Russian weapons v4

[billybob2002]

After a quick search, I found some pictures of the SU-122-54 aka IT-122.

http://www.dishmodels.ru/wshow.htm?p=457&lng=E

SU-122 and SU-122-54 are two different vehicles because one uses the hull of a T-34 and the other uses the hull of the T-54. Additionally, I believe SU-122-54 was developed to be a tank destroyer. I have no clue how many of them were produced (one translated Russian site says only 77).

I haven't found anything about World War 2 SU-122s having their howitzers being upgraded to the 122mm D-49. During World War 2, the Russians tried to replace the howitzer but those tanks failed during the trials.

[DRG]

quote]KraMax said:
Why we in this theme discuss our OOB?

[/quote]

Why ? Because you're the one claiming the SU-122 as we have modeled in the Russian OOB did not exist with the 122mm M30 L22 gun and that we should "clean" that weapon from the OOB but if we "clean" that weapon from the OOB something must replace it in the vehicle.. yes ? So I took a little peek at your OOB and lo and behold you give your SU-122 the same gun as the IS-2M the IS-3, the IS-4 , the T-10 , the T-10B and the ISU-122 in from 1946 to the end of 1954 so I ask you to justify that with proof and the Russian Wikipedia entry isn't very good "proof". I figured since you posted a list of 93 mostly trivial "errors" in our OOB you wouldn't have a problem with my questioning your work. You really don't consider that MAYBE we don't always think your info was passed down on stone tablets. The range of the RCL's is just one example.

So.. show me information on this other weapon the post war SU-122's are supposed to have used. A photo would be a good start especially one of an SU-122 carrying the gun from a T-10

Don

[DRG]

billybob2002 said:
After a quick search, I found some pictures of the SU-122-54 aka IT-122.

http://www.dishmodels.ru/wshow.htm?p=457&lng=E

SU-122 and SU-122-54 are two different vehicles because one uses the hull of a T-34 and the other uses the hull of the T-54. Additionally, I believe SU-122-54 was developed to be a tank destroyer. I have no clue how many of them were produced (one translated Russian site says only 77).

I haven't found anything about World War 2 SU-122s having their howitzers being upgraded to the 122mm D-49. During World War 2, the Russians tried to replace the howitzer but those tanks failed during the trials.

Yep... I've seen the photos of that SU-122-54. I would be happier if there was something other than one set of photos in a museum setting. What I'm really curious about are the upgraded post war SU-122's which, as you also discovered, there really isn't anything to be found about them.

Don

[billybob2002]

DRG said:
Yep... I've seen the photos of that SU-122-54. I would be happier if there was something other than one set of photos in a museum setting. What I'm really curious about are the upgraded post war SU-122's which, as you also discovered, there really isn't anything to be found about them.

Don

I found some pics of the SU-122-54 in a non-museum setting...

http://www.jedsite.info/tanks-tango/...122-intro.html
http://www.jedsite.info/tanks-tango/...2v1-intro.html
http://www.jedsite.info/tanks-tango/...2v2-intro.html
http://www.jedsite.info/tanks-tango/...2v3-intro.html

[KraMax]

DRG said:
quote]KraMax said:
Why we in this theme discuss our OOB?

Why ? Because you're the one claiming the SU-122 as we have modeled in the Russian OOB did not exist with the 122mm M30 L22 gun and that we should "clean" that weapon from the OOB but if we "clean" that weapon from the OOB something must replace it in the vehicle.. yes ? So I took a little peek at your OOB and lo and behold you give your SU-122 the same gun as the IS-2M the IS-3, the IS-4 , the T-10 , the T-10B and the ISU-122 in from 1946 to the end of 1954 so I ask you to justify that with proof and the Russian Wikipedia entry isn't very good "proof". I figured since you posted a list of 93 mostly trivial "errors" in our OOB you wouldn't have a problem with my questioning your work. You really don't consider that MAYBE we don't always think your info was passed down on stone tablets. The range of the RCL's is just one example.

So.. show me information on this other weapon the post war SU-122's are supposed to have used. A photo would be a good start especially one of an SU-122 carrying the gun from a T-10

Don

[/quote]

Which I have specified proofs - normal and they are. A problem only in that that you cannot clean in general SU-122 with gun M30 from game. Also it is not necessary to ask from me proofs of presence at SU-122 guns D-25T - I have already written to you that I will study this question and in need of our OOB I will make changes. But from the middle of 50th years appears SU-122-54 is the fact. But in this theme I did not write about identity of gun D-25 and M30.

Range of shooting RCL - I have presented to you to proofs of the table of shooting of these tools which are made together with these guns and stand out to soldiers for trainings. But you have ignored them. In this case iron - but you them do not accept my proofs.

[KraMax]

DRG said:

.....
Just because you find a source that says an RPG-2 had 200 mm of penetration ( for example ) doesn't mean I have to accept if I check other sources and find differing opinions I make a design decision and go with that.
.....


Don

In the majority Russian sources of the information it is spoken - RPG-2 penetration 200mm, but also foreign sources of the information I have found the information in the majority that RPG-2 penetration = 180mm.

[DRG]

billybob2002 said:I found some pics of the SU-122-54 in a non-museum setting...

Good pics

If you do ever find anything on this post war SU-122 with the upgraded gun let me know

Don

[KraMax]

DRG said:

Good pics

If you do ever find anything on this post war SU-122 with the upgraded gun let me know

Don

SU-122-54 It has been accepted on arms in 1954. Serially was issued 1955-57.
Gun D-49 under characteristics penetration was equivalent to a gun of heavy tank IS-3.
On rotating commander to a turret optical range finder TKD-09 with base of 900 mm has been mounted. The gun unit of fire made 35 shots, and for simplification of work of the charging was used electromechanical loading. For the purpose of reduction of a gassed condition of fighting branch by the compressed air from compressor, and then for the first time the trunk purge at first has been applied to 122-mm of guns - with a purge.
With a gun machine gun KPVT the 14,5-mm have been coupled to pneumatic system of the recharge, second machine gun KPVT has been established as the antiaircraft. The unit of fire of machine guns made 600 cartridges.
The front armored sheet of the case and fighting cabin of 100 mm was in the thickness continuous and had a corner of an inclination from a vertical of 51 degree. Onboard sheets of cabin of 80 mm have been inclined by thickness under a corner of 26 degrees.

Weight - 36 tons
Length with a gun - 9,97 metres
Length of the case - 6 metres
Width of 3.27 metres
Height of 2 metres

The armour:
Case forehead-100mm
Board 80mm
Forage 45mm
Roof and the bottom 20mm

Speed of 48 km/h

[DRG]

Maxim

That's fine you gave the details about the SU-122-54. Its very helpful and FYI I have already built a new Icon for the vehicle but that's not what I was asking "billybob2002" about.

OK ?

Right from the start it's been about the M30 L22 gun on the WW2 vintage post war Su-122's you want me to "clean" out of the OOB and replace with..... ??

As I already pointed out, you "replaced" that gun in your OOB with the same gun as is mounted on the SU-122-54 and THAT is what I want to see proof of.

OK?

Right now I'm only interested in hearing about the gun mounted on the WW2 vintage post war Su-122's that existed AFTER WW2 ended and BEFORE the introduction of the SU-122-54.



Don

[DRG]

KraMax said:

<snip>The front armored sheet of the case and fighting cabin of 100 mm was in the thickness continuous and had a corner of an inclination from a vertical of 51 degree.

Just FYI. 100mm at 51 degrees is 159mm or 16 in the game not the 22 you rate it in your OOB. It would have to be 63 degrees to rate a 22

Don