Tiger overrated? (1 Viewer)

[Jack]

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/military-vehicle-news/tigers-reputation-rewrite.html

Not my area of expertise but I found it interesting that according to one historian there were 'just three incidents during 1944 and 1945 when U.S. tankers came face-to-face with a Tiger, including once when a group of the fearsome tanks was lamely strapped to a railway flatcar and destroyed without much effort'.

Interesting that the article mentions Kelly's Heroes!

 

[waynepoo]

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/military-vehicle-news/tigers-reputation-rewrite.html

Not my area of expertise but I found it interesting that according to one historian there were 'just three incidents during 1944 and 1945 when U.S. tankers came face-to-face with a Tiger, including once when a group of the fearsome tanks was lamely strapped to a railway flatcar and destroyed without much effort'.

Interesting that the article mentions Kelly's Heroes!

Interesting read, no doubt more Tigers have been made and sold in the model world than were made in the real world.....:rolleyes2: and I don't own one of them. ^&grin
Wayne.

 

[Fitzgibbon]

Interesting read, no doubt more Tigers have been made and sold in the model world than were made in the real world.....:rolleyes2: and I don't own one of them. ^&grin
Wayne.

But then a "Dead Tiger" would be politically incorrect now in most quarters {sm4}

 

[DMNamiot]

Hi Guys,

Would have to agree that the Tiger was over rated mechanically but if it was operational its gun was a serious killer. That said I would have to say that the Germans best and most reliable tank would be the panzer IV. If they had gone ahead and produced these only and perhaps found a way to mount the higher velocity gun it would have been up to the task of defeating the other armored vehicles it encountered. But hindsight is always 20 20. Still it was an interesting article.

Dave

 

[bradleyl30]

I think this is accurate.

Tiger Fever gripped the allies so every German tank or assault gun was often referred to as a Tiger. In fact, the Allied High Command were more worried about the Panther which did a lot more damage. But neither the Tiger nor the Panther were in optimal conditions in Normandy where narrow roads and relatively close ranges eliminated most of their advantages.

Even though it is on the World of Tanks website, this blog is very technical. I found it quite accurate:

http://worldoftanks.com/en/news/pc-browser/21/chieftains-hatch-us-guns-vs-german-armour-part-1/

 

[lancer]

Maybe someone should ask the Russians and their thousands of dead tanks whether the Tiger is overrated or not.:rolleyes2: -- Al

 

[bradleyl30]

Maybe someone should ask the Russians and their thousands of dead tanks whether the Tiger is overrated or not.:rolleyes2: -- Al

I think the article was specifically speaking to the Western Front and the fear generated amongst the Allied troops in the west, and where they existed in relatively few numbers.

You are correct that when deployed on the Eastern Front in open spaces they were in their true element. It is how they were designed to fight. They suffered significant losses in areas such as around Leningrad or other areas where they fought at much closer ranges.

 

[Jack]

I think the article was specifically speaking to the Western Front and the fear generated amongst the Allied troops in the west, and where they existed in relatively few numbers.

You are correct that when deployed on the Eastern Front in open spaces they were in their true element. It is how they were designed to fight. They suffered significant losses in areas such as around Leningrad or other areas where they fought at much closer ranges.

I wonder how many German bomber pilots in 1940 reported being shot up by Spitfires when they'd really been done over by Hurricanes. Like any 'product' a weapon needs a good PR department!

 

[Poppo]

I think this is accurate.

Tiger Fever gripped the allies so every German tank or assault gun was often referred to as a Tiger. In fact, the Allied High Command were more worried about the Panther which did a lot more damage. But neither the Tiger nor the Panther were in optimal conditions in Normandy where narrow roads and relatively close ranges eliminated most of their advantages.



Well, in Normandy the total allied control of the air( Jabos) eliminated their advantages.
In fact, every german tank attack was successful at the beginning, but after the initial success, they were stopped by the american fighter-bombers.:wink2:

 

[trooper]

Well, in Normandy the total allied control of the air( Jabos) eliminated their advantages.
In fact, every german tank attack was successful at the beginning, but after the initial success, they were stopped by the american fighter-bombers.:wink2:

Not to mention,(and you didn't), the cab ranks of British tank busting Typhoons. Trooper

 

[wayne556517]

Lucky they wasted resources on TIGER,s and PANTHER,s etc,if they had pumped out 100,s of STUG,s the war would of dragged on,they where feared by Allied Tankers as well hard to see hard hitting.

 

[Rob]

Not to mention,(and you didn't), the cab ranks of British tank busting Typhoons. Trooper

^&grin

Spot on :wink2:

Rob

 

[larso]

I recall reading in Guderian's book, his plan to have every infantry division issued with 200 anti-tank guns. That would've been very cheap comparitively and pretty effective too. Off course it was knocked back by the lunatics running Germany. And speaking of the MkIVs, production was actually going to be cancelled but at a point when there was nothing else really being made. Guderian did get that one changed.

 

[Poppo]

Not to mention,(and you didn't), the cab ranks of British tank busting Typhoons. Trooper

Thank you for adding details, I just wrote generally about the allied air forces. You surely know more than me about the different kinds of allied airplanes.

 

[Poppo]

Lucky they wasted resources on TIGER,s and PANTHER,s etc,if they had pumped out 100,s of STUG,s the war would of dragged on,they where feared by Allied Tankers as well hard to see hard hitting.

Not sure about this, the germans needed to fight the russian T34s, KVs, and the luftwaffe after winter 1942 had lost most of its potential and they couldn't help anymore the panzerwaffe as they had done till that moment. And a Tiger and a Panther did the job of several medium tanks.
The problem in the german industrial tank production was that they built too many different types of tanks and this created big problems for the repairings and so on ( not speaking they also used french tanks, czech tanks...). The soviets were much better in this, just one solid, simple type made in thousands ones.

It also has to be said that Guderian, inspector of the tank production during the second part of WW2, defended the panzer 4 while Hitler wanted to replace it with the panther. Guderian was right in this because the panzer 4 was not expensive, solid, easy to repair, fast to be produced,it was built till the very end and it was the main tank of the panzerwaffe till the end of WW2. In this you are right.

 

[Phantom Warrior]

I find it hard to believe that US tankers came across just 3 Tigers. The Canadians and Brit tankers came across many Tigers. If Shermans came across few Tigers in the west, what destroyed them. And don't say typhoons because they had very few confirmed Tiger kills.

Terry

 

[bradleyl30]

I think it is correct to say they wasted resources on the Tiger, but I don't think that argument is a slam dunk on Panther. They were able to build a lot of Panthers which could do a lot more than the Panzer IV. Wider tracks, better armor and armament, etc.

One thing that is absolutely critical is to remember that the whole German army was built on the idea of attack, so saying they should have built a whole bunch of defensive weapons is rather pie in the sky argument.

So, if I got the do over I would have simplified the Panther some, but I would have produced both the Panther and Panzer IV. Also, lots of StuGs.

 

[larso]

The Pz IV and Panther worked well together. Producing as many as possible, along with even cheaper Stugs and other such vehicles was the best approach. I think Tiger 1 was a worthwhile direction. It achieved a reputation out of all proportion to its numbers. It was able to dominate greater areas thah the others and put fear into all opponents. The Tiger 2 however and all the other super heavy stuff was a clearer waste of resources. Energy spent here would've been better directed elsewhere.

 

[Jack]

I find it hard to believe that US tankers came across just 3 Tigers. The Canadians and Brit tankers came across many Tigers. If Shermans came across few Tigers in the west, what destroyed them. And don't say typhoons because they had very few confirmed Tiger kills.

Terry

As I said not my area of expertise, but even if the writer underestimates the US/Tiger contact and it was in fact ten times higher, that would still be a number small enough in my view to be surprising.

 

[Poppo]

The Pz IV and Panther worked well together. Producing as many as possible, along with even cheaper Stugs and other such vehicles was the best approach. I think Tiger 1 was a worthwhile direction. It achieved a reputation out of all proportion to its numbers. It was able to dominate greater areas thah the others and put fear into all opponents. The Tiger 2 however and all the other super heavy stuff was a clearer waste of resources. Energy spent here would've been better directed elsewhere.

What about the panzer 8 " Maus" {sm4}