First German Tank Killer?

I found this while googleling earlier, quite possibly the first German tank destroyer:



The Pzkw Jg 1, armed with a 47mm Czech gun fitted onto a Pzkw 1 chassis. I wish I could provide more info, but this picture is all I could find. To be honest, I'm not even sure if that gun is a Czechoslovakian 47mm, but it is the only gun that I know of that looks like the one in the picture.s

I'm sure someone will be able to provide us with more info, but its a neat little thing to look at none the less.

 

An additional photograph:


Christian

 

It´s a Czechoslovakian gun indeed. A handful of Pz.I(200 or so) were converted and used in France, North Africa and Russia. In 1940 the Skoda 47mm kanon P.U.V.vz.36. was the most powerful AT-gun in the german arsenal. Like the ZIS-30 it is another example of an improvised TD/SP AT-gun.

http://www.freeweb.hu/gva/weapons/czech_guns.html

 

interesting use of language 'GOOGLEING' hilarios :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Any one know the performance of that thing?

 

I might hae some information by tommorow

 

Tank killer

This veh

 

Based on German specifications 47(APC) to 58mm(APCR) at 500m. Roughly the same as the german 50mm/L42 or the french 47mm/L53 guns. Of course the 50mm/L42 gun was introduced after the campaign against France.

 

looks pretty small, with a low silhouette, so it wouldn´t be to easy to hit this Panzerjäger I., I guess.




There was also a flak-version based on the chassis of the Pzkpfw I.





Best wishes,
Che.

 

That was a field conversion, not at official one.

 

other early tank destroyers:



Marienwagen with 5cm gun, 1918 (20 on the front before armistice)





12t zgkw with flak18 20 build and used in France in 1940

and this one a real missed chance imho:



panzerselbstfahrlafetteIII: 75 L40 gun on 5T half track (note that this differs in form from the later armored haftracks by having the engine at the rear. Build in 1934. 2 used by afrika corps. the gun had a mv of 700m/sec an i presume it could easily have taken a 75mm pak40 later. turret had ful traverse.
I think this vehicle, if taken in production, might have given the wermacht a much needed anti tank punch at a reasonable price and with good mobility especially for barbarossa. Any opinions ?

Aglooka

 

? A 75mm/L40 gun made in 1934. The date must be wrong?!

Yes, but before Barbarossa KV-1 and T-34 were unknown in the west, so there is just no need for such a powerful AT-gun. Known russian tanks could easily be killed with a 37mm gun.

 

Itsd mentioned several times in the publication (Spielberger, halbkettenfahrzeuge), but 1934 is the date of the requirement not the build date, sorry for that.
Given that the 7.5 feldkanone 16 had a barrel of 36cal length, it seems not too outrageous or impossible to go to a 40 cal barrel in 1934. But i think this vehicle was meant as an artillery support vehicle not a tank hunter. Anyway, in 1936 two variants were build as tank hunters with the 37 mm flak in the turret.

Given that the vehicle was presumably intended as an artillery support vehicle , itcould have been build for the infantery divisions. That it would make a nice tank destroyer later is just a happy coïncidence (as happened with the Russian 76mm guns)

Aglooka

 

Except for the flak 18/36 88mm of course.

 

Yes, but field guns usually have a much lower muzzle velocity. That limits their usefulness in an AT-role. Such a vehicle would be an interim solution, like the M3(halftrack) or the Marders.
The StugIII was the better sollution. Even the short 75mm gun could fire effective HE and it was well enough protected, to follow infantry into the battle, if indirect artillery support is required, 100/105mm guns are the better choice. They have more range and firepower.
So if this 75mm gun is being put into any vehicle it should be put into the Stug.

 

indeed, the stug should have priority. But i think the vehicle above would have been a nice extra. I guess if you divert some of the armoured halftrack production to this vehicle you could get a nice ani tank asset at a good price.
Of course since this vehicle never went into production, it might seem much better in theory than in practice and there might be alot of hidden faults with it.

aglooka

 

That "thing" can penetrate a 55mm thick armor over a range of 500 meter and had a maximum efficent range of about 1500 and could penetrate 30mm of armor over that range.

Source: http://wwiivehicles.com/germany/guns.html

 

The Invincible Tiger

During the D-Day landings the Allied tank divisions encountered the 'Tiger' as they advance. Of course the tanks made a showdown. A single Tiger against an entire amoured division. Everyone would think that the Germans would end up like :kill: . But after destroying the amoured division and taking more than 293 shots and suffering transmission problems, the Tiger still manages to drive for another 40 miles to safety

 

Hello Constantine, welcome to the forum. I see we have another Tiger myth to defuse here.

Could someone with a little more ready knowledge of Villers-Bocage be of help here? I don't have the numbers in order myself I'm afraid.

 

Re: The Invincible Tiger

here we go again!!! :roll:
a tank is a tank, no superman :angry:
also a tiger was rare, due to low production numb. and combat losses, no fuel supply

another tiger fan that needs reeducation