Tigers - were they worth it?

and why did they have to build so many shermans and t34's ? Cause they got destroyed in large nrs. Germany might have been less powerful in numbers, but don't forget the german AT guns. they are responsible for MANY kills. The 88mm gun was devastating and the PAK40 took its share as wel i reckon. Fact remains that german tanks were superior to most allied tanks (except maybe JSIII and Pershing)

 

Facing a Tiger with a Sherman would make me want to turn tail and get my mates...
Now then-I know this is gonna raise alot of controversy,but for the role it played,you don't need any more than a T34/85-it could knock out most tanks(ok-at a shorter ranges......) BUT it could be maintained and operated by idiots,have exellent mobility/reliability,and have adequate firepower/armour.If fitted with the same sights and used by the same men(T34's were used amass by the Nazi's too) and formation/tatics as the Germans-you've got to ask-WHY bother with the Tigers/Panthers-however splendid they might be........

 

Yep, Dinger.
Allied AT guns killed many German AFV's also. One of the best example of this is in the book "Nuts" about the Battle of the Bulge. Nice pics of 3 Panthers knocked out, still in perfect formation, their barrels drooping and soot marks on the paint from the fire. Destroyed by a combination of hidden AT guns and Shermans. Another great pic of a Panther upended off a roadway with a hole in its side from a 75mm Sherman.
Panthers and Tigers were superior to their Allied counterparts but woefully outnumbered. The Panther had no equal on the battlefield but, at no time in the war were the Germans ever able to operate 1000 at one time. IIRC, the most Tigers ever serving at one time was around 300. Spread these numbers all over Europe and you get? Not much. Never enough. Panthers and Tigers were grouped into Heavy battalions and brigades attatched to certain Panzer divisions. When one of these units wasnt around, which when you take into consideration their numbers was rare, a Sherman is an equal and a T-34/85 was the King of the battlefield. There were entire sections of the East front without any German tanks. This is where the T-40's, 60's and such were used, against infantry, not against tanks. Germans killed many Allied AFV's with towed AT guns because they HAD to, not because they "just dont feel like sendin' out the tanks today Heiny".
The Germans would have been much better served producing copies of the T-34 with minor improvements, as some in the Army Ordinance Office thought. A T-34 with a cupola, Maybach gasoline engine, L/48 gun(would arrive earlier than Panther, only later aquiring the L/70), and many upgrades arriving in early '42.
And again, its not as if the Tiger and Panther were indestructable Lords of the Battlefield. Their tracks, vision equipment, optics, and other equipment could be damaged just as easy as any other tank. Their armor was in no way impenetrable and even if your shell doesn't penetrate, spalling can kill the crew.

 

Whilst reading a few books about the Allied thrust from Normandy through to the Rhineland, I get the impression that due to the total air superiority of the Allies, Tiger tanks were only good for anti-tank purposes (Ardennes offensive not-withstanding). They would position themselves at junctions or corners and blast away at anything that moved. The Tiger was a remarkable machine that scared the bejesus out of infantry and Sherman tank drivers, but to be used almost solely in a purely defensive role must have been frustrating for Tiger Commanders.

 

Madcap, they would come from Henschel and Porsche, where most did get built at. At least 90 Porsche's were used in operation Citedel, if im not mistaken, and had untested crews so they did not near as well as expected.

The Maus would make an awsome tank as static defense. It would be impossible to knock it out from the front and most likely so from the sides.

I agree, getting the Maus to where it could be used was and would be a nightmare and I wont argut that. The main thing I wanted to say--bearing in mind that the Maus had already been in position, that it would be a very deadly "pillbox" to deal with.

These would be dug-in and as their size demands it, they would most assuredly, have Infantry support. There is nothing that couldnt be knocked-out or destroyed but this could come close to it.

Ive never heard of the E-100, can anyone elaborate?

 

In 1943 the Germans came to the conclusion that they could never produce enough tanks producing 4 distinctly different models of tanks at once. PIII, PIV, Panther, and Tiger were all rolling off assembly lines at this time. An ingenious solution was reached to solve this problem, the E-series.
The E stands for Entwicklungtypen=Standard type. The E tanks were planned as six tanks that would be very close in design, designed for ease of manufacture, and sharing as many parts as possible. They would be the:
E5,5 ton light tank

E10,10ton light Tank destroyer.

The E5 and E10 would be identical vehicles, the E10 being a turretless model equipped with a L/43 75mm gun, the E5 would have a 20mm canon or L/60.

The E25,25 ton,medium tank destroyer would be an enlarged version of the E10 with an L/70 gun.

The E50,50 ton, tank would replace the Panther and sport the same armament and protection

The E75 would replace the Tiger and sport similar armament and protection

The E100 would be a 100 ton Super Tank, King of the battle field. Armed with a 125mm main gun.

The E tank's were to be made of mostly prefabricated pieces that could be used to make any one of the tanks. Example, the glacis of the E25 would be the same piece the E50 uses as side turret piece, etc. Generic pieces would fly off assembly lines and workers would build whatever type was most needed. Only 3 engines would be used for all six types, all using the same fuel pump, generators, water pumps etc.
When the E plan was initially proposed German factories starting with Adlerwerke, were supposed to switch to the E plan during '44, boosting German AFV production to 4,500/month by July '45(almost US levels).
Mockups and prototypes were started late '43 early '44 but no real progress was getting made. By mid '44 it was clear that the Germans could not afford the down time that would be required to retool factories to the E plan standard. Germany had to have every vehicle they could wring out just to stay alive, they had no luxury to look towards the future.
The only E vehicle that made it to prototype stage was the E100, the rest never made it past the drawing board or mock ups.

 

For Tim: It would have been much cheaper to build a good pillbox, but unfortunately(for the Germans) Hitler always insisted on attacking instead of building defenses--which was stupid-to say the least.

Most likely then never thought of the Maus as just a total stagnant defensive weapon, but might have been better off had they done so. It too would have been very wise to have made many such obstacles for defensive operations but, then again, they had Hitler in charge.

These defenses could not have possible stopped the allies, but would have bloodied their noses much more than what did happen. Of course, if these defenses had been made, im sure that most of these men would have wanted a way to escape, if possible.

Using Maus type turrets might not have been such a bad idea. Heh he, its lucky for the allies that the Germans didnt have you around to give them these ideas

For Tallyrand: Excellent information. Im as Herr Rommel is, am interested to know where you got this info from???

 

The best source in my posession for this info is:"Panzerkampfwagen Maus und andere deutsche Panzerprojekte" by Sawodny and Bracher,1978. Its in German, but translated copies exist, Im just not fortunate enough to have found one George Forty’s Osprey book “Tanks”,1994, has a small section on them, as does Peter Chamberlains “Tanks of the World 1915 to 1945”,1972. The two latter are in my opinion the two most concise tank books ever produced and together can answer just about any question.
In my opinion the E plan(which went farther then just tanks, it envisioned hanomags, armored cars, trucks, ost tractors, etc to come under this umbrella standard)was just a pipe dream of Speers. Mid '43 is to late to introduce such a far reaching program, altering production methods for almost everything produced.
Again, had the E plan(or similar plan)been introduced earlier in the war, say fall 1940 under Todt,and fully implemented by summer '42 it would be a possible war winner.

[ 29 August 2001: Message edited by: talleyrand ]

 

The E100 itself closely resembles a Konigstiger, with extra side skirt armor plates which are removable using jibs carried on the vehicle. The single prototype was never fully completed when captured by the UK. The E100 was being constructed by Henschel, and while it was being designed and built had bloated to the point that the prototype actually weighed 137tons, over a 1/3 heavier than initially designed. Avoiding the E plan by adding on non-interchangeable equipment/parts. Shows the follow through Speer had with the program.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by C.Evans:
Thats true but, you have to admit that the Tiger 1's and 2's and the King Tigers were some very powerful cats. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excuse me, C., but the Tiger II and the King Tiger were one and the same. If you'll allow me, as a first timer, to toss in my own 2 pfennigs, the Tiger series was a waste of resources and the existence of the Tiger battalions diluted manpower that was badly needed for the divisional Panzer regiments. My dream tank of the war is the Panther II--the Panther's speed and lighter weight coupled with the 88mm KwK43, and hopefully in a more serviceable package. Lacking that, I'll have to go with the Panther G.

Your ob't servant,
Paul

 

Dear Paul, first I want to say welcome aboard. Thanks for correcting me. One thing that I have heard of is that there was either a King Tiger, or a Royal King Tiger tank. I dont remember where or when I read this, but I do not recall it being just a Tiger II tank.

After I make my new change of address, I will try and remember to look up the written sources I have for all classes of Tiger Tanks. The author might be incorrect, but I think there were at least 3 classes of Tiger. The last one might have been a proposed prototype??

But I did err on naming the Tiger 2 and King Tiger as two different cats. Thanks for the correction.

 

Mr. Evans,

An excellent place (I have found in my experience, anyway) to go for German AFV specs is www.achtungpanzer.com.

-Tim

 

Hey, C., the "third" Tiger could be the Tiger (P) "Elefant" heavy Jagdpanzer. I'm very sure the Tiger II, King Tiger, and Royal Tiger were all the same tank.

Your ob't servant,
Paul

 

Dear Smokestack, thanks for the link, I will check it out.

Dear Paul, you are most likely correct on the "3rd" Tiger. The auther I had b3ased what I said about it, has been known form having not-so-accurate of info in some of his books.

I do have some good info on Tigers but my books are in storage out of town and I dont know just when I will have access to them to check for sure. When I do find something out, I will post it on this site.

PS, I dont mind being correted when need be, so if you find other things by me thats not correct--by all means--correct me.

 

Here is a link with pictures(artist conceptualized) of 3 of the E tanks. Plus drawings and pics of models of the E100.
Check it out guys. http://members.tripod.com/~fingolfen/eh.html

 

Excellent, excellent!! I just spent about 90 minutes looking there.

I was surprised that they did not show an actual photo of a Maus. The one im talking about is oft used in books and had already been captured and is seen without its tracks.

Damn good site though

 

I liked the pics of the models, though, C. I can live without a real photo of the "Maus that never roared", seeing how nicely done the models were--all of them.

Your ob't servant,
Paul

 

How many tons was a maus. Some one told me that it was too heavy for most roads.