Jump to content


If Germany only used Panzer IV tanks instead pf building Tigers and Panthers


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

Daigensui #21 Posted Oct 04 2016 - 20:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 27483 battles
  • 29,586
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

View PostLegiondude, on Oct 04 2016 - 10:16, said:

IIRC Daigensui is of the informed opinion that due to the Craftsman style of production German companies vigorously held onto even to the end, it's actually not that easy to simply build cheaper equipment and get higher output. So from that sense, if you could only build a few vehicles anyway, the Big Cats were an "improvement"

 

Basically. There was also the issue that the man-hour calculation is out of whack for the Germans due to the use of slave labor. It's one thing to force the old, the women, and the children under the threat of extinction to work 12 hour shifts on tasks that need only a bit of training. It's completely another to have massive bottlenecks across the system due to having slaves work on relatively complicated tasks that not only would require long training, but can be easily sabotaged without notice. In order for the Germans to have the capacity for higher production, you need to have changed things starting from 1933 at the latest, when Adolf came to power. 



Donward #22 Posted Oct 04 2016 - 22:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 40089 battles
  • 7,067
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-29-2011

Is this the garbage that passes for content these days on what is left of the smoldering ruins of the HAV?

 

Boy. It's a great thing all the regulars got chased out of here.


Edited by Donward, Oct 04 2016 - 22:16.


Anlushac11 #23 Posted Oct 04 2016 - 22:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 33229 battles
  • 2,119
  • Member since:
    05-25-2013

View PostDonward, on Oct 04 2016 - 16:16, said:

Is this the garbage that passes for content these days on what is left of the smoldering ruins of the HAV?

 

Boy. It's a great thing all the regulars got chased out of here.

 

Is it possible for you to respond to a thread without crapping on everyone else and trying to stir up a crapstorm? 

 

 All you ever do is come into every post mentioning anything German and try to cause trouble while adding nothing to the conversation.


Edited by Anlushac11, Oct 04 2016 - 22:30.


Donward #24 Posted Oct 04 2016 - 23:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 40089 battles
  • 7,067
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-29-2011

View PostAnlushac11, on Oct 04 2016 - 13:28, said:

 

Is it possible for you to respond to a thread without crapping on everyone else and trying to stir up a crapstorm? 

 

 All you ever do is come into every post mentioning anything German and try to cause trouble while adding nothing to the conversation.

You mean because I call out garbage that has already been covered here in the HAV YEARS ago? Is it so very hard to just scroll down and look at the sections where this garbage has been debunked dozens of times?

Or is it because you're frosty about being called out for being wrong every time you open your yap about ANYTHING on any topic? 



railer1999 #25 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 00:11

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 12295 battles
  • 323
  • [CSA-1] CSA-1
  • Member since:
    08-05-2014

View Postsqazx, on Oct 04 2016 - 16:34, said:

If Germany had of NOT Invaded Russia for another year .....

we might all be speaking German

 

If they had of Perfected the Jet and Rockets................

 

That's completely on LUCK.

 

Remember Hitler thought that Russians were just rednecks who couldn't invent weapons. Even Hitler's Generals agreed with that. So not invading Russia was on luck and Hitler was unlucky.



Dogsoldier6 #26 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 00:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 53721 battles
  • 2,478
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011

View PostDonward, on Oct 04 2016 - 22:16, said:

Is this the garbage that passes for content these days on what is left of the smoldering ruins of the HAV?

 

Boy. It's a great thing all the regulars got chased out of here.

 

Yawn....................................

collimatrix #27 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 00:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 12102 battles
  • 2,786
  • Member since:
    02-01-2011

View PostDonward, on Oct 04 2016 - 23:19, said:

You mean because I call out garbage that has already been covered here in the HAV YEARS ago? 

 

You mean like this one and this one and this one and this one?

 

This is pretty pathetic by comparison.  There's hardly anything new.  Well, there's this bit of lunacy:

 

View PostPrinzEugen85, on Oct 04 2016 - 17:03, said:

Their production actually made sense for what it was. Germany was always short of rubber and fuel, but had more high grade steel than they knew what to do with, due to the occupation of Norway. So one Tiger is carrying more steel (and rolled nickel armor), but consuming less fuel than several Pz4s.

 

If that's the case then why were they trying to conserve ordnance-grade steel by making their rifles' receivers out of mild sheet?  And if the big cats' armor was such hot stuff, why did it crumble like a cookie when hit with HE?

Let's make it a drinking game.  Take a shot whenever someone says any of the following demonstrably untrue things:

 

-The Germans just had to hold out a little bit longer, because they were right on the edge of developing nuclear weapons!

-The ME-262 was superior because it had swept wings that reduce drag!

-Axial compressors are better than centrifugal ones!

-If the war had gone on just a bit longer, the Germans would have had E-series/Maus/XYZ tracked napkinwaffe!



Mechanize #28 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 01:00

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 1428 battles
  • 2,844
  • Member since:
    08-04-2010

View PostPrinzEugen85, on Oct 04 2016 - 09:03, said:

Their production actually made sense for what it was. Germany was always short of rubber and fuel, but had more high grade steel than they knew what to do with, due to the occupation of Norway. So one Tiger is carrying more steel (and rolled nickel armor), but consuming less fuel than several Pz4s.

 

 

View Postsqazx, on Oct 04 2016 - 09:34, said:

If Germany had of NOT Invaded Russia for another year .....

we might all be speaking German

 

If they had of Perfected the Jet and Rockets................

 

No, more among the lines of "If Germany waited another year to invade the USSR, they would've come up against much more prepared and and better/more thoroughly equipped soldiers and got stomped harder then they did in reality."

 

Or you could try and draw the war out a bit longer....which leads to "all of your major cities in the German heartland getting the taste of the atom bomb. GGWP"

 

I always love it when people think Germany could ended the war on even decent terms, let alone conquer the world.


Edited by Mechanize, Oct 05 2016 - 01:09.


Donward #29 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 01:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 40089 battles
  • 7,067
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-29-2011
But MUH KRUPPSTAHL!

railer1999 #30 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 02:17

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 12295 battles
  • 323
  • [CSA-1] CSA-1
  • Member since:
    08-05-2014

View Postcollimatrix, on Oct 04 2016 - 23:58, said:

 

You mean like this one and this one and this one and this one?

 

This is pretty pathetic by comparison.  There's hardly anything new.  Well, there's this bit of lunacy:

 



railer1999 #31 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 02:18

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 12295 battles
  • 323
  • [CSA-1] CSA-1
  • Member since:
    08-05-2014
Didn't know that there were multiple discussions that was related to this.

EnsignExpendable #32 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 02:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
If Germany only used Panthers, the spearheads of the German invasion would peter out in July of 1941 at the earliest as opposed to October. Marshal Kulik would wear the world's biggest "I told you so" smile as Soviet factories, unmolested by evacuation, begin cranking out 107 mm and 85 mm guns, T-50 tanks, and KV-3s. The Red Army can perform mobilization on its own timetable, as pre-war plans dictated. Without a wide buffer to trade for time, the Germans are forced to fight in unfriendly, unprepared territory, their industry struggling to replace even a small fraction of the tanks they lost on the front. Red Armymen wash their boots in the Atlantic Ocean by 1942.

Mechanize #33 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 03:32

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 1428 battles
  • 2,844
  • Member since:
    08-04-2010

View PostMuzzle_Maus, on Oct 04 2016 - 07:47, said:

Hi Railer,

 

OK I will take the bait.  I am a better WW2 Armor historian than a a player.  I agree with your premise that if the Krauts had could have stuck with pressing for more production of the Pz IV family. Instead Der Fuhrer, Albert Speer and OKW  pressed the development of Heavy and larger Medium tank, they could have fielded more tanks if they had not.  the 7.5 cm L48 gun was fine at penning Allied tanks.  But you have to consider the scare of running into the initial KVs and Sloped armor T-34, and that the only effective gun against it was the 8,8 Flak.  So "we" need a chassis now that carry the 8.8.  Things evolve from the need for a better tank from there.  But in either reality a nation the size of Germany would never have met the production needs in tanks or aircraft against the industrial capacity of either the US or USSR.   

 

Also to note as a waste of German military resources was the formation of some 20 Luftwaffe Feld Division being a total waste per Field Marshal von Manstein because those men would have been better trained and used if they where drafted into Heer Division.  Pretty much the Nazi war machine its own worst enemy.  This was recognized by Allied Supreme Command as well. You need lots of men and machines in a war of attrition.

But a good question regardless.  :) 

 

Ok, this one isn't terribly wrong, but, alas, it is.

 

The 8.8mm FlaK guns were one of the few weapons that could take out Soviet tanks from 1941-1942 at good distances, but the Tiger wasn't made to counter them, the Tiger was built as a breakthrough tank to get through thick Soviet fortifications and emplacements, the 88mm L/56 made sense here since the HE shell it could fire was good at this, having a good ballistic trajectory and decent armor penetration for it's AP shells for the time were just bonuses.

 

The guns that had trouble during the initial invasion were the 3.7cm and short 5cm guns on the Panzer III which were nearly useless unless you get a flank shot at close range with the latter, the long 5cm could penetrate from a longer distance, mainly when Panzers and AT guns using it had Tungsten cored APCR (a commidity which soon became very rare in German supply so this didn't last long as using it for machine tools was far more useful then using it to send downrange where you wouldn't recover said material), and of course the 7.5cm/L24 infantry support gun on the Panzer IV at the time was all but useless unless it actually managed to hit with it's rather primitive HEAT shell.

 

heavier use of the StuG III, supplementing the long Pak 38 5cm/l60 with the heavier, but necessary PaK 40, along with role swapping the Panzer III and Panzer IV so the latter could use the stronger 7.5cm L/43 and later the L/48 (which basically was the PaK 40's gun modified for AFV use) and giving armor upgrades to the Panzer IV overtime were the real solutions here for trying to deal with the T-34 and KV-1, which unlike the PaK 38, didn't need APCR to penetrate said tanks at combat ranges.

 

The Tiger was made to serve a different role altogether.


Edited by Mechanize, Oct 05 2016 - 06:54.


Walter_Sobchak #34 Posted Oct 05 2016 - 06:19

    Major

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

The issue of what type of tanks the Germans should have built is really not all that important.  The bigger issue revolves around the question of when Germany should have maximized panzer production.  Germany didn't prioritize panzer production until Hitler launched the late war Panzer Program increasing tank production.  If you look at the early war production figures, they are amazingly low.  While German industry was certainly not efficient, they certainly could have produced more tanks in the period of 1939-1942 if they had wanted to.  And it's this period that it would have actually mattered.  Here are the numbers:

 

1939 - 370

1940 - 1,888

1941 - 3,623

1942 - 5,530

1943 - 11,601

1944 - 18,956

1945 - 4,406

 

Take a look at those numbers.  In 1941, they managed to produce fewer tanks than they did in 1945!  The year they invaded the Soviet Union, they produced fewer tanks than they did in the four months of 1945 as their factories were being bombed and overrun.  And remember, in the period of 1939 to 1941 they are increasing the number of Panzer Divisions.  By the crucial year of 1942 their Panzer forces were depleted to the point that they had to strip out one Panzer battalion from each of the Panzer divisions in Army Group Center and North and give those to the divisions in Army Group South.  And frankly, after the failed 1942 campaign in Southern Russian, it really doesn't matter what sort of tanks the Germans build, they are not going to win.  They tried to fight the war on the cheap in the first few pivotal years, at least in regard to tank production.  And it cost them dearly.  



Shanzival #35 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 19:12

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9301 battles
  • 557
  • [PANSY] PANSY
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011
The biggest difference likely would have been where Little Boy was dropped.

It might have resulted in less of a waste of resources but the ens result would have been a question of When and At What Cost?

There is no question as to Who Would Lose.

GAJohnnie #36 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 19:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 9132 battles
  • 6,285
  • [_BOT_] _BOT_
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

View PostPresident_Romney, on Oct 07 2016 - 13:12, said:

There is no question as to Who Would Lose.

Excellent scene from Band of Brothers petty much explains it all.

 



Zinegata #37 Posted Oct 12 2016 - 09:44

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9569 battles
  • 5,380
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View Postrailer1999, on Oct 04 2016 - 22:07, said:

So far many of the tank documentaries like Nazi Mega structures and Greatest Military Clashes indicated that Germany should have worked on Panzer IVs and not Tigers and Panthers(Funny fact: I never see them criticising the Pershing or the IS tank). Was relying on the Panzer IV a better choice for Germany or are these documentaries just spreading out propaganda?

 

Anything was better than mass-producing Panthers or Tigers. Neither of those vehicles were sustainable. The real cost of the vehicles is the running/maintenance cost - and in this regard the performance of the Panther/Tiger was abysmal. A Sherman tank battalion of 60 tanks could be supported using just 30 trucks. A Tiger battalion with 45 tanks needed 130 trucks to keep it going. Yes, one hundred and thirty. A Tiger battalion essentially consumed a Sherman Division worth of resources.

 

That said the Panzer IV was probably not quite as good as just sticking to the Panzer III chassis and the Stug. Torsion bar suspension made the Mk III extremely reliable to the point it was the only German vehicle to be captured and kit-bashed into an Allied variant - the SU-76i. Everything else was too fragile and fell apart before it could be given this kind of treatment.


Edited by Zinegata, Oct 12 2016 - 09:44.


Zinegata #38 Posted Oct 12 2016 - 10:04

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9569 battles
  • 5,380
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View PostWalter_Sobchak, on Oct 05 2016 - 13:19, said:

The issue of what type of tanks the Germans should have built is really not all that important.  The bigger issue revolves around the question of when Germany should have maximized panzer production.  Germany didn't prioritize panzer production until Hitler launched the late war Panzer Program increasing tank production.  If you look at the early war production figures, they are amazingly low.  While German industry was certainly not efficient, they certainly could have produced more tanks in the period of 1939-1942 if they had wanted to.  And it's this period that it would have actually mattered.  Here are the numbers:

 

1939 - 370

1940 - 1,888

1941 - 3,623

1942 - 5,530

1943 - 11,601

1944 - 18,956

1945 - 4,406

 

Take a look at those numbers.  In 1941, they managed to produce fewer tanks than they did in 1945!  The year they invaded the Soviet Union, they produced fewer tanks than they did in the four months of 1945 as their factories were being bombed and overrun.  And remember, in the period of 1939 to 1941 they are increasing the number of Panzer Divisions.  By the crucial year of 1942 their Panzer forces were depleted to the point that they had to strip out one Panzer battalion from each of the Panzer divisions in Army Group Center and North and give those to the divisions in Army Group South.  And frankly, after the failed 1942 campaign in Southern Russian, it really doesn't matter what sort of tanks the Germans build, they are not going to win.  They tried to fight the war on the cheap in the first few pivotal years, at least in regard to tank production.  And it cost them dearly.  

 

The issue here though is not really the lack of tanks, but rather what else the Germans had been spending their resources on. Sure the Germans had fewer tanks and smaller tanks than the French and the Russians. But from 1940 to 1942 the Germans outproduced their opponents in ammunition - meaning that the fewer German guns and tanks could in fact keep shooting for longer and destroy more enemy targets - and it wasn't until 1943 that they began to get seriously out-metaled in the ammunition department. Unsurprisingly, the Germans started complaining about how unfair it was for the Allies to be able to bury them in ordnance at this point and they kept blaming the "overwhelming Allied material superiority" for their defeats.

 

Which really demonstrates why so many of the historical counter-factuals on the Internet and Hearts-of-Ironing a German victory is so utterly meaningless. Most folks don't even realize that tank numbers or statistics don't actually matter. Having ten tanks without gas or ammunition is meaningless against one tank that has both.

 

The war was ultimately won and lost not by any fancy technologies, technical adjustments, or tactics. Rather it boiled down to the simple and cruel math of which side still had bullets and someone left to shoot them at the end. The German side and their fanboys like to pretend that they weren't subscribing to this ruthless math and had somehow perfected some kind of higher military art (superior tactics! superior doctrine! superior engineering - yada yada yada) - but the actual ammunition production and expenditure figures show that they were just brute-forcing it along in the early years of the war; just like how the Allies did in the latter part of the war too.


Edited by Zinegata, Oct 12 2016 - 10:05.


Jarms48 #39 Posted Oct 12 2016 - 12:40

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 117 battles
  • 1,304
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostGAJohnnie, on Oct 08 2016 - 04:15, said:

Excellent scene from Band of Brothers petty much explains it all.

 

 

I'm sure the Germans in 1939 and 1940 could have said a similar thing to the Polish, the Netherlands, and Belgium. "Say hello to Porsche, and Maybach! You resisted against our invasion, what were you thinking?" Lol. :P


Edited by Jarms48, Oct 12 2016 - 12:40.


EnsignExpendable #40 Posted Oct 12 2016 - 15:18

    Major

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

View PostZinegata, on Oct 12 2016 - 03:44, said:

 

Anything was better than mass-producing Panthers or Tigers. Neither of those vehicles were sustainable. The real cost of the vehicles is the running/maintenance cost - and in this regard the performance of the Panther/Tiger was abysmal. A Sherman tank battalion of 60 tanks could be supported using just 30 trucks. A Tiger battalion with 45 tanks needed 130 trucks to keep it going. Yes, one hundred and thirty. A Tiger battalion essentially consumed a Sherman Division worth of resources.

 

That said the Panzer IV was probably not quite as good as just sticking to the Panzer III chassis and the Stug. Torsion bar suspension made the Mk III extremely reliable to the point it was the only German vehicle to be captured and kit-bashed into an Allied variant - the SU-76i. Everything else was too fragile and fell apart before it could be given this kind of treatment.

 

Not just one variant, two: SG-122 and SU-76I. The SG-122 wasn't very numerous though. The SU-76I also suffered from its donor chassis: I read documents where there are complaints that tanks coming in have very unreliable engines and that the rubber of the road wheels is such poor quality that driving faster than 25 kph will damage them.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users