Military -Tanks of world war 2

BlitzKrieg

Yess i am trying to get the military side going and yes i'll put military in front of every topic and no there will be something here for wargamers so dont feel left out. (see if u can spot it )

Tanks of the second world war... while in the pacific quite useless were excellent in the normady russain and afrikan wars.

my questions are:

Wha tanks do u think were the best

Wha made a tank good

AND HOw were they used to win the war.

Heres my own views:

They may seem pro german but its my view and i aint a nazi:

The German Panzer tanks from 3-6 were probably the best:

panzer 1 -out of date and useless, yet still proved itself in france

panzer 2 -proved itself in afrika still pretty weak compared to allies

panzer 3 -Ball starts moving used to great extent in Russia

Panzer 4, Panther and THE TIGER AND KING TIGER: These i consider the best tanks of world war 2, while the panzer 4 was just a all rounder, the panther and Tigers were way ahead of competition. THE PANTHER IS CONSIDERED THE BES. But i perfer the tiger for this classic quate:

"If your intelligance reports a tiger in the area send four shermans and expect to lose 3 of them." -Some american general.

The most important thing i think for a tank was its sighting system. Micheal Witman with his Tiger proved that they who can get a clear shot first win. Witman is famous for being the greatest tank ace of all time and holding up the British in normady.

I think the war would have been very different if Germany could have produced as much tanks as America. THere were 4 times more Shermans on the battlefield then panthers or tigers and it was this simple tank rush which won them the war. I kinda makes me feel uneasy, we make all these games and complain about stupid tank rush tactics yet its how we won the greatest war of all time...hohumm

---

People of the Boards

I have a cunning plan

and before u ask how cunning

just trust me its cunning

oooo thats cunning

klong

firstly, congrats on taking the military forum forward.
second, the topic at hand.
i think the T-34 made a huge impact in the eastern front and frightened the life outta the germans, yet this wasn't really a revolutionary tank- all they did was to get the basics right. they had this incredibly dangerous tank built quite badly- building tanks and other military equipment outside mustn't have been good for the quality of the machines. imagine what they would have done if built in the UK or the USA, where build quality was far better. i also think more credit is due to the churchill- well equipped and managed to last for 20 years or so after the war.
however, your selection of the king tiger is a good one- an all round great tank.
keeps the posts going, it gives me something to do.

---

The Boss

klong

i have posted some military topics on the admin: military forum, so i'll post them here.
on another topic, from friday i'll have a vastly reduced number of posts as i'm finishing up on my summer job, but hopefully i'll get on 2/3 times a week.

---

The Boss

ButcherOfNog

the best tank ..... i know in wargames i'll always take 5 MKIV's rather than 4 MKV's (Panthers) etc. Its all very well having a small number of excellent tanks, but its much better to have a decent number of good ones

Yossarian

The T-34 was a revolutionary tank and scared the hell out of the germans who had only the MKIII and MKIV at the time, both inferior. The MKV (Panther) was built as a counter to the T-34. The germans even considered just building a direct copy of the T-34 but decided against it due to identification problems. Production of both the Tiger and Panther was rushed and result in lots of technical problems leading to breakdowns on the battlefield. Probable one of the worst moves was to 'test' these new tanks in small numbers on the eastern front before the massed employment at Kursk.

The MKIV was considered an infantry support tank as it was equiped with a low velocity 75mm gun.
Tank production in germany was limted somewhat due to political problems. In 1943 Guderian was appointed head of Panzer forces, and faced considerable resistance when he attempted to increase tank production. It having been considerable reduced in order to increase the production of self-propelled guns.
As for numbers: There was a suggestion made in germany in 43/44 to switch all tank production to the King Tiger. this would have produced approx 50 tanks a month.

[VpR]jimmad

Well the sherman rocked apart from it exploding alot due to the petrol engine (dumb yanks) but for every german tank there was 7 shermans no matter how good they were they simply couldnt take out 7

nesf

They could take on 7 imo, esp Jadgtigers in defensive postitions and the like, to penetrate the armour the yanks had to get very very close, and the 128mm cannon made a sherman's armour look like tinfoil.

It was more a case of they could put tanks all along the line, and the germans really couldn't afford to spread too thin due to the problems of regrouping from such a situation and such.

BlitzKrieg

Like i said earlier 1 tiger was as good as 3-4 shermans. It came down to the better sights and crew i think. The american tanks were crap on the aiming. I personnally dont like the Sherman i think its a over rated tank. Its simply a mass produced tank in a tank rush

Yossarian

American armour did not have a 7:1 numerical superiority on the battlefield. There advantage lay in industrial capacity to produce tanks faster, thus being able to replace losses quickly.

Manach

I'd also have to go with the Sherman. Given the rate which the US churned these out + the ease of modifying them for other roles, ie mine-clearence, bridge-spaning etc.
Although on a 1:1 the German Panther I'd prefer.

Kensai

The Jadg Tiger was the tank killer right?
Anyway.
The tiger had many problems, it was suited to the open countryside, it stuck out like a sore thumb in the norman countryside, its sheer size, it broke down a lot.

There was a great program about WW2 tanks(and tank killer) on discovery channel the other night

nesf

Aye, and it was called tanks! suspiciously enough....

The Jadgtiger was a monster of a machine, but frankly it just wasn't a good idea. It was expensive and slow(ish) to make and when germany was already heavily outnumbered it wasn't a good option.

The sherman wasn't a bad tank, I think it comes under alot of fire (pardon the pun ) due to it's comparisson to Mark 5 and Mark 6 Panzers (Panthers and Tigers), but to be honest, it was the air support that they recieved that made them so effective. Without the air cover their losses would have been alot higher.

klong

The Germans were planning on building a tank even bigger than the Jagdtiger; called the Maus. It was to have a crew of 12 [i think] and weighed something like 35 tons. To power it they used an uprated aircraft engine but the max speed was only 15km/h or so. and it didn't even have a gun fitted!
As regards air support, it makes no difference if you have the worlds best tank and don't have at least air parity, as was shown in Normandy in 1944. Without air support, the German tanks were on a loser straight away.

---

The Boss

Yossarian

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by klong:
The Germans were planning on building a tank even bigger than the Jagdtiger; called the Maus. It was to have a crew of 12 [i think] and weighed something like 35 tons. To power it they used an uprated aircraft engine but the max speed was only 15km/h or so. and it didn't even have a gun fitted!
</font>

The Maus weighed approximatly 100Tons, and was a ridiculas monster. I think the engine blew up on the first prototype.
There was also a mine clearing prototype which wighed 120tons. It had 4 solid steel wheels, was articulated in the center and looked kinda like the AV from Aliens.

The Jadtiger (Ferdinand) was heavily armoured. Its drawback was not having enuff space for ammunition and with the early models not having any close fire weapons (mg's).
The Panther was probable the best alround tank of the war.


[This message has been edited by Yossarian (edited 14-08-2001).]

klong

the lack of ammunition space was a major drawback on russian tanks, as was the fact that they had their fuel tanks on the outside, making them easy to hit.
One of the most interesting tanks of the war was the Petrarch. This was a tank designed to be air dropped and was only used once in action, at the crossing of the rhine in 1945. probably one of the worst too, as to be air dropped it would have to have been quite light, i believe its armour was virtually non-existent.
The mighty irish army used the churchill until the 1960s- they let nobody stand in their way!

---

The Boss

nesf

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Yossarian:
The Maus weighed approximatly 100Tons, and was a ridiculas monster. I think the engine blew up on the first prototype.
There was also a mine clearing prototype which wighed 120tons. It had 4 solid steel wheels, was articulated in the center and looked kinda like the AV from Aliens.

The Jadtiger (Ferdinand) was heavily armoured. Its drawback was not having enuff space for ammunition and with the early models not having any close fire weapons (mg's).
The Panther was probable the best alround tank of the war.


[This message has been edited by Yossarian (edited 14-08-2001).]</font>

I thought it was the Elephant Tank Destroyer that had the lack of mg's problem? I could be wrong though.

Yossarian

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by nesf:
I thought it was the Elephant Tank Destroyer that had the lack of mg's problem? I could be wrong though.

</font>

The Elefant (Pz Jag Tiger)was more commonly known as the Ferdinand.

richindub2

Any chance one of ye could give a few links to decent sites with info about this sort of thing?

nesf

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Yossarian:
The Elefant (Pz Jag Tiger)was more commonly known as the Ferdinand.

</font>

I had assumed that the ferdinand/elefant and the jadgtiger were seperate models. The elefant mounted an 88mm gun ,as opposed to the 120mm of the jagdtiger, and was introduced earlier in the war. Am I correct?

Yossarian

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by nesf:

I had assumed that the ferdinand/elefant and the jadgtiger were seperate models. The elefant mounted an 88mm gun ,as opposed to the 120mm of the jagdtiger, and was introduced earlier in the war. Am I correct?</font>

I had alwaqys thought the Jag tiger was the Ferdinand, mounting a 88mm gun(not sure which version of 88, possible the long barrel). I didn't think a german tank/tank killer was mounted with a 120mm gun.

klong

The contract for the Tiger was contested by two firms, Henschel and Porsche.
Henschel won, but the Porsche design was also put into production. This Porsche design was known as both the Elefant and the Ferdinand. 90 were built but the design was not a success.
The Jagdtiger had a 128mm gun and weighed 70 tons.
On the subject of the Maus, Jane's Tanks of WW2 gives the following specs:

Crew-5
Engine Power- 1200hp
Combat Weight- 188,000kg
Max speed- 13km/h
Length- 10.09m/33.11ft
Range- 185km/114.89 miles [planned]
Width- 3.67m/12.04ft
Main gun- 1 X 128mm, 1 X 75mm
Height- 3.66m/12ft
Armour- 40mm to 240mm

---

The Boss

nesf

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Yossarian:
I had alwaqys thought the Jag tiger was the Ferdinand, mounting a 88mm gun(not sure which version of 88, possible the long barrel). I didn't think a german tank/tank killer was mounted with a 120mm gun.

</font>

Ok, i'm definite that the Jadgtiger, that was based on the tiger II chassis, was fitted with a 128mm or a 120mm gun, prob 128 but i can't remember. But I do remember that it mounted a bigger gun than any other german tank/tank destroyer.

The ferdinand, was an proposed design to mount the 88mm gun of the tiger onto the frame of either a panzer4 or 5, i can't remember which. It failed miserably and was never mass produced.

You might be thinking of the JadgPanther, which mounted a 88mm gun, was based on panther chassis, and had nicely designed sloping armour that allowed to be lighter and thus faster.

klong

Talking about guns on German tanks...........
the Sturmmorser Tiger was a conversion of the Tiger [18 made] used for destroying buildinds and had a 380mm [14.97in] gun.
nesf just look at my previous post!
What about the worst tank of the war?

---

The Boss

Yossarian

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by klong:
The contract for the Tiger was contested by two firms, Henschel and Porsche.
Henschel won, but the Porsche design was also put into production. This Porsche design was known as both the Elefant and the Ferdinand. 90 were built but the design was not a success.
The Jagdtiger had a 128mm gun and weighed 70 tons.
</font>

That is what im refering to. When the contract was awarded to Henschel (It was found to break down less..), Porsche had produced 90 chassis which where converted to SP guns. These where known as Ferdinands ( as in Ferdinand Porsche). I think they performed reasonably well.


As for a SP gun based on the Tiger II chassis, im not too sure.

klong

This is what Jane's has to say about the Ferdinand: [service life]

"The Elefants [Ferdinands] went into action on the first day [of the Kursk offensive] and WERE A DISASTER. They had no machine guns for self defence and Russian infantry were able to disable them with anti-tank grenades, mines and petrol bombs. The 8.8cm gun was awkward to aim. Their drive systems also gave trouble; survivors were returned to the factory and overhauled- they were also providede with a machine gun in the front hull. Five became recovery vehicles. Thereafter the Elefants served mainly in Italy where they proved to be formidable opponents when employed defensively but the local roads could not support their weight and many were eventually destroyed by their own crews."

So much for a great tank so.

---

The Boss

Yossarian

Initially the Ferdinand was armed with just the 88mm L71 and internal MG34's for local defence. There armour was from 80mm(side) to 200mm (front) thick.
During the Kursk offensive the Ferdinands suffered from technical problems (drive problems and power/weight ratio) and lack of self-defence weapons. In October 1943 50 Ferdinands where returned to the favctory for repairs and modernisation. Modernization consisted of the installation of a MG34 in the hull, improvement of armor protection, installation of wider tracks and installation of commander's cupola (developed from that of Stug III Ausf G), which provided improved visibility. Most of the Elephants were partially covered with Zimmerite, an anti-magnetic paste. These modified Ferdinands were renamed Elephants. Officially Ferdinands were renamed Elephants in a general order dated May 1st of 1944.

The Ferdinands suffered similar teething problems as the panther and tiger during the kursk offensive. However the modifications made as a result of the experience gained at Kursk resulted in a formidable Sturmgeschütz, which was very effective at long range (knocking out a T-34 at 4.5km) and seen service untill the end of the war.

nesf

Apologies Klong, cheers for the detail v interesting

Worst tank of the war? Depends on the period, Pz 3's would have been slaughtered in the later war years.

The Pz 1 was pretty bad, but it was pre-war, so it can't be compared to tanks developed later really.

BlitzKrieg

Panzer 1s may have been out dated but u gotta admit it was impressive how they beat the better tanks of the BEF and Frnace when invading france. Damn impressive tactics.

klong

Worst tank of the war.....the Soviet T-38 Amphibious Tank:
Crew- 2
Combat Weight- 3,300kg
Length- 3.78m/12.40ft
Width- 3.33m/10.93ft
Height- 1.63m/5.35ft
Engine Power- 40hp
Max Speed- 40km/h
Range- 170km
Main Gun- 7.62mm machine gun
Armour- 3mm to 9mm

1,500 were built and were mainly used in Finland, although quite a few were used against the Russians. Few of them had radios.
That or the Polish TK series. Details later.

---

The Boss

klong

i think it would be a good idea to post pictures.......so how do you do it?

---

The Boss

BlitzKrieg

like so:


no spaces in the whole thing so it should be like:

example:





that picture was made via: [img]*http://www.tmffa.com/pic/kiyone-wedding.jpg*[/img] just remove the stars and viola