Russian heavy tanks

[BlackDragon]

How where the russian heavy tanks orginized. i.e. js2's 3's and kvs.

[Mobius]

5 tank companies of 2 platoons of two tanks each plus a command tank.

[BlackDragon]

so 2 packs for a company? how about platoon.

[Mk 1]

No. 1 pack for a company. 5 tanks to a company. 2 tanks to a platoon. Company was 2 platoons of 2 tanks each (4 tanks) plus a company commander tank (the 5th tank).

[BlackDragon]

Whats the next step up then after company, and how many units?

[pmskaar]

If you are talking from August 1942 on, the Russian heavy tanks were organized into independent "regiments" of 21 tanks. These were organized with 4 companies of 5 tanks as described above by Mk1 and others plus a regimental command tank. Prior to August 1942, the KV's were in 5 tanks per company but were alloted to tank brigades and tank divisions depending on which part of the early war we are talking about. Steve Zaloga's book "The Red Army Handbook" is a great book for breaking down how Russian units were organized at various stages of the war. Later in the war, from 1944 on there was often a regiment of heavy tanks assigned to the various Tank Corps.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

[DrBig]

No JS3's in WW2

[tstockton]

DrBig,

No JS3's in WW2

I seem to recall some anecdotal "evidence" that a very small number of JS-IIIs made it to the front lines at the end of April / beginning of May, 1945...

...or was that "evidence" planted by some guys who wanted an excuse to game JS-IIIs vs King Tigers??

Wouldn't surprise me...

Regards,
Tom Stockton

[1ComOpsCtr]

This article on the IPMS site lays it out pretty well, but the link below is probably one of the better references available.

http://ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2001/ ... lj_js2.htm

During the September 1945 Berlin Victory Parade there was a combined unit of JS IIIs that impressed all who saw them. There is some confusion about their use during the assault on Berlin but I can find no footage or photos in the archives that confirms their use, but there were two brigades of JS II's in the final assault.

http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?pti ... &Itemid=50

Take a look at the heavy tank entries on this link, they will provide all the details you require for Heavy Tank battles (JS vs Tigers) and though there weren't many of them I would bet they would be fun to duplicate(game).

Both sites make good painting guides as well.

Will

[Mk 1]

From my discussions with Russians who have pretty good access to archive material* it seems pretty clear to me that no JS-3s were involved in the closing battles in Europe.

But the debate/myth/confusion seems to persist.

I suggest there are two reasons:
1) Some people seem to have an emotional investment in proving/believing/promoting the position that the most advanced Russian tanks were in combat sooner than they actually were. There is even one guy who seems to be on a publicity campaign (both on web fora and in military history magazines) to prove that T-34-85s were present, in large numbers even, at Kursk. JS-3s in the closing battles is just one of those things that some people seem to want to believe.

2) There are several published German first-hand accounts of combat against JS-3s in the closing battles of the war. "Wait a minute!" I hear you cry. "Did he just say there were first hand accounts?" Why yes, that's what I said. It seems that there was some confusion in the nomenclature of the JS series among the Germans. The tank which we now know was called the JS-2m, the version with the improved welded single-plate glacis, was called the JS-3 when first identified by German intelligence reports. They had correctly identified the JS-2 with its cast stepped glacis. The assumption seems to have been that the tank with the improved glacis (and improved turret-front) was simply the next in the sequence, rather than just an improved model of the same tank. They got it wrong, but enough of the troopers (actually generals, mostly) used the German nomenclature in their memoirs, thus perpetuating (and giving evidence to) the mistake.

Or so I understand it.

There is, though, still some question of whether JS-3 units were shipped to the Far East to take part in the Manchurian campaign. I know some here have taken me to task over this assertion, and I don't dispute that there is some evidence against it, but I have seen/heard some indications in favor of that as well. But I have never seen clear evidence that they actually saw combat in that campaign ... only that they were sent there for it.

-Mk 1


*Note: "pretty good" by Russian archive standards, that is ... given the state of archives in the FSU no one really has "good" access.

[Mickel]

1) Some people seem to have an emotional investment in proving/believing/promoting the position that the most advanced Russian tanks were in combat sooner than they actually were.

They would be wargamers stuck facing other wargamers with Tiger II hordes.

Yes, I confess, I have some. But they're going to be Egyptian, so I think that's allowed.

Mike

[DrBig]

regarding the JS3, this was discussed in some detail in 2006 here. I can't find the thread, but...

first there was the article that iirc Cookie Sewell from the Patton Museum (?) that appeared in Armor magazine saying that the JS3 was not even combat deployable in 1945 due to mechanical problems. Not in Berlin or Manchuria. The chassis was so overstressed that key components would snap during cross country ventures. iirc, they put them up for that parade, and that's it. They had to go through 2 extensive & expensive rebuilds to get them in action at all by the mid '50's, & they game up on the whole project altogether.

Then there's that new book that just got published by Ian ALlen

http://www.rzm.com/books/cp/cp1622.cfm

I would have really like to have seen it in the streets of Berlin, but it just ain't so

[1ComOpsCtr]

There is a group of "historians" and "Germanic-o-phials" who just can't seem to face the fall of Germany or the failure of the vaunted technologically superior arms consortium to provide the weapons to defeat the "peasants" in their little metal boxes. Many of those individuals view the Russians as though they are nothing more than "native hordes charging the valiant Germanic Knights" who are trying to stem the evil flow of a distasteful governmental form, and their unwashed Slavic hordes, westward.

In reality all of the German "super weapon" tanks from the Panther, Tiger One, Tiger Two, and on were basically flawed, and almost suffered more losses to mechanical failure than through combat. Were it not for the field support/maintenance elements of the Panzer Units and the hard work of the tank crews many of the tanks mentioned might not have survived the trip to the front.

In both cases, the Germans and the Russians you must remember, were working under the strain of a "War" economy with limited resources. In the Russians case the very facilities that built their weapons had suffered potentially catastrophic disruption being relocated to avoid capture/destruction and the Germans were being resource starved as well as suffering facility destruction due to the bombing campaign.

While many criticize Soviet military technology it should be noted they made many discoveries and pioneered many innovations before many in the west envisioned the concept. German and Soviet armored vehicles suffered technological and "build" failures at an alarming rate, but the Soviets were able to mass produce, and "borrow", enough equipment to take the war to the enemy, and win, ...much to the sorrow of many people in eastern Europe.

We (Americans) tend to use our technologically superior viewpoint to judge the weapons built for a different culture as insignificant. We are wrong in that viewpoint, potentially "dead" wrong. I only need cite the AK-47 to illustrate my point.

Will

[Mobius]

="Mk 1"
2) There are several published German first-hand accounts of combat against JS-3s in the closing battles of the war. "Wait a minute!" I hear you cry. "Did he just say there were first hand accounts?" Why yes, that's what I said. It seems that there was some confusion in the nomenclature of the JS series among the Germans. The tank which we now know was called the JS-2m, the version with the improved welded single-plate glacis, was called the JS-3 when first identified by German intelligence reports. They had correctly identified the JS-2 with its cast stepped glacis. The assumption seems to have been that the tank with the improved glacis (and improved turret-front) was simply the next in the sequence, rather than just an improved model of the same tank. They got it wrong, but enough of the troopers (actually generals, mostly) used the German

To them it was the "JS-3" since they weren't at war (or no longer around) when the real JS-3 showed up.

[BlackDragon]

I only asked about hs3s b/c sometimes i play political games that happen shortly after ww2 and i wanted to use them in a barrle group.