• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

king tiger movie

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#11
t looks like the mix of a tiger and a panther. was it used effectively?
Click to expand...

I'm no tank expert, but I will attempt to answer that question.

German heavy armour would be considerably overrated by Hitler throughout the war. He frequently would weigh equipment as the sole reason for winning a battle, when we all know that it's always a combination of sound strategy, good leadership, and quality training that wins battles, not necessarily the equipment they use. So, throughout the war, heavy tanks would be used in incorrect roles by demand of Hitler. Both the Tiger I and Tiger II are armed with 88mm guns (56 calibre for the former and 71 calibre for the latter), which pack an amazing punch using against Allied tanks at extreme distances. Despite their weight, both series of tanks had good mobility through the use of extra wide tracks, good suspensions, and easy steering control (all three of which also added to their cumbersome maintenance necessecities).

Given all of these attributes though, even the gun of a Sherman (75mm) can punch through a lot of armour if it's firing at extremely close ranges. While the 88mm guns of the Tigers could effectively ensure 1 shot kills 100% of the time at close ranges, their real strength was the ability to knock out most adversary tank of the war at ranges where they could not fire back. This makes for these heavily armed, heavily armored beasts extremely effective in a defensive role, where speed, maneuverability, and tactical use are more imporant in an offensive role. Remember, the German Army became famous for how they used their armour, not what they used, as the the tanks themselves were actually routinely outclassed in all theatres of the war.

All in all, German heavy tanks played more of a propaganda role in the war, often inciting fear into the Allied ranks. In reality though, the combined production of both Tiger I's and II's never equated to more than 2000 total. They were rare to be seen on the battlefield, and most were knocked out by means of air power rather than actual tank vs tank combat. If they weren't lost to those, they were abandoned due to their extreme gas consumption and hefty maintenance requirements. In the thick of retreat, which the Germans did a lot of in 1944, one didn't always have the time to keep a Tiger/2 properly maintained.
 
Upvote 0
#17
I believe the man said they and the Panther were common in the late war battles.

I take that to mean they made appearances in such battles, not that there were zillions of them in those battles.

Since the King Tiger was used primarily as a portable, long range gun, it is entirely likely they were common because they faught in one battle, then moved on to the next battle.

The same tank and crew could have appeared in a long list of battles, again because they were held back, fired long range and then withdrew to fight another day.
 
Upvote 0
#18
Actually he said "there were lots of battles with companys [sic] of King Tigers...King Tigers are common in most late war battles"
This is quite simply wrong. King Tigers were obviously rare, and most did not fight repeatedly in several battles, because they were seriously lacking in mobility. Many were deployed in the Ardennes, where they broke down (something German tanks did frequently, especially the early Panthers and Tiger II) or ran out of fuel and were abandoned.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu