Ah, back to the subject of the most surviveable tank...
Quote:
|
Bad Russian command & control tactics doomed many T-34's.
|
This is a good point in regards to the T-34 (and welcome, KG!). When looking at the battlefield surviveability (got that, Erich?) of a tank, I would say we should stay away from looking at the actual use during the war. This is a perfect example- early in the war, the russians were not especially skilled at armored tactics. This led to many instances where tanks were essentially sent to the slaughter in hopes of overwhelming the germans. Even later in the war, russian generals were notorious for having little regards for casualites- including tanks.
BUT- at least in my opinion, these aspects are related to HOW a certain tank was used- not the tank itself. If we are assessing only the tank itself, we should simply look at the tank on a one-for-one basis.
And even in this case, I would tend to stay away from manufacturing and numbers- IF, that is, we are still looking at battlefield surviveability.
Let's look back at the thread topic-
Quote:
|
did one have a better chance of surviving that the other?
|
My take was to look at each tank on an individual basis, and asses the question- would one have a better chance of surviving than another?
IMO, the T-34 wins out in nearly all the categories, ESPECIALLY if we consider the T-34/85.
Mechanical reliability- T-34's only competition would be the Sherman.
Mobility- again, only competition with T-34 would be the Sherman maybe...
Armor- some tanks certainly had more, but the T-34 had enough sloped armor to compete. And in many of the cases of a tank with more armor, mobility was sacrificed (unless we use Erich's first King Tiger).
Combat Effectiveness- Early war, the T-34 had no real competition. By the later years of the war, the T-34/85, other tanks had slightly better guns and optics, but the T-34/85 certainly could hold it's own. The 85mm gun could almost compete with the 88, and could relaitvely easily take out MOST enemy tanks.
If we look at something like the Tiger I- it hads thick armor, a good gun, radio, and good optics. but Mobility- almost none in rough country. Reliability- even less than mobility.