IS-3 historical turret armor

Source: Yuri Pasholok

Hello everyone,

something interesting from Yuri Pasholok’s blog. Some of you might have asked where did the changed IS-3 armor scheme come from. Well, it was based on the following drawings – 1945 production series IS-3 armor schematics from Plant No.200


How to read it: lower schematics shows cuts, designated by regular alphabet letters. The upper picture shows these cuts from profile, the lower identifies the spots. Of the cuts, the upper row (two) represent side armor of the turret, the lower row represents front of the turret at spots K, F, E (check the lower picture for exact spots).

The last cut on the right side (that goes the other way than the rest) is the turret rear.

55 thoughts on “IS-3 historical turret armor

  1. So does this mean that IS-3′s turret has been unhistorically OP this whole time? Or are there similar drawings that could indicate the old armor values?

  2. Hand drawn, variable-radii cross-sectional view drawings of the old non-CAD times (which means at most mechanical assistance at the drawing board)…. I am a mechanical engineer, such stuff turns me on.

    Hats off to the engineers and the whole industry of the past. First for envisioning layouts like this, then for drawing them, and then hats off to the guys who built the models for the molds. Oh, not to forget the guys who planned and then executed the actual casting process.

    *goes back to preparing some models for a FEM-simulation of the casting process*

    • I think you speak for all us mech engs when you say that. *tear* it’s beautiful work!

  3. Is very nice, Soviet dome turrets are some of the best-looking around. Just a bit shame scan isn’t large enough to make mantlet area legible.

  4. Meh, I remember when some russian players went to Kubinka and measured that its armour on the frontal plate was 122mm…

    • Players on Ru server used ultrasonic thickness gauge to measure IS-3 armor (Kubinka’s IS-3 was used), and they found that 120 mm armor plates were used to build frontal “pike-nose” (UFP and LFP are 120 mm).

      • Were those guys actually trained in using that device, or did they just pick it up somewhere and went ahead? There are quite a few things that can go wrong when using those devices without proper training/instruction/supervision.

    • I actually hate the IS3, but somehow those Russian players don’t seem like experts in tank measuring to me… must be just my strange thought process…

        • WG’s way of balancing tanks….send some drunk retards with gauge and let them measure the tanks….at least it looks like they are doing it like that when you look at the tanks in game

  5. just asking, then the T9 chinese heavys stock turret shouldn’t be nerfed too? cuz its 1:1 an is3 turret

      • Actually WZ-111 stock turret is indeed all around better armored but the truth is… this armor on sides and rear is useless and this tank get’s often in to melee or mid range where tall tanks or seated on elevation can easily shoot the bolted in plate on top of turret which is only 20mm thick.

        Yes, it’s only 20mm, it can be pened even from the front on extreme angle. Overmatch doesn’t protect plate this thin.

        The upgraded turret is much better on WZ-111 because it has no top weakspot ,thin side and rear is acceptable because it’s shot only when someone flanks you and when this happens, the enemy prefers to aim at the hull. The front is superior in armor to stock turret because the mantlet gives extreme protection and I had only TD APCR rounds penetrating it. The cheeks on it are sloped when facing front so they’re impervious as well.

  6. Funny how they quote historic stuff when they need to nerf something. Nerf French auto loaders to the point of uselessness, make American autoloader op in some cases, now again autoloaders from Germany. Personally I think those things are going to be game breaking.

    • >Auto-loaders
      >game breaking

      Well if you’re jumping right in to face of a high tier frenchie then you’re indeed asking for disaster.

      IMO thinking is OP and game-breaking, You should use it too.

      PS. If’ these tanks are OP why you’re not having a frenchie in your garage ?

    • The rates of fire on the Auto-loaders for the 128 and 150 @ 2s and 3s between shots is close enough to being correct. The auto-loader device is correct but the whole WT E100 “package” is not which is sad.

      • autoloaders are gamebreakers..they never should be in the game at all….they simply don’t fit the game mechanics properly…..

        • Game mechanics:

          1. Find enemy tank
          2. Point at it
          3. Shoot until it (or you) explodes.
          4. ???
          A) Victory.
          B) If it wasn’t victory, rage about noob teams, OP tanks, campers, being outnumbered, autoloaders, arties, TDs, Polish players, gold ammo, invisible tanks, how daddy touched you at night.

          If you don’t see how autoloaders fit in this, find another game.

        • If only drum and magazine guns had the same drawbacks in this game as they did historically, there would not be many autoloaders running around in this game!

          I really do get annoyed when I catch a tank out and am about to start taking it apart with my 390 alpha 7 second reload gun only to have some autololz ninja come in and kill it before I am reloaded.

          It’s bad enough with all these massive alpha guns blatting a half HP tank dead just as I shoot it and my shell slams into a wreck.

          Really do feel like a bug driving around in a normal tank sometimes… but fear not, for I have only 20k exp to go for the FV 183 doom cannon!! and then I shall be the troll…