This group is for everyone who like tanks, sci-fi tanks, real tanks, funny tanks, you can put here tank mods, tank maps, simply everything with straps, armor and gun :D

  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
KV-2 tank
embed
share
view previous next
 
Post comment Comments
Panzert
Panzert Aug 9 2011, 9:49am says:

I vote the KV-2 for most hilarious tank of WWII.

Though despite being near useless the Germans reused them.

+2 votes     reply to comment
Sgt.AS
Sgt.AS Aug 9 2011, 10:13am replied:

Well, what about the Bishop?

+1 vote     reply to comment
_w_
_w_ Aug 10 2011, 3:16pm replied:

you mean that ruthless detective-inspector??

(tip; watch monty python)

+1 vote     reply to comment
Panzert
Panzert Aug 11 2011, 1:23am replied:

The bishop is a very different case, it had a fixed turret and was designed for firing arty from distances at which they weren't even fighting directly.

The armour is also siginifactly thinner and the weight is much less.

+1 vote     reply to comment
Dutchygamer
Dutchygamer Aug 9 2011, 1:20pm replied:

What is hilarious about a 152mm howitzer on a heavy tank that most weapons couldn't penetrate, which in return could turn tanks into scrap metal with 1 shot? I love this tank =P

+2 votes     reply to comment
shroomman
shroomman Aug 10 2011, 5:44am replied:

The KV2 was reused by the germans for recon purpose, because of its hight, it was possible to have a good look. I don't know if they used it in combat thow...

+1 vote     reply to comment
vsempizdetz
vsempizdetz Aug 9 2011, 2:06pm says:

Near useless? A single KV-2 tank halted two German divisions in Riga for two days until it was bombarded by aviation since everything the Germans put up against it failed to penetrate its armor.

+4 votes     reply to comment
The_Integral
The_Integral Aug 9 2011, 6:52pm replied:

Events like that really don't reflect the greater usefulness of a vehicle. You can take any of the early war heavy tanks-Matilda IIs, Churchill Is, KVs, ect.-and find instances where they seemed like unstoppable beasts, but these events are far outnumbered by the ones were the heavy tanks end up abandoned in a ditch without ever firing a shot.

Ultimately though, the KV2 was a victim of its circumstances. It was a vehicle designed for assaulting hardpoints being operated in a time when the Soviets were doing very few offensive operations. By the time the Soviets' situation improved, German weapons had improved enough that the tank's armor was no longer sufficient to make up for its massive profile, slow speed, and short range.

+5 votes     reply to comment
Panzert
Panzert Aug 10 2011, 1:15am replied:

It had too many mechanical problems and there were too little of them built to have any effect on the German invasion.

Sure, they had some tactical victories, but so did the Germans in 1944/1945. I use 'useless' in the same vein that the king tiger is useless in that it was 70 tonnes and was extremely prone to mechanical breakdowns.

The fact that it couldn't even go up slight inclines due to the weight of the turret also contributes to my conclusion.

Also pretty much everything the intergral said.

+1 vote     reply to comment
Do0med34
Do0med34 Aug 10 2011, 2:32am replied:

@sempizdetz

well, yeah 80mm armor ain't gonna get penetrated by small calibre automatic cannons... it doesn't show a tank's effectiveness by comapring it against a Panzer I, II or III, almost all Allied tanks were better than the early Panzer I-III. Even frensh and polish tanks...

Nothing to be amazed about that.

HURF DURF HEAVY TANK BETTER THAN LIGHT TANK... please

+2 votes     reply to comment
RK44
RK44 Aug 10 2011, 9:41am replied:

I dunno I prefer a STUH rather than a KV
the KV is just too big for an assault gun

0 votes     reply to comment
hj12321
hj12321 Aug 10 2011, 10:31pm replied:

French and Polish tanks were kinda old in the WW2,because their general didnt notice about the importance of the tanks,so they lost the war.

+1 vote     reply to comment
SRB-HawkEye-
SRB-HawkEye- Aug 10 2011, 11:47am says:

Those tanks you call "useless"- they were used in "turrning-point" moments in history of WW2. Only KV-1, stoped German division for 24 hours with smaller turret and thiner armor, preventing the German advance to Moscow. After that, they seen that the KV2 has potential- 152MM gun and four machineguns. That was a tank that were used like fortification- or "movable bunker" or whatever. KV2 were famous because the German weapons couldn't penetrate it's armor easy. So, KV2 was entrenched on the roads, crossroads, etc. holding the Germans for a very long time. With the arrival of Panzerfaust, Panzershreck, Panthers, Tigers, and bigger caliber of German guns, those were useless. But, KV2 already went in history as an "epic" tank. Mechanical problems weren't so big problems, because it didn't drive for such a long distances. It just need ammo, nothing else. Oh, yeah, turret was problem because of height, but it has its advantages, thought...
On the other side- "King Tiger" useless??? What??? You surely don't know the point of heavy tanks... They proven themselves as great holding both Russian and Western Allies, just like Elephants before it.
And, Panzert, I don't know, why you are complaining on that tank? For it's time and purposes, that was a hell of machine. Why Russians (except of the Germans) didn't complained? Most of tank crew said that they felt safely inside that tank...

+1 vote     reply to comment
Panzert
Panzert Aug 11 2011, 1:17am replied:

By useless i mean the fact that there were often more of them being serviced than were in action from mechanical breakdowns alone.

They may not be useless in combat, but there were so little of them in combat a time that the difference they made was insignificant. The idea of a Heavy tank in WWII was doomed from the start in my eyes. The only really significant success they had was at prokhorovka. All the other successes, such as Billote's rampage through stone in 1940 or the KV-2 that held up the German column or even Wittman's rampage in 1944, were just tactical successes that contributed nothing to the overall battle.

With that said, I don't think the heavy tank concept is completely worthless. The KV-1 and Tiger 1 were brilliant designs, with both having some great success in various stages of the war. I just don't think the KV-2 is a good design because of its extremely limited mobility, overtaxed engine, limited reload rate, high profile, etc.. It could be a great tank in the right hands, but it was too slow and cumbersome to have a real impact on the war. Also the fact that in 1941 the Soviet army was a real mess and there was no coordination for any KV-2 units or anything.

Similar case with the king tigers, too unreliable and far too little of them produced to have any impact on the war. Though they did rack up some crazy kill ratios, it couldn't outmatch Soviet or American production.

+4 votes     reply to comment
Do0med34
Do0med34 Aug 11 2011, 1:40pm replied:

Panzert here just spoke out obvious facts that everybody interested about WW2 should know about, who would give him -1 reputation for this?

fanboys grow up plz.

+1 vote     reply to comment
SRB-HawkEye-
SRB-HawkEye- Aug 11 2011, 5:42pm replied:

Yep, I think no one should lower any karma down, those are just the facts and friendly conversation. I'm historian and I knew some things very good, so I think my opinions will fit in this conversation. Anyway, Do0med34, you gave me -1 karma, so why wouldn't you grow up? Don't complain on others...

Anyway, Panzert, can you tell me which mechanical problems did it had? Problems on transmission, gear, something??? Like I said, it " it didn't drive for such a long distances", so what problem it could have during the way of less than 500 meters? That was fortification tank, It wasn't used like, for example, T-34. And there was field repairing, the tank were used by experienced tank crew.

"They may not be useless in combat, but there were so little of them in combat a time that the difference they made was insignificant"- wait, who said that? They were keeping Germans from reaching the Moscow, so they were constantly in battles... The idea of heavy tanks and cruisers were great, but they didn't achieved to be in serial production because of big problems and because they were built and tested during the war, and the future weren't in big and heavy tanks. At Prokhorovka, there were KV-1 not the KV-2's, but still KV-1 is in group of heavy tanks.

Yep, I don't like either, but the Russians knew that they must sacrifice those characteristic in order to get the high value of firepower. Real impact on war- yep they had, if there weren't such tanks like KV-1 and KV-2, Germans could easily drive into Moscow. Didn't you read the books about the start of the Eastern Front?

The main problem of King Tiger was too little production. If they could produce more of them, there could be a slaughter on both fronts. Sherman's were tin cans for nearly every German tank, but the Soviets produced the IS-1 and 2, which were great opponents to them, so, it ended like that...

Cheers, mate!

+1 vote     reply to comment
Panzert
Panzert Aug 12 2011, 12:50am replied:

Just making it clear that i have no problems with the KV-1 (Except maybe it was undergunned later in the war). With that said, i'd say although the KV-2 may have played a part in preventing the Germans from reaching moscow, but their main problem was that they were completely unprepared for such a winter. As a result, none of their tanks would start in some cases and many men froze to death. The Soviets on the other hand, were obviously well prepared and could counterattack at a time where the German army had no strength.

Regarding distances, it may have to drive 500 metres to defend something, but when the enemy is gone it's going to have to drive further obviously.

On the problems themselves, the KV chassis wasn't originally built to take such a turret and one could imagine the extra weight of the turret would take a heavy (lol) toll on the suspension and transmission. On top of that, the KV had problems with the clutch being too lightly constructed.

Also, according to 'Russian Tanks of World War II Stalin's Armored Might', the 41st tank division had 33 KV-2s and only 5 of those were not broken down.

+2 votes     reply to comment
SRB-HawkEye-
SRB-HawkEye- Aug 12 2011, 7:13am replied:

Well, KV-1 was first very successful heavy tank in Soviet Union. That tank was first that stopped German division on advancing (on 24 hours), thanks to it's impenetrable armor and good firepower. So, Stalin thought that much more armor and firepower could do it better, so he ordered his engineers to made something. They made KV-2 and that tank entered serial production (334 tanks produced till 1941). Knowing the issues, they tried something with 107mm gun and smaller turret, but they didn't entered the serial production. Later, KV-1 had reduced armor, and that's how IS won their competitor.

If you watching "History Channel" or even reading books, you will see why the Soviets won the war (oil for cleaning rifles, clothes,...). Yep, they should drive back to base or whenever they are going, but the experienced crewmen knew how to "gently" drive those tanks, preventing the tank to stop. And, also, they knew where the errors were on KV-2 so repairing were going fast.

Yeah, you are right, but those were problems of the KV-2 in 1940 that fought in Finland, so those were improved later, but just a little. Anyway, those tanks fulfilled every task they had, from supporting the lighter tanks and holding the Germans to destroying bunkers.

+2 votes     reply to comment
Panzert
Panzert Aug 16 2011, 9:23pm replied:

I think you've wrapped this up nicely :D

+2 votes     reply to comment
hj12321
hj12321 Aug 10 2011, 10:35pm says:

Yeah,Bishop was very heavy and it had many mechanical problems.And because the allies had controlled the sky,so its difficult for Bishop to move.But German heavy tanks can beat the American Sherman because its cannon.

+1 vote     reply to comment
The_Integral
The_Integral Aug 11 2011, 10:26pm replied:

The Bishop was not heavy, weighing under 20 tons, and while I don't know much about its reliability record I would assume it is similar to that of the Valentine(which shared the same chassis), which was a quite reliable tank.

+1 vote     reply to comment
hj12321
hj12321 Aug 11 2011, 10:40pm replied:

Sorry,my fault.Bishop was based on Valentine and its 17.5 ton.
Weight 17.5 t (38,580 lb)
Length 18 feet 6 inches (5.64 m)
Width 9 feet 1 inch (2.77 m)
Height 10 feet (3.0 m)
Crew 4 (Commander, gunner, loader, driver)
Speed 15 mph (24 km/h)
Armour hull: .31 - 2.36 in
(8-60 mm)
superstructure: .51 - 2 in (13-51 mm)
Primary
armament QF 25 pounder gun-howitzer
with 32 rounds
Secondary
armament 0.303 inch Bren machine gun
Engine AEC A190 diesel
131 hp (98 kW)
Power/weight 7.4 hp/tonne
Number built 149

+1 vote     reply to comment
Post a Comment
click to sign in

You are not logged in, your comment will be anonymous unless you join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) which we encourage all contributors to do.

2000 characters limit; HTML formatting and smileys are not supported - text only

Image Details
Type
Entertainment
Date
Aug 9th, 2011
Size
2592×1944
Options
URL
Embed (big)
Embed
Share
Report Abuse
Report media
Add Media
Members only