So not all plans were supporting massive tanks...

------------

In late 1943, before Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer entered production, BMW and Wesserhuette were awarded a contract to design a small tank destroyer - klein Panzerjaeger Rutscher (Sander) but the project was cancelled in February of 1944 after Hetzer was selected. The project was reactivated in January of 1945, and it was decided to continued development of Panzerkleinzerstoerer. The vehicle was to be a light and fast tank destroyer to compete with an American M 18 Hellcat tank destroyer. It was to be armed with PWK 8 H 63 smooth-bore gun firing fin-stabilized projectiles with effective range of 700 meters or regular 75mm KwK L/48 gun. Prototypes were never completed and the end of the war ended any further development.

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/hetzer.htm

--------

found later on this:

http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us/rutscher.htm

The most interesting feature of the “Rutscher” would be its cleverly chosen main armament- two 80mm Rheinmetall Panzerabwehr-Wurfkanone PAW-600 8H63 high/low pressure guns. These were recoilless cannons according to the high/low pressure principle in which the ignition occurs in a high pressure cylinder. By means of a sophisticated nozzle disk, the ignited gas then streams into a low pressure cylinder. Once a certain pressure is reached, the fin-stabilized shell frees itself from the cartridge and exits the smooth-bore barrel. During firing tests, ranges of 2,000 meters were achieved with a muzzle velocity of 550 mps.

Manufacturer: Weserhütte Bad Oeynhausen (mock-up only)

Crew: 2

Fighting Weight: 38.5 tons

Length: 3.55 m (w/o gun) and 4.85 m (with gun)

Width: 1.85 m

Height: 1.36m (over all)

Engine: BMW Type 335 3.5L 6 cylinder @ 90 hp (3,500 rpm),

Transmission: Voith hydraulic-variable

Gearbox: Allklauen ZF 5-25

Speed: 60-70 km/h (est)

Armor: 8-14.5mm (The hull sides were inclined inwards)

Armament: 2 x 80mm Panzerwurfkanone PAW-600 8H63

-------------

Interesting as one book source claimed the weight would be in the region of 5,000 kilograms but it seems it was alot heavier....

__________________

That wheel arrangement looks like a maintenance nightmare.

__________________
Bah!

It looks like a Hetzer but with two guns. Now we have to have room for ammunition for "2" guns. Does'nt make sence.

I found a German site with the following info:

At the end of the site....three different versions?

3t-Fahrzeug von Büssing-NAG
5t-Fahrzeug von Klöckner-Humboldt-Deutz
7,5t-Fahrzeug von Daimler-Benz

2 man crew, 8cm PK 8 H 63 and a MG.

http://panzer-archiv.de/forum/print....c4137b84766fc9

__________________

Looks to me like another desperate attempt by the Germans to create some kind of wonder weapon.

Why two Barrels?

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

Or cuts it by half. You have 2 crew members, which means one is a driver and the other is the gunner, loader and tank commander manning two guns. How slow is the rate of fire?

__________________

American by birth, TEXAN by the grace of GOD!

Yea, you wonder why they were going to build it.

A bit on the PAW 600 high-low pressure gun:

This weapon is a smoothbore gun that was designed as a cheap expedient to provide infantry divisions with a decent anti-tank weapon.
The round it fires consists of a 105mm howitzer casing cut down to about half height with a heavy steel plate welded on the face of it. This plate has a series of small holes (venturii) drilled in it. A short spigot is fitted to the plate. On the spigot a modified 8.1cm mortar bomb is attached such that when fired it detaches from the spigot. The mortar bomb is fitted with a hollow charge warhead. There was nothing sophisticated about it. It was hobbled togeather from existing bits of stuff.
Accuracy in tests was 90% hits could be obtained on a stationary 1m x 1m target at 500 meters. At double the range hits on the same size target are largely blind luck. Well, that makes it better than a panzerschrek at least!

Also, 38.5 tons and no more than 14.5mm of armor?! That's alot of weight for paper thin armor.

This tank also looks alot like a US project proposed by the Rheem corporation in 1953. This called for a two man tank armed with two 105mm "rocket guns" in a small oscillating turret. It too went nowhere.

More than a hint of the ONTOS about it too:

__________________
"Wars cannot be fought with dream stuff" - Sir Percy Hobart.

Hmmmm, Rheem makes aircondition units now-adays.

looks cool, I'd rather have that then the biggen's

__________________
Time is only enemy you'll never get rid of.

Why not a "Mini/Gatling-gun" type set-up, with rotating barrels. Then all it would have to do is pull about 6 "Box Cars" (as Framer said) of ammunition.

The Japanese and their suicide personel had the most effective/economical means of destroying tanks (credited with 1/2 total losses on Okinawa/Iwo Jima), though distasteful/morbid, not to mention all to final for the attacker.

__________________
"Danger Will Robinson!"