Jump to content


Hello, Kitty


  • Please log in to reply
106 replies to this topic

The_Chieftain #1 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 18:27

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 9515 battles
  • 9,426
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

Posted Image


The problem with Tiger is that everyone seems to be an expert. They know everything about it, and if they see something which doesn’t match with their preconceptions, it’s wrong. As a result, when people finally get to Tiger, they are often confused by what is in the garage in front of them.

Posted Image


It seems to be a question which comes up often enough. I recall one ticket that got sent to support explaining to us, quite politely, that the developers had erred, and that the early and late model turrets of Tiger 1 differed in ‘this’ manner and that whatever turret is on the Tiger when you buy it in the game, it’s not an early model turret and should be changed. Well, this isn’t really true. What you have in your garage when you buy a stock Tiger is the ‘real’ Tiger, a Pz.Kpfw.VI H Ausf. H2, and which few people have heard of. To relieve us of having to respond to the same question repetedly, allow me to explain.

The Tiger we all know and love was not really the desired end-state. The development of the vehicle went through a few stages, the process of which I cannot explain in a manner better than Jentz and Doyle, and so I’m not going to try. And, since I don’t want to be on the wrong side of copyright violations, I’m not going to go quoting them at length either: If you really want to know the gritty details, go find buy their book or rent it out of a library. But here’s the nutshell version.

The requirement was put out for a breakthrough tank in the 45 ton range.

Porsche was first out the gate with its Panzerkapmfwagen VI (P), the Typ 101, but he more or less came up with his own specifications. A hundred chassis were ordered, with the Krupp turrets which had been designed for Typ 100, the Tiger P’s predecessor. The vehicle went for trials where they weren’t massively successful.

Posted Image


Over on the other side of the field, Henschel were working more to the specifications listed by the higher authority  (actually, at the Eagle’s Nest). The initial instruction was for a tank with a 75mm squeeze-bore cannon with 100mm frontal, and 60mm side armour, and to see if an 88mm cannon was feasible. As a result, Wa Pruef 6 (Basically the German version of the US’s Ordnance Tank Design Board) put out a contract for Henschel to tweak the VK36.01 design a bit (turning it into VK 45.01), and make it suitable for mounting an 88mm cannon if required.

This was done, but the preference (read: ‘Hitler directive’) was still for a vehicle with a 75mm cannon which, as long as it penetrated 100mm of armour at 30 degrees at 1,400m, was going to be quite acceptable due to the smaller turret and vehicle, lower overall weight, and larger ammunition capacity. Hitler personally directed that the squeeze-bore cannon only be implemented if sufficient stocks of tungsten were available, and such was not the case. As a result, the 7.5cm KwK 42 / 70 was selected to arm the tank. Rheinmetall was selected to develop the turret to mount this cannon onto the VK45.01 chassis, this turret to be called the VK 45.01 (Rh).

Posted Image


We now have the situation where Henschel is able to start producing hulls fairly quickly as they are only doing (granted, heavy) modifications to an already extant design, and Krupp is already under contract to build 100 turrets for Porsche’s Tiger which doesn’t seem to be working out well yet. As a result, it made a lot of sense to have Henschel start building the hulls, and to put the Krupp 8.8cm turrets onto them, to get something into the field, making Pzkpfw VI H Ausf H1. All Tigers built after #101 (estimated to be Feb 1943) inclusive were to be Pzkpfw VI H Ausf H2, with the smaller turret with the 75mm gun which could penetrate 100mm of armour. The fact that the 8.8cm gun did not achieve the desire level of penetration was balanced by the fact that this would give Rheinmetall plenty of time to sort out their VK45.01 (Rh) turret, whilst doing something useful with the currently produced turrets and hull production capacity. (In the long run, this also explains why the Porsche Tiger chassis ended up being converted to Sturmgeschutzen: The turrets built for them were no longer available, and Krupp was now tooled up to build hydraulically operated turrets, not electrical). Basically what came off the production line in August 1942 was what was intended to be an interim vehicle.

Posted Image


There was, of course, one final turn in the story. (Obviously, as the Ausf H2 never did make it into production). That was a new 8.8cm AP shell which could meet the 100mm penetration requirements. Then add the fact that it was determined that the Krupp turret could mount the 8.8cm / 71 thus giving it significantly greater potential than the Rheinmetall turret, all present requirements could be met, and future requirements easily accommodated without the need to tool up production for another turret which hadn’t yet had its design completed and which probably would have a shorter overall service life even if it could meet the current requirements better.

Thus, by mid-July 1942, it was decided that the VK 45.01 (Rh) turret was redundant, and development was cancelled. The entire VK 45.01 (H) production run would be equipped with Krupp’s 8.8cm turret, and the Tiger / 88 legend was created.

Posted Image



Legiondude #2 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 18:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 20134 battles
  • 22,930
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

The_Chieftain, on Jun 04 2012 - 18:27, said:

There was, of course, one final turn in the story. (Obviously, as the Ausf H2 never did make it into production). That was a new 8.8cm AP shell which could meet the 100mm penetration requirements. Then add the fact that it was determined that the Krupp turret could mount the 8.8cm / 71 thus giving it significantly greater potential than the Rheinmetall turret, all present requirements could be met, and future requirements easily accommodated without the need to tool up production for another turret which hadn’t yet had its design completed and which probably would have a shorter overall service life even if it could meet the current requirements better.
Do you mean the 8.8cm/56, or are you referring to some German plans I don't know about to have actually put the long 88 on the Tiger H, or is this referring to the future development of the Tiger II?

Armored_Cavalry #3 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 18:53

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12516 battles
  • 145
  • Member since:
    01-05-2012
♫ Hard Kitty Cold Kitty Big Block of Steel ♪ Mean Kitty Scary Kitty Boom Boom Boom ♫

The_Chieftain #4 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 19:00

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 9515 battles
  • 9,426
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

Legiondude, on Jun 04 2012 - 18:46, said:

Do you mean the 8.8cm/56, or are you referring to some German plans I don't know about to have actually put the long 88 on the Tiger H, or is this referring to the future development of the Tiger II?

The second. As of July 1942, it was forseen that by the end of the year, Tiger would be coming off the production line with the 8.8/71.

Aenir_bEPU #5 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 19:02

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3054 battles
  • 166
  • Member since:
    02-11-2011
When I clicked on this I was expecting a skin to make it look like a Tiger...

AcesHighMDP #6 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 19:12

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 36932 battles
  • 695
  • Member since:
    09-15-2010
Thanks Chieftain, I really enjoy reading your articles.

LightningStriker911 #7 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 19:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 7601 battles
  • 2,141
  • Member since:
    07-16-2011
i love reading cheiftain articles :)

Riceygringo #8 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 19:24

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 19642 battles
  • 7,190
  • Member since:
    07-14-2010
I thought it was a thread about Hello Kitty skins for the Tiger H

SocialFlaws #9 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 19:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 40953 battles
  • 2,300
  • [BULBA] BULBA
  • Member since:
    04-02-2011
So the in-game Tiger's stock turret was actually seen as an upgrade.

Haha, oh wow.

SunFlash #10 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 19:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 21366 battles
  • 4,113
  • [RDDT] RDDT
  • Member since:
    11-15-2011

Riceygringo, on Jun 04 2012 - 19:24, said:

I thought it was a thread about Hello Kitty skins for the Tiger H

and here i was thinking the chieftain had made a clan to compete with PBKAC

husband #11 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 19:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 36792 battles
  • 3,650
  • Member since:
    07-01-2011
Thanks for posting this!
What do the letters VK in VK36.01 and stand for?

burpyturtle #12 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 20:01

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 31830 battles
  • 499
  • [SNOO] SNOO
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011
Great article - but you don't tell us why WOT didn't go with what was fielded rather than the preliminary designs that were not produced.

WOT already has a bunch of tanks that only saw very limited production in the prototype and preliminary testing stages, and several which didn't make it past the drawing boards.

It would be nice to be able to play tanks which use the historic specs with "playability",  "balancing", and other changes (such as making tanks substantially bigger/smaller, thicker/thinner armor, changing ammo and gun specs, etc.) discarded.  I'm sure you are aware of the actual accuracy of most tank guns, and their proven combat ranges.  Visibility only to 500 meters?  That was infantry rifle range during WWI - armored vehicles were able to effectively engage each other much further.

And it is sort of funny to have seen an answer in an update forum that "that gun is too much better than other country's guns" as reason its characteristics are being down-graded - while other guns, which never existed outside of a design phase, are included in the game with vastly superior characteristics.

Kindly stop telling us on the one hand that it is a game and not a simulation.  Then telling us about something else "that wouldn't be historically correct."

And WOT does just that.

Cosmeister #13 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 20:02

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15371 battles
  • 59
  • Member since:
    03-23-2012
Well, the "K" obviously means "kitty"!  hehe

Grimmy_Onland #14 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 20:06

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 36615 battles
  • 423
  • [F0XEY] F0XEY
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011
Nice article, now explain the Chaffee turret please...

Legiondude #15 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 20:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 20134 battles
  • 22,930
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

burpyturtle, on Jun 04 2012 - 20:01, said:

Great article - but you don't tell us why WOT didn't go with what was fielded rather than the preliminary designs that were not produced.

WOT already has a bunch of tanks that only saw very limited production in the prototype and preliminary testing stages, and several which didn't make it past the drawing boards.

It would be nice to be able to play tanks which use the historic specs with "playability",  "balancing", and other changes (such as making tanks substantially bigger/smaller, thicker/thinner armor, changing ammo and gun specs, etc.) discarded.  I'm sure you are aware of the actual accuracy of most tank guns, and their proven combat ranges.  Visibility only to 500 meters?  That was infantry rifle range during WWI - armored vehicles were able to effectively engage each other much further.

And it is sort of funny to have seen an answer in an update forum that "that gun is too much better than other country's guns" as reason its characteristics are being down-graded - while other guns, which never existed outside of a design phase, are included in the game with vastly superior characteristics.

Kindly stop telling us on the one hand that it is a game and not a simulation.  Then telling us about something else "that wouldn't be historically correct."

And WOT does just that.
1. Historical Mode: Coming SoonTM
2. Well yeah, but fairness has to have it's own priority to history
3. If guns had their historical stats, maps would have to be ridiculously larger.

In short: it's a series of design choices by Wargaming that have made these tanks "underperform" compared to their historic counterparts. Really all you can do is deal with it because these choices are very hard to workaround

whitedragonking #16 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 20:44

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22402 battles
  • 818
  • Member since:
    03-15-2011
to think the turret could of change the amount of tank deaths

the_moidart #17 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 20:49

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 29591 battles
  • 2,160
  • Member since:
    10-22-2010
Cool to know that the stock turret was a real design and that the overlarge looking L71 could in fact be put in the turret. Good work.

Master4th #18 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 21:01

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 164 battles
  • 96
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

Legiondude, on Jun 04 2012 - 20:08, said:

1. Historical Mode: Coming SoonTM
2. Well yeah, but fairness has to have it's own priority to history
3. If guns had their historical stats, maps would have to be ridiculously larger.

In short: it's a series of design choices by Wargaming that have made these tanks "underperform" compared to their historic counterparts. Really all you can do is deal with it because these choices are very hard to workaround

Under preform is is one thing, but the tigers lack of historical speed and load capacity begs to wonder which developers raged over getting pwned by a Tiger tank in game.

On the road the Tiger 1 was rated at 38km/h not 30. The Tiger II was rated at 41.5 max road, 38 sustained road speed. No where close to the 27km/h its currently limited at. I see that the IS series tanks can keep up with my Panther 2. However the German tanks are not afforded the same equal playing field.

In the end I see a lot of smoke and mirrors, nay, excuses about why this tank is less powerful than it should be. Its obvious by things like the Micheal Wittman Award being changed that the Tiger and those who showed its potential still leave a Bad taste in the Soviet mouth.

FaustianQ #19 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 21:07

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18664 battles
  • 7,726
  • Member since:
    07-13-2010

Master4th, on Jun 04 2012 - 21:01, said:

...I see that the IS series tanks can keep up with my Panther 2. However the German tanks are not afforded the same equal playing field.

So you are someones alt, or you're just really bad at lying.

ForcestormX #20 Posted Jun 04 2012 - 21:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 10419 battles
  • 11,207
  • Member since:
    06-22-2011
Huh. I thought the stock turret was just laziness on the part of the modelers.

Well, I'm glad to be proved wrong in this case. Thanks for the info.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users