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

Overkill or Target Practice?

Discussion in 'The Tanks of World War 2' started by Gunter_Viezenz, Feb 17, 2006.

  1. Gunter_Viezenz

    Gunter_Viezenz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,838
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Windsor, Ontario
    via TanksinWW2
    [​IMG]

    Iam just wondering because there are many penetrations to the turret.
     
  2. FNG phpbb3

    FNG phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    are you sure they are penetrations or just heavy impacts?

    some of the holes look quite small for an anti tank round?

    FNG
     
  3. Robinson phpbb3

    Robinson phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    via TanksinWW2
    Or a bunch of Yobo's having fun ?;)

    We have road signs peppered with that many holes along our roads :)

    Kym
     
  4. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Both trying to shoot a tank with any available weapon even though most of it wouldn't stand a chance of penetrating the armour, and using knocked-out tanks for target practice were fairly common. But since this tank seems to have been fired at from several directions I'm assuming they just let loose on it with everything they had when it came rolling at them.

    The small impacts are probably 20mm or 37mm Flak.
     
  5. Hoosier phpbb3

    Hoosier phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2005
    Messages:
    904
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Bloomington, Indiana USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Nor was it uncommon for tankers to fire a main-gun round into a disabled tank--though the tank in the photo has clearly been severely punished--just to see if anyone was "playing possum" inside.
    The assumption being that sometimes the enemy would use a knocked-out tank for ambush purposes...
    Clearly not the case in this instance however.

    Tim
     
  6. Man

    Man New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    What happened to the barrel? It seems to have "split" - round explode inside? Will somebody rid me of my ignorance? :D
     
  7. Selesque

    Selesque New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
  8. Gunter_Viezenz

    Gunter_Viezenz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,838
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Windsor, Ontario
    via TanksinWW2
    I think thats a KV-2 the only things the Germans had to defeat it when they first encountered it were the infamous 88s.
     
  9. Man

    Man New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    I can confirm that the picture Selesque posted is a KV1.

    Compare the turret of the picture Selesque posted with this:

    [​IMG]

    And then with this.

    [​IMG]
     
  10. Gunter_Viezenz

    Gunter_Viezenz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,838
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Windsor, Ontario
    via TanksinWW2
    My mistake it is a KV-1, not a KV-2 thanks for spotting that one Panzerman :oops:
     
  11. David.W

    David.W Active Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,981
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Devon. England
    via TanksinWW2
    I'm no expert when it comes to Russian tanks. But I don't think that the photo is of a KV1.
    Look at the gun mantlet. Also the shape & angle of the engine decking is not right.
    Click on the link posted above to see a Kv1. The turret shape is also quite different.
     
  12. Ricky

    Ricky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,974
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
  13. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    It is in fact a KV-1 or KV-1A with the old short 76.2mm L11 gun, which means the picture Panzerman posted will not immediately convince everyone that he is, in fact, right.

    Apologies for breaking the page.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Man

    Man New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    It is a different version, but still a KV1. Bad example picture.
     
  15. Selesque

    Selesque New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Hit over 30(!) times only on the turret side (without any sign of penetration), this KV model 1940 (with F-32 gun, 39 calibres long) was finished by side hit by an 88. (Original picture explanation)

    There is still something that is not right with the first picture. It has no markings. Of any kind. And I'm not that sure it is a JS tank. The large number of concentrated small hits would sugest a few burst of 20mm gun. There are 4 simingly same caliber holes in the turet, and it seems that there is a german infantry helmet on this thing. The turret does look like Ricky's posted picture. But, if the small impacts are 20mm gun projectiles, who wil fire at a JS's turret with a 20mm? And why?
     
  16. FNG phpbb3

    FNG phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    when armour is approaching people have a tenency to fire everything at it, especially stuff like 20 and 30 mm cannon and AA guns.

    whilst they can't penetrate the armour they force the tank to button up reducing it's effectivness, it may also get crew hits prior to them ducking.

    also there are lots of things on a tank that are vulnrable to light guns such as perescopes, viewing slits, radio annteny, tracks, turret and gun mounts and rings

    so it's a case of anything is better than nothing and you may get lucky

    FNG
     
  17. Ricky

    Ricky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,974
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    IIRC, Soviet policy was to shoot any and every weapon available above rifle calibre at armour, for the reasons given by FNG.
     
  18. Selesque

    Selesque New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Well, the noise of projectiles constantly hitting the tank is a factor too. But I don't know how much... Engine noise, tanks noise, artilery shells exploding, infantery fire, aircrafts, mines, grenades, spent cartriges ejected, comander yeling orders.... Lots of noises in those tanks. You had to have nerves of steel to drive around in a tank with closed hatches
     
  19. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    The markings may have burned off, this tank seems to have suffered from internal fires (the engine deck for one thing is blown open). And if it's not a JS-2 what else could it be?
     
  20. Man

    Man New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    Selesque, compare the turrets:

    *Edit: I added the original pic.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page