Jump to content


Photo

SU-122/54 Revisited


  • Please log in to reply
253 replies to this topic

#21 MicroMark

MicroMark

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lancashire, England
  • Interests:Wargaming, military history, rock music, tanks, tanks and tanks

Posted 16 October 2010 - 0756 AM

Anyone got any details of the armour layout of the IT-122 aka Su-122/54 ?

Mark

#22 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 16 October 2010 - 1448 PM

Anyone got any details of the armour layout of the IT-122 aka Su-122/54 ?

Mark


100mm@50deg front hull
100mm@51deg front superstructure
80mm@55deg lower front hull

80mm@40 & 25 deg front corner armor
80mm@26deg side superstructure
85mm@0deg side hull

45mm@60deg upper rear hull
45mm@17deg middle rear hull
30mm@70deg lower rear hull
30mm@20deg rear superstucture

20mm roof over hull and superstructure
20mm bottom

122mm D-49 gun with 35 rounds
2 x KPVT (coax and AA) with 600 rounds

Edited by bojan, 16 October 2010 - 1456 PM.


#23 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2012 - 2337 PM

Does anyone know where this monument is located?

Posted Image

#24 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 November 2012 - 0203 AM

Does anyone know where this monument is located?

Posted Image


This pic along with these two below show the same SU-122-54 at the "Museum of Military Technique “Oruzhiye Pobedy” (Victory's weapons), located in the 30th Anniversary of the Victory Park," Krasnodar, Russia. Can anyone confirm if this one and the one on display at Kubinka are the lone survivors?

Posted Image

Posted Image

#25 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 December 2012 - 0004 AM

Here are a few vidgrabs of an SU-122-54 being used as a movie prop. Does anyone know anything about this movie? Are copies still available?

Posted Image

#26 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,129 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 07 December 2012 - 1117 AM

How did the co-ax KPVs get fed? Bagged belts?

#27 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 07 December 2012 - 1410 PM

How did the co-ax KPVs get fed? Bagged belts?

Box, same as on T-10M coax and AAMG .

#28 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 April 2013 - 2327 PM

After spending a lot of time over the years researching the SU-122/54 and looking for Suvorov's "IT-130," it's clear that most folks out there believe that Suvorov simply made-up the "IT-130." My question is this...has anyone seen any kind of confession from Suvorov? After all these years, has he ever opened-up about the whole "IT-130" thing? On another military forum, Steve Zaloga posted the following in 2003: "The SU-130 was a figment of a Soviet defector, "Viktor Suvorov" and my drawings in that old book were based on his (fictitious) sketches." The book he's referring to is probably "Modern Soviet Armor" (1979)...he doesn't mention that he used those same and other drawings in a few other books/articles including his article "Soviet Assault Guns" that appeared in Jane's Defense Review (April 1983). We know now that Suvorov apparently got the name wrong with the SU-122/54 (could it have been initially known as the "IT-122?"), but he was right about the thing existing. It was truly unknown to the West...with only one recent exception, it has never been included in an official US Army or USMC field manual or vehicle ID guide. So, what about the "IT-130?" In my mind (and I know that I'm a minority with this one), there's more to the story than Suvorov just made it up.           
    

su12254suvorovdrawing1.jpg
 



#29 sunday

sunday

    Bronze-age right-wing delusional retard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,090 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Badalona, Spain
  • Interests:Technology, History

Posted 17 April 2013 - 2347 PM

There is this blog post: http://ftr-wot.blogs...destroyers.html

 

With some interesting, and cogent comments by one bojan.



#30 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 April 2013 - 0925 AM

Sunday; thanks for the info and links. I'm familiar with these sites...especially the link on Alex Mitsch's thread on the "IT-130" which links directly to my 1992 Master's Thesis posted on DTIC. The info on the blog is interesting but it seems to miss the existence of the IT-1 (1964-1970) completely...the "IT" designator was obviously used for the IT-1. I'm thinking that this designator may also have been used for other tank destroyers early in their concept/design phases.              



#31 Dave Clark

Dave Clark

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 995 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 18 April 2013 - 1026 AM

My desk officer at HQ BAOR in the late Seventies used to swear by Suvorov - he claimed to be part of the team which de-briefed him.



#32 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 18 April 2013 - 1310 PM

Looking at all lies he spouted, I would not be surprised "Suvorov" was a false-flag OP.



#33 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 April 2013 - 0035 AM

My desk officer at HQ BAOR in the late Seventies used to swear by Suvorov - he claimed to be part of the team which de-briefed him.

 
Dave; I had the same experience back in the day when Suvorov's info initially surfaced. It's clear that the vast majority of his critics have focused on his claims regarding WWII (his claim that Stalin was planning to invade Germany prior to Operation Barbarossa, etc.), while ignoring the things that he got right. In "Inside the Soviet Army," for example, he introduces the IT-1. He goes on to report that "wartime" Soviet Armies each had an independent tank battlaion of 40 IT-1s. All the other sources I could find describe IT-1 production as being only small scale. According to Zaloga, two IT-1 battalions were actually formed, one in the Carpathian Military District and one in the Byelorussian Military District. The "BM-27" MRL is another example where he got the designation wrong - for some reason (the correct designation is BM-22), but he did give us our first glimpse at this new system. The US Army's FM 100-2-3 "The Soviet Army: Troops, Organization and Equipment" (1991), includes a drawing of the BM-22 and the note that "the Soviet designation is BM-22 rather than BM-27, as previously assumed."
 
I'm thinking that Suvorov's issues may have been more about scale and potential/planned deployment vs. what the Soviets actually accomplished during those years.                         


Edited by Jim Warford, 20 April 2013 - 0040 AM.


#34 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 20 April 2013 - 0742 AM

...Su-122/54, is this the machine that Isby refers to in Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army being used (after conversion into a tug) in Red Square parades?

Yes, some were also converted for mine clearing (BMR-1 IIRC) and used for route clearance in Afghanistan.


Edited by bojan, 20 April 2013 - 0742 AM.


#35 jakec

jakec

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 978 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:No fixed abode

Posted 20 April 2013 - 2051 PM

Did any other defectors point to an IT-130?  Or is this really a single source issue?

 

I'm always fascinated by those guys, is it true, for instance that Wardak (the Afghan Lt Col who gave the Voroshilov lectures) was involved in NATO exercises?



#36 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 April 2013 - 2257 PM

According to the available sources, the Soviets produced 95-100 SU-122-54s...while Suvorov's claim that every MRR inside the Soviet Union had a battery of SU-122-54s is hard to believe, the known numbers produced support the equiping/fielding of 10-12 batteries (1 each in 10-12 MRRs). We also know that they were used operationally as evidenced by their participation in the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968. By the way, the single reference to the SU-122-54 in an official US Army or USMC Field Manual or Vehicle ID Guide (AFAIK), is the USMC's "Soviet/Russian Armor and Artillery Design Practices: 1945-1995" (September 1996 - from the Marine Corps Intelligence Activity or MCIA).        



#37 demosthenes

demosthenes

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 621 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 1603 PM

You sure you don't mean ASU-85s when it comes to '68?



#38 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 April 2013 - 2228 PM

You sure you don't mean ASU-85s when it comes to '68?

Yup, I'm sure...here's a pic of one of the deployed SU-122-54s in Pribram, Czechoslovakia: 

 

su12254pribramczechoslo.jpg
 


 


Edited by Jim Warford, 23 April 2013 - 2238 PM.


#39 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,854 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 April 2013 - 2322 PM

That would seem to imply that it was Soviet formations probably not in East Germany, but Western Russia and maybe the WGF would have had these vehicles wouldnt it? I dont remember GSFG formations taking part in the invasion (though I know NVA units clearly did). I certainly dont recall seeing any reference to them being in East Germany in USMLM reports. Might be worth my pulling them out and looking at them again.

Stuart; that's a great question...I spent some time recently trying to identify the Soviet units involved in the invasion, but I couldn't find a good source that identified the divisions, etc. It would be very interesting to see who this particular SU-122-54 belonged to. As far as USMLM reports are concerned, I've never seen a reference to the SU-122-54 in any of "the Groups." While it's likely that the deployment to Czechoslovakia was the only use of the SU-122-54 outside of the Soviet Union, it makes one wonder why it was used there...was it simply a case of being in the right place at the right time?         



#40 FLOZi

FLOZi

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 117 posts
  • Location:Blighty
  • Interests:60's Militaria

Posted 12 May 2013 - 1324 PM

I'm quite amazed to see SU-122-54 in Prague, there were what, 77 of them?

 

On a related note does anyone have a TO&E for Soviet forces in Prague? I've seen photos of all sorts (ASU-57, ASU-85, T-55, T-62, T-10M, ZSU-57, BRDM-1, BTR-60... and now SU-122-54!)

 

Also this which appears to be some ASU-57 derived APC?

asu57m1964apcyo2.jpg


Edited by FLOZi, 12 May 2013 - 1328 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users