Was the Tiger Really King???? (1 Viewer)

Considering how the Germans felt about the Russians and vice versa, I think whatever might be said should be taken with at least a tiny bit of skepticism.
 
I don't know about the deterioration of the quality of the armor plate (our low velocity 75mm guns wouldn't have been able to penetrate even defective armor of that thickness) but the analysis of the low speed, tendency to bog down (due to the enormous weight), tendency to break down, and complex and unreliable drive mechanism are all dead on accurate. Hitler's love for the ridiculously oversized tanks and artillery pieces on which he wasted so much time and resources on were yet another blessing for the Allies.
 
Hi All,

I would love to wade in on this one. My favorite tank from the Germans was the Panzer Mark IV followed by the Tiger I and of course the Panther was a far superior weapons platform even the French Army used a few for a while after the war, be that as it may I will agree with the statement that the two sides opinions of their opponents equipment must be take with the afore mentioned grain of salt. As an Armor Officer in a previous career I made it a point to look at these vehicles as well as anything our enemies might throw at us especially the T-34-85 which the Eastern Block forces had stored for use against us if we invaded them and the NK Army has them around also. So I love to see data like this come out because for a long time we were taught that the Soviet weapons systems were better than our M-60 series vehicle and the M-1 series vehicle which we found out to be a load of crap during the 1st Gulf War. So whenever there is testing data to look at remember who was doing the testing.

Dave
 
I agree with taking things in context, but I posted this to show that the mighty Tiger II was not without its detractors.

Dave, glad to hear from a "real" armor officer. It offers a good counterpoint to us amateurs. These live-fire testings are of interest because it can show the actual effectiveness of weapons against a production combat vehicle. In WW2, so the story goes, the Ordnance department tested the M1 76mm gun against 4-inch steel plate to test its effetiveness against the Panther. The gun was mounted in later Sherman tanks and the M18 tank destroyers. Eisenhower, et.al. were informed that this gun would penetrate any tank the Germans had! The field results were much different. It turned out that Ordnance tested the gun against VERTICAL armor plate, not angled as seen on the Panther glacis plate.

There was another interesting report in one volume of the "Report of Operations, First US Army" that covered a field test where captured Panthers were fired on by various US Army weapons. It's interesting to see the actual effectiveness of various weapons against a real target.

This was presented as "food for thought" and to get discussion going.

Gary
 
Hi Gary,

You are so right about the effects of the testing on the actual vehicle. It is very interesting to see how various rounds perform. I hope we can have some more discussion about this subject.

Happy New Yaer All.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top