KV?

Discussion in 'WW2 General' started by Lucky13, Oct 20, 2013.

  1. Lucky13

    Lucky13 Forum Mascot

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    36,729
    Likes Received:
    1,064
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Nightshift picker
    Location:
    A Swede living in Glasgow, Scotland
    Home Page:
    How good, or bad, was those KV tanks?
     
  2. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,203
    Likes Received:
    2,037
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    The KV series were actually formidable tanks that the early Panzer types had great difficulty in stopping. Unless the Germans could get a point-blank shot or land a hit to the rear, they were difficult to kill. The "88" was effective against it, however.

    The T-34 pretty much stopped mass production of the KV series because it was comparible in performance, but cost less to produce.
     
  3. silence

    silence Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Occupation:
    Masters Candidate in History
    Location:
    Yuba City, California
    #3 silence, Oct 20, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2013
    He's right on. Here's a bit more detail, just for fun.

    Think of them to T-34s kinda of as the Tiger was to the Panther (in terms of relative roles in the field), only with a lot more range and a much simpler build. There were three types: KV-1 with a 76.2mm gun, KV-2 with a 152mm howitzer (and a turret the size of a small cottage), and the KV-85 with a 85mm gun used as a stop-gap until the IS-II entered service.

    They were tough nuts to crack for the Panzers; until the PzIVF2 and the Tiger and long-barrel 50mm and 75mm AT guns, arrived on the scene about all the Wehrmacht had that could efficiently knock them out were the 88, Stukas and Hs 129s, and - under the right conditions - tank-hunting infantry. The long barrel 50mm was also somewhat effective if it got flank or rear shots. Basically they were SOBs during Barbarossa and the first half of '42. Once the Wehrmacht had a decent number of long-barrel PzIVs into the field, the KV was pretty well done for.

    Even with all its deficiencies, for some reason I've always kinda liked them.
     
  4. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    KV series heavy tanks were produced in Leningrad. German Army cut the rail lines to Leningrad during September 1941. Industry in that city ground to a halt as soon as stockpiled parts were used up.

    KV production was reestablished at a new factory in Tankograd during 1942. However the heavy German Tiger tank showed up about that time and proved far superior to it's Soviet counterpart. Hence KV production continued but at a relatively low priority until finally replaced by Stalin series heavy tank during 1944.
     
  5. meatloaf109

    meatloaf109 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2012
    Messages:
    6,688
    Likes Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Occupation:
    plumbing "pro" at Lowes in Franklin N.C.
    Location:
    north carolina
    Those KV-2's had such a high profile,... What a target!
     
  6. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Poor mechanical reliability didn't help matters any.

    An immobile heavy tank was a magnet for every piece of heavy artillery within range. That applied to German Tiger tank as well as Soviet KV series.
     
  7. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,203
    Likes Received:
    2,037
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    The reality is, as the T-34's numbers increased on the battlefield AND as the newer German armor was arriving on the battlefield circa 1942, the importance of the KV series started fading.

    The PzKfw II, III simply didn't have the range or barrel displacement to safely engage. The later, larger Panzers turned the tables on the KVs...the KV's armor wasn't as effective as the T-34's and had poor mobility. By 9142, they were already up-armoring the KV to try and protect it from the heavier German calibers that were being deployed.

    In an attempt to match the T-34's performance, they released the KV-1S which had lighter armor and a smaller turret with expanded vision for the tank's commander.

    And for the record, the KV tanks were produced at the Kirov plant in Lennongrad along with the T-34 and at the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant, located in Chelyabinsk which is located near the Ural mountains. The Chelyabinsk factory produced the T-34, T-34/85, KV, KV-85, JS and the SU-85
     
  8. Mobius

    Mobius Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    8
    The T-34 didn't have as effective turret armor as the KV and could be taken out by hits there by most guns. Though it was a smaller target.
     
  9. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,203
    Likes Received:
    2,037
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    Not sure where that info comes from...it was considered one of the best armored tanks in the world unless you're referring to the earlier cast turret.

    As the war progressed, the Germans made great efforts to counter the T-34 with larger weapons and heavier tanks.

    But the T-34 was a medium battle tank, the KV was a heavy. This would be like comparing the Sherman to a Patton or a PzKfw IV to a Tiger
     
  10. Lucky13

    Lucky13 Forum Mascot

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    36,729
    Likes Received:
    1,064
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Nightshift picker
    Location:
    A Swede living in Glasgow, Scotland
    Home Page:
    Surprised that they didn't produced more KV-85's, 255? Was that due to the arrival of the IS?
     
  11. Mobius

    Mobius Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    8
    #11 Mobius, Oct 21, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2013
    It comes from analyzing the turret armor either rolled or cast. If was considered that because of the front hull comparison to other tanks. The best is a myth. ttt333444.jpg
     
  12. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,769
    Likes Received:
    800
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    The KV actually had a lot of similarities to the Tiger.

    Once one the battlefield it's thick armor mad it difficult to destroy and in the early years it's gun was one of the more powerful on the battlefield.

    But like the Tiger in had mobility problems, both in reaching the battlefield and once on the battlefield. It's weight meant it could not use bridges the T-34 could and it had no snorkel system. It used the same engine as the T-34 so mobility was lower even if it's transmission worked correctly, which it often did not. KV drivers were also issued mallets for shifting. Shifting was so difficult that drivers often used only only a few gears out of the 5 available further limiting performance. Blowing a shift could mean bringing the vehicle to a halt and starting from zero speed again, not good under fire. The steering system was of the "clutch and brake" type and while suitable for light tanks it left a lot to be desired on 45-56 ton tanks.

    Just like the Tiger, more were lost trying to retreat than in actual combat.

    examples from the Battlefield.ru website.

    the 10th Tank Division, 15th Mechanised Corps, lost 56 of the 63 KV tanks it had on hand. Of these, 11 had been lost in combat, 11 went missing and 34 were abandoned by their crews due to mechanical breakdowns.
    In the 8th Tank Division, 43 out of 50 KVs were lost – 13 were knocked out, 2 became stuck in a swamp, and 28 were abandoned or destroyed by their crews due to mechanical failure.
     
  13. Milosh

    Milosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    In the early years, the KV-1 had the same gun as the T-34 > 76.2mm F-34.
     
  14. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,769
    Likes Received:
    800
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    In 1941 nobody had a more powerful gun in any numbers (over 5-6?) IN a tank.
     
  15. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,203
    Likes Received:
    2,037
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    And the Germans didn't...
     
  16. silence

    silence Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Occupation:
    Masters Candidate in History
    Location:
    Yuba City, California
    Yep.; The KV-85 was a stop-gap while the IS-II production was getting going.

    I actually like the KV-85 better: I don't like that the IS-II only carries 22-28 rounds and this ammo was two-piece. Compare this to the Tiger, which as-manufactured carried 92 and with in-field clips added could actually carry like 120. I also don't like the small, cramped interior that seems to have become vogue - at least for a few years - for Russian tanks. IIRC the T-54/55 crew height limits was a max of 5'6".
     
  17. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,769
    Likes Received:
    800
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    More like decades.

    While the 122mm had armor penetration it wasn't much, if any, better in point blank range, than the 85mm. It had a lower rate of fire and the low ammo storage already mentioned.

    It also hits up against designing to averages. Somebody will point out that the 'average' tank only fired XX rounds before being knocked out while forgetting that for each knocked out after firing 1 or 2 shots (or none) another tank had fire just about 2 times XX to get the average up.
     
  18. Juha

    Juha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    3,734
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Helsinki
    Now the main use of JS tanks was to blow up machine gun nets and open way to the infantry and in that 122mm gun was better than 85mm, 88mm or 75mm. Soviets had considered also 100mm cannon for JS series but because of possible lack of tubes and/or ammo decided fror 122mm gun because there were plenty of 122mm tube and ammo production and significant amounts in stocks.

    Juha
     
  19. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,769
    Likes Received:
    800
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    Russian tanks usually carried a high proportion of HE shells which makes the small ammo capacity a much bigger concern in tank duels. However tank duels were not actually that common.
    The problem from the tankers view point is that while performing infantry support (or attack on infantry positions) running out of HE usually doesn't mean destruction of the tank. Running out of AP ammo in a tank duel really means it is time to find reverse in the transmission.

    From the commanding Generals view point he wants more HE so the tanks can act like force multipliers and shoot the infantry onto their objectives which AP ammo isn't very good at.
     
  20. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    That's to be expected. Allied propaganda aside, WWII German did not have many tanks to shoot at.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. Lucky13
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    839

Share This Page