otester said:
Both Pfausts and Pschrecks were used from ~43 to the end of the war, both came out pretty much at the same time but schreck came in a bit later.
Upvote
0
German anti tank weaponry.
- Thread starter Colt .45 killer
- Start date
Both Pfausts and Pschrecks were used from ~43 to the end of the war, both came out pretty much at the same time but schreck came in a bit later.
Well it was wen ever the germans encountered the Bazooka they made their own.
PanzerShreck was more powerful than Bazooka, caused american redesign after war.
PanzerShreck was more powerful than Bazooka, caused american redesign after war.
Upvote
0
otester said:
The panzershrek was issued in 1943. It's not clear whether the Germans copied the bazooka (which they captured from the Ruskies) entirely or it made them realize they could use the same concept to fire THEIR rocket that they had developed.
In any case, it's 1943... not 44.
Upvote
0
The PanzerShreck was a lot more powerful than the Bazooka, like with the T34/76 the Germans prefer to design their own superior weapon than a direct copy slightly differed. If the Germans had just copied the T34/76 but made a slightly superior version then they could have really mauled the Russians but self-pride prevented this and the Tiger was born.
Upvote
0
otester said:
This is a bit incorrect. You should have said the PANTHER was born.
The Tiger was a project started in the late '30's but didn't get deployed until after the Battle of France where the Germans discovered themselves outgunned by the Allied tanks (The Matilda II and the Souma S35 were both vastly superior to the PZII's, III's and IV's fielded by the Germans).
It was initally supposed to have a short 75, but after the 88 was discovered to be such a terrific AT gun, the turret was modified to hold it.
There can be no doubt that the Panther was created from the German experiences against the T34's on the Eastern Front.
Upvote
0
I left panther out 
The Panther should have taken priority, Tigers are very good tanks but for practality they were not. Panthers also had the allowance for a modified turret which house either: 75, 88, 128 or even 150mm guns. It was fast, quite cheap and nearly as good armour as the Tiger IIs
The Panther should have taken priority, Tigers are very good tanks but for practality they were not. Panthers also had the allowance for a modified turret which house either: 75, 88, 128 or even 150mm guns. It was fast, quite cheap and nearly as good armour as the Tiger IIs
Upvote
0
otester said:I left panther out
The Panther should have taken priority, Tigers are very good tanks but for practality they were not. Panthers also had the allowance for a modified turret which house either: 75, 88, 128 or even 150mm guns. It was fast, quite cheap and nearly as good armour as the Tiger IIs
Cheap compared to the Tiger but not the T34. I read somewhere that the Germans had originally designed a tank that looked a lot like the T34, but it was nixed because it looked too Russian. Hmm, if I recall the it was the original Panther design with the turret more forward instead of set back.
Upvote
0
otester said:I left panther out
The Panther should have taken priority, Tigers are very good tanks but for practality they were not. Panthers also had the allowance for a modified turret which house either: 75, 88, 128 or even 150mm guns. It was fast, quite cheap and nearly as good armour as the Tiger IIs
I will agree that strategically speaking the Tiger was a catastrophe. It cost WAY to much to build in terms of resources AND money.
The Panther was (IMHO) the perfect WWII tank. Big and scary enough to kill everything in it's path, but not as ridiculously expensive as the Tigers (E or B).
The Russian T34 was also a war winner due to it's cheap cost and easy maintenance.
It always kills me how the average n00b historian praise the Tigers as the ultimate tank.
Beancounters win wars anyway.
Upvote
0
Rameusb5 said:
this does not look like the work of a "nOOb historian":
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm
nor does the first-person account written by Otto Carius, panzer ace of the S.P.Abt 502.
Upvote
0
Good site that is, but I got the impression that he thought the Tiger was ace at combat but downed by lack of numbers, numbers also made maintence easier as more parts were available and problems would be fixed more quickly. The crews just didnt care for their Tiger needs enough, the crews that did had a reliable tank, also the reason the Tiger II's broke down alot. Not that they should have to care for it like no other tank but if I was in a Panzer division and received a Tiger II i'd do daily maintence or when ever possible.
IMO Tigers I/II's should have been made after the USSR's defeat ready for American invasion, production could then start by mass and whole Panzer divisions would be made up of Tiger II's with no faults, maybe even make a new diesel engine for it but the Panther V was perfect for Russia.
IMO Tigers I/II's should have been made after the USSR's defeat ready for American invasion, production could then start by mass and whole Panzer divisions would be made up of Tiger II's with no faults, maybe even make a new diesel engine for it but the Panther V was perfect for Russia.
Upvote
0
I think the deal here is that the Tiger was a MAIN BATTLE TANK. The first in its class, and that's why it was such an incredible tank.
It was too expensive, too slow, too prone to malfunctioning, used very rare metals, etc etc etc. It was still an amazing main battle tank.
But yeah, the Panther was a much better over-all tank, and it could have been modified in a lot of manners, and upgrated with time(Panther 2 etc) to serve as a multi-purpose tank system.
The war was over for the Germans by '43 anyway, so nothing mattered in the grand scheme of things.
It was too expensive, too slow, too prone to malfunctioning, used very rare metals, etc etc etc. It was still an amazing main battle tank.
But yeah, the Panther was a much better over-all tank, and it could have been modified in a lot of manners, and upgrated with time(Panther 2 etc) to serve as a multi-purpose tank system.
The war was over for the Germans by '43 anyway, so nothing mattered in the grand scheme of things.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
The Tiger was fielded, designed, and everything before the Panther AFAIK.Tomcat_ha said:
"The development of one of the most famous tanks of World War II started in 1937 and first massive Tiger I heavy tank emerged in July of 1942. From 1937 to mid 1941, Henschel produced designs and prototypes of various medium and heavy tanks such as DW (Durchbruchwagen)I and II, VK3001, VK3601 and VK6501. At the same, Dr.Porsche developed his VK 3001 Leopard medium tank. None of those tanks entered production but provided both companies with valuable experience in tank design and production, which came to be useful in working on the Tiger heavy tank."
http://www.tarrif.net/ (I know the site is supposedly biased etc, but I am just providing some info)
The prototypes were delivered in Sept. 1942, and production started 2 months later. Daimler-Benz then started production, and in February and March of 1943 Henschel and Maschinenfabrik Niedersachen joined in production. Later in war other production (aircraft) was cut back to free up facilities to manufacture parts for Panthers.
The initial vehicles were tested at Erlangen and Grafenw
Upvote
0
It wasn't a 'lack of care and daily maintenance' that reduced the number of operational Tigers on any given day. It was things like:otester said:You need to explain more
-a mechanically unreliable engine
-over-stretched supply lines
-lack of fuel, which was exacerbated by the Tiger's gas-guzzling engine
-high maintenance times for the mechanics (~10 hours for every 1 hour of operation)
-lack of a suitable recovery vehicle
-anti-tank mines
-Germany's worsening strategic situation
...that reduced the numbers of Tigers available. And NO, having a reduced number of tanks on hand did not make things anything easier for the unit. It just meant they were more hard-pressed to accomplish their mission.
As for Tiger IIs, they were built with the same engine as the Tiger I, which meant much more strain was put on it, due to the increased weight. Not to mention they were built at a time when production quality was going downhill, which only increased the problems.
Upvote
0
I never said the Tiger I/II was without its faults, but care was a part of it.
Like i said
Tiger I/II was impractical for the specification needed, no doubt there.
Like i said
Tiger I/II was impractical for the specification needed, no doubt there.
Upvote
0