Based on the Tiger II hull. Tankers much preferred the Tiger II and found it much more useful.
Germans didn't have nearly enough tanks and wasted too many hulls of good vehicles on assault guns.
Posted on 04/07/2018 9:25:29 AM PDT by Simon Green
I am assuming that Carius wrote "Montagehalterungen" (but am unable to find "Tiger im Schlamm" in order to verify my supposition).
Regards,
German armor is consistently overrated. The Soviets had superior, and simpler concepts. American and British quality was superior. What made German panzers so lethal for so long was superior doctrine and superior personnel.
Mounting brackets.
There was no point in a Jagdtiger when they had Jagdpanther.
I think the 88mm PAK was good enough to kill anything that appeared during the war, including the Pershing and IS tanks.
Yep. They probably would have done best concentrating resources on Panzer Mk-IV production and improvements.
Ther was no point in any of their heavy tanks including Panther which by allied standards was a heavy tank.
Yes the Tiger may have been invulnerable from the front but when you never have more than 30-40 operational Tigers along a +1,000 miles front, they become useless... even resource liabilities in the larger scheme of the conflict.
Based on the Tiger II hull. Tankers much preferred the Tiger II and found it much more useful.
Germans didn't have nearly enough tanks and wasted too many hulls of good vehicles on assault guns.
The also liked their railroad guns. There was an analysis on the resources that went into them, and what those resources could have been used for - aka X battalions of tanks that were much more usefully mobile for the type of war being waged.
There is a clone of Panzer General on Ipad called Open Panzer.
Sweet, thank you for the tip. I’ll have to check it out.
That’s what Allied tankers all thought.....NOT!
Germans lost a production battle. But tank to tank, the Tiger, Tiger 2, and Panther were more than match for any allied tank. Too complicated in design I’ll agree. Too call them overrated doesn’t square with performance tank to tank like at Kursk.
Somewhat akin to the old Soviet Azeri 2S3 or newer MSTA-S.
The Serman and Panzers started out with 75 mm cannons. The Germans fired a high-velocity shell because their barrels were longer.
Slower rounds from the Sherman bounced off the Panzers.
I believe the designers for the Sherman made the barrel shorter because the tank had to be shipped overseas and they didn’t want the barrel to stick out beyond the front of the vehicle. This made the gun useless and many Allied tankers died for the sake of convenience.
Yes and no. By 1943, the Germans were on the run and out of the assault business. However, in a defensive role firing from ambush, the Stugs with their low profile and powerful gun gave a good accounting of themselves. Using imitation as the best form of flattery, the Stug concept can be considered successful in that the Soviets and Americans developed similar assault gun platforms. Below is the American WW-II developed T-28:
The “bigger is better” for German tanks was only useful on the eastern front where you had open fields to hit the enemy before they could return fire and you had room to navigate. When they tried using the larger tanks on the western front, they no longer had the advantage over the smaller more nimble allied tanks as they could no longer pick them off before they themselves were also in range of fire as well as not being able to maneuver away from the overwhelming numbers of lighter tanks that still had enough fire power to cripple or destroy them.
The Panther tank was almost the perfect tank for Germany, if they had only utilized a transmission design similar to the bolted on v-gear transmission like the Sherman tank. Panther’s could damage their straight gear transmission at higher speeds which required factory repair rather than field repair - keeping it off the battlefield.
Dunno.
The Mark IV was getting a little long in the tooth and the Mark III was obsolete for anything but an assault gun chassis.
A simplified Panther and Jagdpanther might have been a good idea.
Problem was, the Panther the Germans built was larded up (which started out as a German T-34...) with gizmos inleaved road wheels and they couldn’t build them fast enough.
Tigers, though, were a waste of production lines and steel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.