Playing with the Big Boys

[Yoozername]

1901 of the 3047 tanks had 37mm or smaller main guns.

Your list does not include the StuG. I believe they had 300-400. That's from memory.

[Mad Russian]

From memory StuG's weren't tanks. I didn't count armored cars either.

Your comment was only about tanks, so that's what I answered.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Yoozername]

Some might describe the KV-2 as a turreted assault gun...

The following quote describes the common effect the KV-2 had on the battlefield:

The most of KV-2 tanks were lost because of breakdowns. For example, 41st Tank Division lost 22 KV-2 tanks of 33 tanks total. The only 5 tanks were destroyed by the enemy, other 17 tanks were abandoned because of breakdowns or run out of fuel.
In October 1941, the KV-2's manufacture was cancelled. Totally 334 KV-2 tanks were produced.

I would like to point out it describes that 5 were destroyed by the enemy.

The saving grace for the German armed forces in the attack on the Soviet Union was the amount of material they captured.  That included weapons that could fight/destroy T-34 and KV weapons.  And don't miss the captured KV-2 at the end of the video. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ69GN1YkOo&feature=related

[Yoozername]

[Mad Russian]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

Some might describe the KV-2 as a turreted assault gun...

I might be one of those.

The following quote describes the common effect the KV-2 had on the battlefield:

The most of KV-2 tanks were lost because of breakdowns. For example, 41st Tank Division lost 22 KV-2 tanks of 33 tanks total. The only 5 tanks were destroyed by the enemy, other 17 tanks were abandoned because of breakdowns or run out of fuel.
In October 1941, the KV-2's manufacture was cancelled. Totally 334 KV-2 tanks were produced.

I would like to point out it describes that 5 were destroyed by the enemy.

From most of the accounts I read, most tanks were lost to breakdowns or lack of fuel, where the crews had to destroy them. They were not destroyed directly by enemy action.

It should be noted that those KV-2's of the 41st Tank Division went into combat with no ammunition.

The saving grace for the German armed forces in the attack on the Soviet Union was the amount of material they captured.  That included weapons that could fight/destroy T-34 and KV weapons.  And don't miss the captured KV-2 at the end of the video. 

I think there were several saving graces for the German armed forces in June of 1941. First and foremost that they attacked on or before June of 1941. The purge had affected the Red Army and it was still trying to relearn it's trade. The T-34's and KV's were so new the crews weren't trained and there was little to no AP ammo for the new 76mm guns. The Soviet tanks were severely lacking in radios. The Red Army was just experimenting with making large scale armored units, mechanized corps which they couldn't control. All of this because the attack happened in June of 1941. If the attack comes in even 3 months later it would have been an entirely different Red Army.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Ratzki]

I wonder if things would not have worked out better for the Germans had they waited another three months. They might have set more realistic goals and been better prepared for the winter. Yes, I am sure that the new Russian tanks would have taken a much heavier toll on the invaders, but I still think that the learning curve would have been too steep for the Russians to overcome in three months to make much of a difference in the leadership department. I think that the Germans would have still roughed them up badly, maybe not quite so much but still enough. Plus the German war machine would have quickly gone into production on new and improved weapons earlier, instead of the false bravado that they carried for that first 1+ year. Maybe the kick in the danglies would have brought them to their senses earlier and yes, the war would have taken on a much different path.

[Mad Russian]

The fact that the T-34 and KV-1 would both have had AP ammunition would have been something I don't think the Germans could have off set.

I don't think the Germans would have attacked in the fall of 1941. If they postponed it I think it goes all the way to the summer of 1942. For the most part the European armies didn't fight in the winter.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian
The T-34's and KV's were so new the crews weren't trained and there was little to no AP ammo for the new 76mm guns.

It would be a little difficult trying to set them ablaze by penetrating their turrets when they didn't have any ammo.

The Germans estimated the Russians had as many as 10,000 AT guns when they invaded Russia. In reality the number was around 18,000.

[Mad Russian]

ROFL!!! Maybe that was the German problem early on. They needed rounds in the tank so they would burn.

Yoozername will have some ideas along those lines I'll bet.....[:D]

Good Hunting.

MR

[Ratzki]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

The fact that the T-34 and KV-1 would both have had AP ammunition would have been something I don't think the Germans could have off set.

I don't think the Germans would have attacked in the fall of 1941. If they postponed it I think it goes all the way to the summer of 1942. For the most part the European armies didn't fight in the winter.

Good Hunting.

MR

I agree on the wait till '42 part, but was just thinking of the 3 month delay only. Now with the Russians total neglect of maintaining or even producing parts for tanks in the field, I wonder if they would have been in worse shape as they trained like mad men with their new T34s and KVs and just wore the things out at an alarming pace. I wonder if the new tank production pace would have kept up? I read an American test of a new KV and T34. The T34 was totally unfixable in under 300 miles, it was used for target practice afterwards. If this was any indication of the condition of Russian production armour, three more months might have left them worse for wear.
And the one thing that I have learned from reading about the fighting in the east is, the Germans were never more dangerous then when they got a bloody nose first. I would like to think that the motivated, highly trained German troops would have come up with something quick, because they would have to.

[Yoozername]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

ROFL!!! Maybe that was the German problem early on. They needed rounds in the tank so they would burn.

Yoozername will have some ideas along those lines I'll bet.....[:D]

Good Hunting.

MR

I see, so you base your opinion on the fearsomeness of a KV-2 in 1945 in that it has no ammo and therefore can not burn? That's clever.

[Mad Russian]

No, I  base the KV-2 fearsomeness in the Ruhr on the fact the US forces had never seen one.

That they wouldn't know what it was.

That it would be in a position not easily flanked and that anything coming to do battle would have to face it head on.

That ANY tank or TD in the world could not trade 1 for 1 shots against it.

That the KV-2 becomes a 152mm pillbox that the Americans have to come in and dig out by hand.

Now, none of that means anything. We'll go and see if we can find out what actually happened and go from there when we try to put the scenario together.

Not all situations make good wargame scenarios.

Good Hunting.

MR

[WilliePete]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

You think so? Why do you think an American force would fare any better against them than the Germans did? They wouldn't have had to develop an AT shell for it. 152mm HE would do enough damage to any vehicle it hit to no less than disable it.

The Germans isolated several of them. They were easier to isolate than they were to knock out.

We're looking into seeing about the one reported in the Ruhr Pocket. Should be easy to find that monster if it was there.

Good Hunting.

MR

MR, the KV II certainly demands respect, but I think you are giving it too much credit. The KV II was big, but at 52 tons it was no bigger than the German late war heavies. At its thickest point (mantlet) it had 110mm of armor. The Whermacht of 1941 had few weapons that could defeat the KV II, but the 1945 US Army had a variety of weapons that could! Besides, by 1945 the US had tactics in place that it learned from fighting against heavier German tanks. I doubt it caused much trouble if any for the Americans...

[Mad Russian]

Could be. To me it would depend on the position the KV was in and how hard it was to get at. If the Americans have tank support. Several things.

We'll go see what we can find when we start working on the Western Front scenarios.

Could be it broke down and never fired a shot too. We don't know yet.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Yoozername]

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/PDFs/FM30-40.PDF
 
They could certainly check what it was...
 
But I believe that it wasn't the roaming dreadnaught of 1945

[Ratzki]

I'll wade in on this KV2 issue just untill my toes get wet. After reading all the above posts, I find myself in both camps. Would American guns in '45 be able to handle the armour of the KV2, I think so. But how well would they handle the KV2 seems to be a better question.
Now, I want to bring up a little theory that someone with actual projectile measurements will be able to explain better then I. It has to do with both sectional density and the balistic coeficient of the 90mm and 76mm projectiles mentioned above. Once the calibre gets over a certain diametre, bigger often does not mean better. I think it has alot to due with a solid projectile's sectional density; the ratio of the diameter of the projectile to the weight. A longer projectile in relationship to its diameter will maintain speed longer than a short, stubby projectile of a given caliber and should also given better penetration. There is also balistic coeficient that comes into play. BC is the projectile’s ability to maintain velocity. The BC of a projectile is different at different velocities and affects accuracy and projectile stabilization during flight. What I am trying to say is that there may be alot of information and formulas to figure out how much armour a projectile can penetrate, but for the most part one has to actually shoot the gun at the target in order to evaluate what will happen. Now Zaloga states in his book Armored Thunderbolt "...unaware of the inadequacy of the 76mm gun against the front armor of the Panther tank as they had not researched the effectiveness of this gun against the new German tanks which had already been encountered in combat." Does this mean that it was useless?... no, but it would seem the 76mm was far from a real reliable killer. If they had not at the time fired it at a Panther, odds are there are no tests vs a KV2. Now a Panther has frontal armour somewhere between about 58mm to 105mm (correct me anyone in the know if I am way off). Now not going into how much of how thick and what percentage is what I figure the average armour thickness to be around 80mm. I know that it does not quite work this way, what I figured is that for every shell that would hit the thinest armour, another would hit the thickest, and if the 76mm was rated as an unreliable weapon against the Panther front face, would not the 75mm (as stated above) KV2 armour kinda be in the same catagory? Could it kill the KV2 from the front, sure but not every shot would knock the thing out, and if as someone stated before, if the Germans had come up with some HC ammunition for the KV2, I would not want to be trading shots with it. And I do agree that to say that US tanks would be dancing around the KV2 shooting it up is unrealistic in the setting that MR has said that the encounter occured. I think that US forces would have been presented with no option but to face it head on, or have some infantry have a go with some AT resources that they would have.
As for aircraft vs tanks of any sort, most of the reading I have done states that aircraft were not efficient AT weapons platforms and they could take out light armour they had limited success with the big boys. Again, I would state that it is possible but not something that a person would want to bet the farm on.
I have no real information on the US 90mm gun, so will not comment on it.
In the end, can the US take out the KV2?... sure, but I do not think that it would be a given at any range and one thing is for sure, I would not want to get hit with that 152mm shell, HE or not, it would loosen a few fillings I would dare bet.

[Mad Russian]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/PDFs/FM30-40.PDF

They could certainly check what it was...

But I believe that it wasn't the roaming dreadnaught of 1945

Yeah, US forces were the world's best at vehicle recognition. That's why there were only Tiger tanks in the German Army.

The most likely candidate for the KV-2 to be confronted by initially would be infantry, possibly supported by 75mm armed Shermans.

As I've said before, we'll research it and see what we find.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Ratzki
if the Germans had come up with some HC ammunition for the KV2, I would not want to be trading shots with it. And I do agree that to say that US tanks would be dancing around the KV2 shooting it up is unrealistic in the setting that MR has said that the encounter occured.

In the TM listing German Ordinance 2 HE shells manufactured for Russian 152mm guns and one Anti-concrete type are described. No AP or HC.

The US 76mm gun is pretty accurate. They would have a 40% chance for first round hit on a 6.6' target at 1000 yds assuming a 25% error in ranging.
At 1000 yds the 152mm/L12 has a 7% chance of a first round hit against a similar size target.

[Yoozername]

http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/90-mm-ammunition/index.html

For those of you unfamiliar with the US 90mm gun...

[Yoozername]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-941%2C_Essen%2C_zerst%C3%B6rte_Krupp-Werke%2C_Luftaufnahme.jpg
 
Krupp works in Essen.
 
Original historic description: 
Bippa
Devastated Krupp Works in Essen
This aerial photo, taken from an artillery observation plane of Ninth U.S. Army's 79th Division, shows to the damage wrought to the Krupp tool plant at Essen, Germany, which was ponded by Allied air attacks and artillery of the Ninth Army before the city fell April 10, 1945, to troops of the 17th U.S. Airborne Division. Krupp was especially important to the enemy because so many other German armamonts factories were dependent on it for parts, such as armored platos and crankshafts. U.S. soldiers met little enemy resistence in the city, which had a peacetime population of 670,000. Essen is situated in the midst of one of the world's richest hard coal deposits and has been called the arsenal of Germany. U.S. Signal Corps Photo ETO-HQ-45-31874. Serviced by London OWI to list B certified as passed by shaef censor