Thursday 8 October 2015

Tiger II Reload Problems

The myth that the IS-2 had to have its gun in a very specific position before it could be loaded is a common one, and I handle it here. However, it has come to my attention that there is another tank that indeed had problems with loading if the gun was not level: the Tiger II.

WO291/1003 Motion studies of German Tanks

Loading in general is described as "very slow and fatiguing" for the following reasons:

Perhaps they should have used two-piece ammunition.


  1. "Perhaps they should have used two-piece ammunition."

    So much sass in this one line.

    1. Well, to be fair, dviding a round into two pieces IS a easy way to deal with big and heavy ammunition. And if you find a way to get the shell case out of the equation completely, you'll get a gun system less problematic for a loader, vide Chieftains

    2. How much does a single pice weight?

      The IS-2 AP projectile alone weighs 55 lb in total, and you still have to lift another 13 lb (propellant case) from the hull floor stowage into the fighting compartment. Certainly, that was not ideal either and uncomfortable to say the least. It's only fair to note, that this method was still more tedious than to fire the puny 22 lb APC round from the Tiger II's turret stowage.

      It's certainly not as easy as you assume, but a good way to improve ergonomics and to ensure healthy working conditions during daily duties.

    3. Well, the 22lb only refers to the actual projectile of the 88×822R mm cardrige, the complete munition was heavier. While I can't find an accurate estimate atm there is actually a weight listed here in this very article of 51lb. While still lighter than the IS-2 projectile alone, it's not that much of a difference, and if loading the 55lb IS-2 AP projectile was a problem because of the weight, than the 51lb 88×822R mm round certainly was not easy to haul around either.

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. The usual, biased article here...
    You obviously concentrate on the faults (despite that it isnt such a bg deal), to make your praised IS-2 superior. It says when the gun tube is elevated, loading is "comaratively EASY" Tanks usually fight with gun barrels horizontal or elevated... Also, the rate of fire with this "inferior" configuration was still at least two times higher than the "superior" 122mm. Your two piece ammunition is a total bullshit also... If they make the ammo two piece, reload will be pathetically slow, just like the IS-2. Though the designers of the soviet tank had no other choice, so obviously resulted in a serious tactical disadvantage. The post war T-55 and 62 also prove that you are wrong, because they also have unitary ammo, some of which were heavier than the 88mm of the Tiger. So much about your two piece ammo...

    1. I don't know why you're projecting your bias onto me. I didn't mention the IS-2 in this post at all. I don't see why the T-55 and T-62 mean that the Tiger II wasn't inconvenient to load.

      It would be a good idea for you to read the article where I discuss Soviet reload rate trial standards. Under identical trial conditions, the IS-2 and Tiger II score similar RPM numbers (4-6 vs 5-6 respectively), despite, like you say, much heavier total ammo weight.

    2. "Psychological projection, also known as blame shifting, is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unpleasant impulses by denying their existence while attributing them to others."

      IS-2 did not have level its gun it is a myth!!
      -The proof lack of mention in an early manual about 2 tanks (IS-1 and II)....right.

      Tiger II had to lower its gun!!! the Allies had some trouble with a captured vehicle in this excerpt!!!

      Can we at least get the rest of the document? Instead of these excerpts as I would be interested in reading the entire thing.

    3. The Allies explicitly state the the Tiger II's gun has to be lowered, whereas there is exactly zero evidence anywhere that the IS-2's gun had to be lowered. If you can find trials where it's indicated that the IS-2's gun had to be lowered, then you can compare the two situations. Until then, it's just a myth.

    4. I am not the one claiming that gun leveling is a "myth" without supplying evidence to support this opinion. The burden of proof is on you as you made the claim that it is dispelled.
      I suggest asking an IS-2 crew if you can find any about it or dig though IS-2 training records.

      @ Tiger II where is the rest of the Document?
      from what those excerpts state it would seem that you just provided some evidence that the IS-2 and other larger gun weapons needed to level off as the issues states seem universal. In any case the whole document is needed.

    5. Sorry forgot this part:

      Could very well be unfamiliar crew or damaged components. The rest of the doc will shed light on the context of this.