Jump to content


was the tiger a reliable tank?


  • Please log in to reply
199 replies to this topic

cashdash #41 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 02:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 5558 battles
  • 7,254
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013
I find it hard to think of the Tigers as being ahead of their time when they were 1930s designs fighting a 1940s war.

panzershreck65 #42 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 02:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12710 battles
  • 603
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

View Postcashdash, on Aug 25 2014 - 21:50, said:

I find it hard to think of the Tigers as being ahead of their time when they were 1930s designs fighting a 1940s war.

 

T-34 was in development in a similar time frame. same with all the KV tanks. 

however the T-34 project didnt really get into what we would think of as a T-34 until the T-50 project went downhill. (at least that's the way i read it happened) 



EnsignExpendable #43 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 02:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
The A-32 passed trials, A-34 passed trials, and was adopted as the T-34 way before the T-50 was even a thing. 

Jeeps_Guns_Tanks #44 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 03:05

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16990 battles
  • 5,607
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    07-14-2010

View Postcashdash, on Aug 25 2014 - 18:50, said:

I find it hard to think of the Tigers as being ahead of their time when they were 1930s designs fighting a 1940s war.

 

I can't think of them being ahead of their time because of their Rube Goldberg turret drives. 

 

Pathetic is being generous for their designs they are so comically bad. 



panzershreck65 #45 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 03:05

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12710 battles
  • 603
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

View PostEnsignExpendable, on Aug 25 2014 - 21:58, said:

The A-32 passed trials, A-34 passed trials, and was adopted as the T-34 way before the T-50 was even a thing. 

 

mu bad. i don't really care for russian tanks (as in I ********* HATE THEM WITH EVERYTHING WITHIN ME.) jk i just dont like them because they are always super over represented in wot. (please please please don't turn this quip into a flame war, i beg of you.) 

 

and because i don't like them i don't look into them often. barely know a thing about them. 


Edited by panzershreck65, Aug 26 2014 - 03:06.


Daigensui #46 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 03:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 32940 battles
  • 29,988
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

View Postpanzershreck65, on Aug 25 2014 - 19:05, said:

jk i just dont like them because they are always super over represented in wot. 

 

In what way are they over-represented?



Krieger_07b #47 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 03:11

    Captain

  • Players
  • 12782 battles
  • 1,896
  • Member since:
    09-30-2011

View Postpanzershreck65, on Aug 25 2014 - 21:05, said:

 

mu bad. i don't really care for russian tanks (as in I ********* HATE THEM WITH EVERYTHING WITHIN ME.) jk i just dont like them because they are always super over represented in wot. (please please please don't turn this quip into a flame war, i beg of you.) 

 

and because i don't like them i don't look into them often. barely know a thing about them. 

 

Flame war baiting aside, if you ever want to learn a lot about Soviet tanks, Ensign has a pretty comprehensive blog here:

http://tankarchives.blogspot.ca/

With translations of firsthand period documents and the occasional WoT RU portal history article that doesn't make it across the pond.



cashdash #48 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 03:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 5558 battles
  • 7,254
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

View Postpanzershreck65, on Aug 25 2014 - 21:56, said:

 

T-34 was in development in a similar time frame. same with all the KV tanks. 

however the T-34 project didnt really get into what we would think of as a T-34 until the T-50 project went downhill. (at least that's the way i read it happened) 

 

 

The difference was the T-34 was built for a 1940s war, the Tigers were built for a 1930s "We have to attack the Maginot line head on" war.

 

They shouldn't feel bad though, the Brits and Italians were building tanks for a 1920s war.



betazmag #49 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 03:45

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12925 battles
  • 223
  • [HAND] HAND
  • Member since:
    05-12-2011
What was the real tank and in this game are entirely different things. 

EnsignExpendable #50 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 03:45

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View Postcashdash, on Aug 25 2014 - 22:43, said:

The difference was the T-34 was built for a 1940s war, the Tigers were built for a 1930s "We have to attack the Maginot line head on" war.

 

They shouldn't feel bad though, the Brits and Italians were building tanks for a 1920s war.

 

TOG! TOG! TOG!

 

Wait, our massive MkV+ doesn't fit into a 1944 battlefield? Well what do you know.



Walter_Sobchak #51 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 03:47

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 236 battles
  • 5,140
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

Its funny how many times I have read books or internet posts that describe the late war German tanks, particularly the Panther and the Tiger 2 as having a great deal of influence on post-war tank design.  The more I have thought about this, the less I agree with it.  In fact, I would argue that the Panther and Tiger 2 were pretty much developmental dead ends with few aspects of their design being adopted in post war vehicles.   These two vehicles were influential  only in the very general sense that they raised the bar in terms of what a medium or a heavy tank could weigh.  Their existence prompted the allied countries to develop heavier vehicles with the appropriate armor and firepower to match the late war German "cats", but they did not actually borrow many design features from them. 

 

To prove my point, lets look at the particular design features of "the cats" (Panther and Tiger).  The layout of the tanks was very conventional, with three men in the turret and two in the hull.  This was pretty much the norm for most WW2 tanks.  Post war designs trended toward the elimination of the second hull crewman, the Russians doing this first with the IS2 design and the Americans and British following suit later with the M-48 and Centurion.  So we can see, the "cats" were not ahead of their time in this regard.  From an automotive standpoint, the cats were quite conventional as well, with a gasoline engine mounted in the rear and the transmission in front.  This layout configuration was quite common,  the USA used it in the M3-M4 line of medium tanks and the M2/M3/M5 line of light tanks and so did the Italians, the Japanese and the Czechs.  The British and Russians had already figured out the advantages of having a rear mounted transmission and made that standard on most of their models. The Russians and the Japanese had made the move to diesel power packs for tanks before the war started.  Diesel engines with rear mounted transmissions would become the norm in most post-war tank designs, two features absent on the Panther and Tiger.   

 

In regards to suspension, the cats did feature torsion bars, which would become the most popular form of suspension for tanks in the post war era.  However, torsion bars were not unique to these vehicles.  The Germans had already fielded thousands of Panzer 3 and Stug 3's which had torsion bar suspensions.  The Russians had torsion bars in the KV 1 which appeared in 1940.  By 1944 the US had made the switch to torsion bars with the introduction of the M-26 Pershing, M-18 tank destroyer and the M-24 Chaffee light tank.  So we can see that the use of torsion bars on the cats was not a novel design feature.  The one feature unique to the cats that no one copied (in a vehicle that made it to full scale production) after the war was their system of overlapping road wheels.  The German system of overlapping road wheels may have provided for a comfortable ride, but they also made maintenance difficult, added extra weight to the vehicle, and had the tendency to get clogged with snow and mud in cold weather conditions.  The only post war tank designs that  revisited the idea of overlapping or interleaved road wheels was the AM-50 French design of the immediate post war era, it never went into production.

 

In terms of firepower, the Panther and Tiger 2 featured very high velocity cannons of either 75 or 88mm with a length to bore ratio around 70.  This ratio is significantly higher than that of most postwar tank designs that have ranged mostly in the 40-60 range.  We must assume that post war designers found that cannons with caliber ratios above 70 were not optimal.  German armor piercing ammunition was not fundamentally different from the allies, both sides primarily relying on solid shot capped armor piercing rounds (German rounds sometimes had a small explosive charge which western allied rounds did not.)  The most innovative German tank cannon design was the "squeeze bore" barrel which tapered down to a smaller diameter at the muzzle of the cannon.  The squeeze bore gun required rounds made from tungsten steel which was in short supply, so it was not used in significant numbers on any German AFV.  The real advance in armor piercing ammunition came from the British, who invented the discarding sabot round for their 6 and 17 pounder guns.  The discarding sabot has gone on to become the primary kinetic penetrating round used in most post war tanks guns.  In that regard, its safe to say the British 17 pounder was a more influential design than the Kwk 42 of the Panther or the Kwk 43 of the Tiger 2.

 

Interestingly, the only country who's AFV designs show a degree of influence from the Panther and Tiger 2 were the first generation post war tanks from France.  In the immediate post war period, France operated a battalion of captured Panthers, so these vehicles may have been used as inspiration for their post war tank designs.  The most obvious influence in the French designs was the main cannon on their AMX 13 light tank which has been described as "a copy" of the Panter's Kwk 42.  Somewhat ironically, this cannon would also see service in the Israeli M-50 upgraded Sherman tank.  The French  AMX 50 has a hull shape and road wheels that are very reminiscent of the Panther and Tiger 2, although it does not feature a front mounted transmission.   

 

The Panther and the King Tiger tanks raised the bar for firepower and armor protection when they were introduced in 1943 and 1944 (as well as for vehicle weight.)  That is not in dispute, nor is the fact that these tanks forced the allies to reevaluate their own designs to counter the powerful German vehicles.  In that sense, yes, the Panther and King Tiger were influential.  However, these two vehicles were in many ways conventional German designs of their era. Many of the aspects of their designs did not become common in post war designs, and some particular features, such as overlapping road wheels, were never used in post war production vehicles at all.  Therefore, I think it is safe to say that late war German tank designs, while impressive for their power and size, were not so much the forebears of post war tank design but more of an offshoot (and dead end) on the evolutionary tank design tree. 

      


Edited by Walter_Sobchak, Aug 26 2014 - 03:48.


Walter_Sobchak #52 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 04:03

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 236 battles
  • 5,140
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

View Postcollimatrix, on Aug 25 2014 - 18:44, said:


Best bet for a time traveler in WWII is a Bradley.  The 25mm will kill most things you'll run into, and it has far more ammo.

So best time traveling tank would be this?

 



Rena_Dyne #53 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 04:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 9406 battles
  • 4,344
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View PostDonward, on Aug 25 2014 - 18:50, said:

Because of their futuristic design, the US, Britain and USSR directly copied their designs and incorporated them in their armed forces. Ersatz Panthers and Tigers were used well into the 1960s...

 

 

Is that why the M4 sherman was still in use by the Israelis clean up to the 2000's, and the M18 hellcats are still in use by the Venezuelans, but NO one really uses tigers and panthers now? Oh, and how the M26, M48, M60, and M1 abrams all have nothing in common with the box-tank designs of the tiger or panther tanks? .>>



AdmiralTheisman #54 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 04:43

    Captain

  • Players
  • 30786 battles
  • 1,821
  • Member since:
    07-01-2013

View PostEnsignExpendable, on Aug 26 2014 - 03:45, said:

 

TOG! TOG! TOG!

 

Wait, our massive MkV+ doesn't fit into a 1944 battlefield? Well what do you know.

 

Perhaps the designers of the Tog chose to smoke instead of drink their Tea. 



Zinegata #55 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 05:18

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9922 battles
  • 5,425
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View Postnapalm43, on Aug 26 2014 - 06:00, said:

I just finished watching a documentary about when the 3rd army went up against Panthers and had to wait on the Hellcats to save the day since their 75mm guns were just bouncing left and right while the Panthers were chipping away at the Shermans for a loss of 3 tanks at the outset of the battle. Most of Patton's tanks had the 75mm at the time.

 

Which battle? Because I am seriously doubting the veracity of a story involving the 3rd Army having Hellcats while most of its Shermans were still on the 75mm. The Hellcat got to them pretty late; the timeline doesn't fit.


Edited by Zinegata, Aug 26 2014 - 05:20.


cashdash #56 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 05:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 5558 battles
  • 7,254
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

View PostAdmiralTheisman, on Aug 25 2014 - 23:43, said:

 

Perhaps the designers of the Tog chose to smoke instead of drink their Tea. 

 

Now now, let's be fair to the designers of the TOG, they built a tank to fight a 1918 war and it would have been pretty good at it too. They realized that the war they were building a tank for wasn't going to happen and stopped before it hit production.

 

Not so with the Tiger or Panther.



AdmiralTheisman #57 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 06:23

    Captain

  • Players
  • 30786 battles
  • 1,821
  • Member since:
    07-01-2013

It is much easier to get drunk on German beer than high on English tea after all. 



Walter_Sobchak #58 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 06:35

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 236 battles
  • 5,140
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010
Funny thing about the Panther, it's the only tank I can think of that really was created as the result of panic due to the appearance of an enemy vehicle (T-34.)  Its often stated that the Tiger was a response to the T-34 and KV, but development of the Tiger started well before that.  Also, the Tiger development was as much a response to the Char B1 as it was Soviet tanks.  Meanwhile, the Red Army did not come up with the T34-85 in response to the Tiger and Panther.  The T-34/85 had been in consideration before the German "cats" arrived on the scene.  However, after Kursk higher priority was given to the T-34/85 ( and priority was taken away from T-43.)  The Soviets were loathe to do anything that might interrupt production, so it took something like Kursk to impress on them the notion that they needed to up-gun their tanks. The Germans on the other hand were the ones that were constantly having to adjust to meet current circumstances.  The various Marder designs of 1942 are a good example of this.  The Panther was as well, there was no program for a new medium tank prior to the "discovery" of the T-34 and KV by the Wehrmacht in 1941. The Panther was a rush job and it shows.  Granted, it was probably one of the best looking tanks ever made, but it certainly had more than its fair share of teething problems. And unlike some difficult children, it never outgrew most of those teething problems. 

Walter_Sobchak #59 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 06:38

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 236 battles
  • 5,140
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

View PostAdmiralTheisman, on Aug 26 2014 - 01:23, said:

It is much easier to get drunk on German beer than high on English tea after all. 

 

English Pale Ale > German Pilsner any day of the week. 

Daigensui #60 Posted Aug 26 2014 - 06:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 32940 battles
  • 29,988
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

View PostWalter_Sobchak, on Aug 25 2014 - 22:35, said:

The Panther was as well, there was no program for a new medium tank prior to the "discovery" of the T-34 and KV by the Wehrmacht in 1941.

 

It does depend on how you view the VK 2X.0X series of designs. Those could be considered lights or mediums depending on your standards.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users