"Mark V at Stalingrad" Topic

I was looking when Russia first used tanks and found that the White Russian Army used Mark V's during the Russian revolution. They were captured by the Red Russian Army.

This did not surprise me. But that 3 had be used at Stalingrad did.

From link

Three were reactivated in 1941 for use in the Battle of Stalingrad.[1]

The ref link [1] below does work. link

This page link

The last confirmed use of the Mk V in battle was by units of the Red Army during the defence of Tallinn against German forces in August 1941. They were dug in.

I would be interested if there were other information which confirmed the Soviet use of the Mark V at Stalingrad.

Many Thanks

Rich

Mark V in the Red Army by the end of the Civil War, there were more than 70 pieces. They could not be used in the Battle of Stalingrad. By this time, these tanks had long been decommissioned and sent for melting. In addition to those that were installed in various cities as monuments (two in each city: Smolensk, Rostov-on-Don, Kharkov, Leningrad, Kiev, Voroshilovgrad and Arkhangelsk).
The tanks used in the Baltics in 1941 (4 units) are from the Estonian army. They were also written off after the incorporation of the Estonian army into the Red Army, but they still remained in warehouses, waiting to be sent for melting. When preparing the defense of the city, all decommissioned weapons were put back into service.

One of the tanks, captured by the Red Army in 1920.

Already a Soviet tank on the Polish front, 1920.

Soviet (formerly Estonian) tank knocked out during the defense of the city of Tallinn, 1941.

German soldiers in front of a tank-monument in occupied Kharkov, 1942.

Interestingly, the armament was already removed from the Estonian tanks when they were decommissioned. Therefore, they had to be armed with what was available by hand. These were Russian Maxim machine guns and 45 mm anti-tank guns.

Three were reactivated in 1941 for use in the Battle of Stalingrad

This sounds a bit unlikely, considering that there was no fighting around Stalingrad in 1941.

Perhaps the writer had somehow confused Tallinn with Stalingrad?

I suppose that someone has mixed two different wars. These tanks really took part in the "Battle of Stalingrad". Only it was during the Civil War in Russia in 1919, and then this city was called Tsaritsyn.

One of the Estonian tanks ended up a pillbox in Berlin '45.

That would be quite a mix-up, Cuprum2, though I have seen some even bigger mix-ups in the past.

That said, I was not aware that these tanks fought in Tsaritsyn in 1919, so thanks for the info. Maybe I should someday delve deeper into the military history of the Russian Civil War.

16 tanks took part in the assault on Tsaritsyn, and the city was taken in many respects precisely because of this. The Reds simply did not know how to fight the tanks, which destroyed the wire barriers and panicked the Red infantry. In addition, a battle of tanks with red armored trains took place, one of which was hit and captured. One of the tanks was driven by a British crew. After the battle, only one tank remained in the ranks. On tanks fired field artillery, armored trains, as well as the ships of the Volga river flotilla of the Bolsheviks.

White Guard tankers. One has a tank-shaped patch on his right hand.

Battle between 16 white Mark V tanks and a couple of red armoured trains sounds like a topic that would make for a spectacular looking convention game! And with just a couple of different unit types, it should be pretty straightforward for the players to grasp rules.

There were four armored trains, if I'm not mistaken. Around the city there was a ring railway, which allowed armored trains to maneuver widely. But the high embankment created large "dead zones" in which the guns of the armored trains could not hit the tanks.

Scheme of the defense of Tsaritsin in 1919, depicting the railway lines along which the Red armored trains moved.

Very interesting, I do like the photos and map too. Albeit even the WWI vintage FT-17 was found in a number of locations in WWII.

Around the city there was a ring railway, which allowed armored trains to maneuver widely. But the high embankment created large "dead zones" in which the guns of the armored trains could not hit the tanks.

I presume these "dead zones" refer to the inability of the trains to depress their guns sufficiently to engage tanks at close ranges?

Gaming-wise this would make interesting situations, with the tank commanders trying to get into close range to engage the trains in favourable terms, while the train commanders would try to maintain distance in order to be able to use their firepower (likely superior to a single tank), while being restricted in their manoeuvring by the limited railway network. Sounds like an interesting tactical scenario.

Yes you are right.
Moreover, it should be mentioned that two red armored trains were improvised (just field guns and machine guns), installed on ordinary railway cars and platforms, and reinforced with sandbags, logs and something like that (I did not find out their specific type).

Cuprum2, you are a river to your people! So much good information!! Thanks!

Always ready to help if it's in my power)))

Thanks for all the info

Rich