
-
Category Artwork (Traditional) / All
Species Canine (Other)
Size 1280 x 1010px
File Size 342.9 kB
Theres nothing quite like a KV2.
Even if the driver's view slit is nothing but a crude hole, cast into the hull.
No glass or anything- just a tapered hole to look out of.
I had a video on that, about two computers ago.
A walk around of a surviving original.
I'll see if I can find it again.
-Badger-
Even if the driver's view slit is nothing but a crude hole, cast into the hull.
No glass or anything- just a tapered hole to look out of.
I had a video on that, about two computers ago.
A walk around of a surviving original.
I'll see if I can find it again.
-Badger-
Did they not just taken the viewing glass out of the original? Even those older French tanks with their dwarf turrets had armoured glass or epilloscopes, but a museum could strip out any old part for one reason or another. Only way to find out is to locate el jefe in charge of the place.
According to the walkaround video, no glass was ever in the KV2 they were examining.
The commentor stated specifically, they only used a crudely cast, tapered hole for the driver to look out of.
There was definitely no way to mount a glass cover, either.
Russian wartime tanks were crude-
Unfinished and jagged welds, tons of crap sticking out inside the turret for the crew to injure themselves on...
Just crude and primitive.
But that meant they could produce thousands of tanks in a very short period of time.
And since the thinking was that a tank would last no more than a month in service, they didn't care if it was crude.
Just so long as it worked.
-Badger-
The commentor stated specifically, they only used a crudely cast, tapered hole for the driver to look out of.
There was definitely no way to mount a glass cover, either.
Russian wartime tanks were crude-
Unfinished and jagged welds, tons of crap sticking out inside the turret for the crew to injure themselves on...
Just crude and primitive.
But that meant they could produce thousands of tanks in a very short period of time.
And since the thinking was that a tank would last no more than a month in service, they didn't care if it was crude.
Just so long as it worked.
-Badger-
Hmm...I'll just say there's a lot to unpack there. Much of our knowledge of Russian WW2 stuff comes from pop history books, or from Wehrmacht accounts that weren't and still aren't treated with the heavy skepticism they should be. It wasn't until relatively recently that Russian military archives became available to debunk a lot of what had previously been taken as gospel. A tank that only lasts a month isn't worth much. It's a tremendous waste, really, when such waste can't be afforded. T-34 design and production were streamlined and simplified with a focus on getting as many tanks out of the factory as possible during the most desperate years of the war. Things that were obsolete, too expensive or difficult to produce in great enough numbers, or too unreliable, were culled. Battle rifles, T-26s, T-28s, the T-34M...some factories used welding while others used casting, so you had different-looking turrets among the T-34s and KV-1s. Techniques and material quality and gradually improved with supplies and training. Some had extra armour applied as well, and the classifications used to describe such tanks (e.g. by year or by putting an E after the name) may not accurately reflect what they were called at the time. A few T-34s with the smallest turret also had a 57mm gun attached. Smaller details on turrets or hulls could be down to individual factories. It's about as difficult to trace as individual Sherman tank variants. A more crude finish to the weld, AFAIK, didn't reduce the vehicle's overall quality while it saved time, so that was considered an acceptable trade-off. All wartime tanks were probably faily crude apart from the US stuff, though it took them a while to get up to quality as well.
I've never come across the KV-2 being described as a TD before, although if the need was great (as it certainly would've been early on) it could probably still be pressed into service as one. AFAIK the KV-1 and 2 were described as 'little turret' and 'big turret', respectively. The rebuilt tank in the video is using an IS-2/JS-2 hull. That was a heavy tank named for 'The Boss' himself, and the hole the presenter is looking through had armoured glass. They appear to have cut an extra hole above it for some reason. If there were a hole in the front of the armour, it would present an unacceptable weak spot to machine guns and AT rifles. Even those covered with armoured glass have been removed from a lot of post-war tanks, along with the hull machine gun, to strengthen the frontal plate. The little hole on the [right side of] the IS-2's curved hull for the fixed machine gun also went the way of the dodo, though the same idea stuck around on the early T-54s for a little while.
EDIT: Didn't see your edits before I posted this.
I've never come across the KV-2 being described as a TD before, although if the need was great (as it certainly would've been early on) it could probably still be pressed into service as one. AFAIK the KV-1 and 2 were described as 'little turret' and 'big turret', respectively. The rebuilt tank in the video is using an IS-2/JS-2 hull. That was a heavy tank named for 'The Boss' himself, and the hole the presenter is looking through had armoured glass. They appear to have cut an extra hole above it for some reason. If there were a hole in the front of the armour, it would present an unacceptable weak spot to machine guns and AT rifles. Even those covered with armoured glass have been removed from a lot of post-war tanks, along with the hull machine gun, to strengthen the frontal plate. The little hole on the [right side of] the IS-2's curved hull for the fixed machine gun also went the way of the dodo, though the same idea stuck around on the early T-54s for a little while.
EDIT: Didn't see your edits before I posted this.
Found the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijnqk_4S1iI
Its not quite the way I remembered it- all in Russian, with english closed caption.
I had a definite memory of him saying no glass..but turns out he just said "you can't see where you're going while driving it".
Still doesn't look like you could put glass in it, though.
Not easily, as least.
You can see the cast surfaces in the view tunnel that were never sanded smooth, though.
Hard to mount glass in something that rough without breaking it from vibration alone.
-Badger-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijnqk_4S1iI
Its not quite the way I remembered it- all in Russian, with english closed caption.
I had a definite memory of him saying no glass..but turns out he just said "you can't see where you're going while driving it".
Still doesn't look like you could put glass in it, though.
Not easily, as least.
You can see the cast surfaces in the view tunnel that were never sanded smooth, though.
Hard to mount glass in something that rough without breaking it from vibration alone.
-Badger-
Would anyone like to have a slightly restored real KV-2?
I got a buddy whose grandfather started collecting ww2 vehicles from 1946 to 2016. His grandfather starting collecting when he was just 18...he's got a collection of mostly German vehicles with a few Russian,British,American & Japanese vehicles as well. His entire collection consist of 3800 vehicles,1900 static weapons like Artillery,Anti-Tank,Anti-Aircraft and at least 2 german pillboxes and 1 bunker from the Atlantic wall & 400 Aircraft & boats. He lived in Denmark originally then moved to France and later moved to Norway.
I got a buddy whose grandfather started collecting ww2 vehicles from 1946 to 2016. His grandfather starting collecting when he was just 18...he's got a collection of mostly German vehicles with a few Russian,British,American & Japanese vehicles as well. His entire collection consist of 3800 vehicles,1900 static weapons like Artillery,Anti-Tank,Anti-Aircraft and at least 2 german pillboxes and 1 bunker from the Atlantic wall & 400 Aircraft & boats. He lived in Denmark originally then moved to France and later moved to Norway.
Comments