europe, but, according to some sources, several units of this tank took part in the Japanese campaign in August 1945. The IS-3 was distinguished by a more rational shape of the turret and frontal part. Subsequently, many of these vehicles were delivered to Egypt, where in 1967 they were all destroyed by American M48s, since by that time they had become quite obsolete.
A further development of the series was the IS-4, which was produced in limited quantities in the USSR in 1947-1949. Its production was discontinued due to identified defects in the chassis. The last tank of the family was the IS-7, but work on it did not go beyond a few prototypes. The Soviet army followed the path of other armies in the world - creating one main battle tank instead of several types. Thus, the IS-2 turned out to be not only the most successful heavy tank of World War II, but also the last successful tank of this type to take part in battles.
As for the IS-2 itself, it remained in service with the Soviet army for a long time. In 1957, it underwent a significant modernization, which consisted of replacing the engine and many elements of the chassis and structure. The IS-2 was delivered to North Korea and China, where it took part in the Korean War of 1950-1953. There are unconfirmed reports that several of these tanks were re-delivered by China to North Vietnam, where they took part in repelling American aggression in the late 1960s. Several more tanks were delivered to Cuba to repel the expected American invasion.
In the Soviet Union, IS-2 tanks, despite the fact that they were inferior in performance to the new main battle tanks of any potential enemy, also found use. On the border with China, many of them were converted into fixed armored firing points. The IS-2 was also used in military maneuvers until the 1980s. Some of the tanks, like the T-34-85 mass tanks of the war period, were in the strategic reserve for a long time. Only in 1995, the IS-2s were finally removed from service with the Russian army and cut into metal, with the exception of a few museum and memorial copies.