Hi, What difference would it have made if Germany could have fielded the armour they wanted in 39? As in, that the Panzer III was fitted with a 50mm AT gun and the Panzer IV was being made in proper numbers. Also that that the Panzer III and IV were not blighted with design and then build problems so that the Panzer I and II were never needed. Whilst I can see no difference in Poland I think that a better equiped panzer armour in france could have resulted in the capture of the BEF. But Russia is where the difference would be. An upgunned P3 would be able to engage T-34's and the possesion of more P3's and 4's would have resulted in a faster camapign possably allowing the capture of Moscow any other views on this? FNG
It seems to me that it wouldn't have made that much difference. the things that stopped the German advance in Russia (despite what the Discovery or History channel might say) wasn't the T-34. by the time that large numbers of T-34s were deployed the advance had already stalled. Weather, logistics and vast distances, not to mention some poor leadership decisions had more to do with the loss of initiative in the East. France might have fallen sooner ( if that is possible) but the failure to destroy the BEF was apparently a leadership decision at the highest level and not due to lack of capability.
but would germany have advanced faster across Russia if they had upgunned 3's and more 3's and 4's replacing all 1's and 2's? FNG
Germanies high command was worried as the allies fielded far more tanks and tanks of better quality than Germany. These short comings were shown when the Brits countered with Matilida and the French under de Gaul countered with their own armoured troops. However these were two little two late but they did show up German weakneses in their armour. FNG
The probelm IIRC wasn't particularly the speed of the Panzers but the speed the foot infantry marching behind them. Unless you can entirely mechanise the Infantry then regardless of how fast your tanks can go your advance is going to be largely limited to how fast the Landsers can march.
The influence of these minor technological differences on warfare on a strategic scale is minimal. This is proven by the fact that the winning side during WW2 always had more or less inferior equipment, a piece of information that has often been remarked upon. An army, and even a single armoured division, consists of many thousands of different vehicles, only a few of which are MBTs or other frontline fighting vehicles. Upgrading your MBTs only will not make your army any faster; its pace will still be that of the slowest mode of transportation in use. Since the Germans were often advancing through France and Russia at a pace their own infantry could barely keep up with, better tanks could hardly have made a difference even by making the fighting easier.
