Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied tanks"

The place if you want to talk about historical facts. No politics allowed!
User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2450
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied tanks"

Postby Warhawks97 » 12 Dec 2014, 20:01

Charles Vane wrote:Forget the tiger. panther is better in every aspect except rear/side armor ;)

the tigers design was outdated in 43 and only was able to beat the IS 2 on Long range because of better optics and more accuracy. but then only with luck or APCR ammo ;) on short range the tiger was nothing compared to the IS 2
panther on the other Hand had more pen and better armor then the tiger and an even more accurate gun. :P

panther mass production would have been much smarter then keeping the tiger design until end of 44 and then building KTs...

edit:
Even if Germany was fighting a 1-front war, that doesn't change that Soviet technology was better than German technology at the end

wait what? do you really want to argue about german tech? do you really want to compare what Germans had after fighting several nations and mention "even if" how could you know? without war in the west it may had other results. and IS 2 smashed everything? I think that a panther would disagree.

"And to top it all off, if the US couldn't get a breakthrough in France, then Germany would have been turned into a radioactive wasteland. The allies had nuclear weapons! Which, by the way, were built with GERMAN scientists that you scared away because they were Jews. The Japs put up a better fight than Germany. We were so afraid of invading Japan that we dropped an atomic bomb on them."

I think you Need a bit help in School with history hm? PM me in steam I can refresh your history knowlege a bit.


"allies won the war" weak Argument. build your own mod and give them a win button. arguments like this are in a multiplayer game where both factions have a Chance to win so damn off..




Thats true. Would have been much better producing only Panthers and Jagdpanthers, hetzers and Stugs instead ressource, working and maintanance intensive tigers and heavier Tanks.


Also Russian Tanks had been easy produced, got improved over the time (even with radio sometimes^^) but at all axis had better tanks with the Panther. Russian Tanks could have been more effective with better gunsights. ISU and Is had big guns but bad optics and very long reload times. Tiger crews had been usually the best axis tank crews and sometimes tanks even beat superior numbers of IS 2 tanks simply by better shooting, moving, teamwork, communication and faster reload. Also big russian guns had limited ammo storage.



Axis would have beat russians. Note that russian build only Fighter Airplanes, Tanks and artillery (which was a fine mix of masses, flexibility,weight, range, calibre). Nonetheless russians survived thx to large supply by western allied. up to 5000 spitfires, medium bombers, 8000 shermans M4A2, TRUCKs etc. The russian infrastructure and logisitics was basically build up by americans. Without that the trucks and other things russian artillery would have been less flexibel and also the fuel supply would have been more complicate. They also had much shorter supply lines at the turning point in 43.

In japans fought not better.... They lacked industrial and US considered Germany as the bigger threat and concentrated first on germany. Thats why japan fought longer and japan had the advantage to be not daily bombed untill US captured some islands mid-end 44 while Germany was already heavily bombed at that time at day and night. I mean japan had not even tanks except small tanks which got outmatched by stuart already. They also had no real Artillery or machinpistols etc.

The biggest advantage of USA was the huge industry and ressources. Not even russians came even close to US production capabilties.

User avatar
V13dweller
Posts: 128
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 09:18
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby V13dweller » 13 Dec 2014, 05:27

On the topic of US industry, Germany lost of Commerce War against Britian thanks to them, as the US was able to produce a Liberty Ship every 24 days, and they had multiple Shipyards all churning out a new Liberty Ship just under every month, and Germany's Uboats were unable to sink the required tonnage to starve the British of resources.

User avatar
cookbros.racing
Posts: 6
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 14:25
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby cookbros.racing » 13 Dec 2014, 15:08

To the Performance of Panthers and Tigers:

1. If you look at the kill/loss ratios of Panthers and Tigers the Tigers were much more better.

2. If you see the Top 20 German Tank Aces of WW2 you´ll find only one on Panther Ernst BarKmann with 80+ kills but nearly 15 on Tiger I.

These statistics are a clear statement of the Performance of both tanks.
BK Mod Mega Fan

User avatar
V13dweller
Posts: 128
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 09:18
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby V13dweller » 13 Dec 2014, 15:16

The Panther also arrived later, plus, the Tiger I could have racked up heaps of kills on early T-34's, back when the Tiger and Flak 18/36/37 were the only threat to them.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2450
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby Warhawks97 » 13 Dec 2014, 16:09

The Tiger was a dangerous beast and scored many kills and esspecially on eastern fronts where russians wasted the tanks. But in end 43 and 44 where the first effective beast killers+ 17 pounders arrived the Tiger lost on its effectivness.

Also note the number of tanks in serivce. The number of Panther in service raised up till end of war while tigers dropped. Also Kills alone isnt all. You may kill 40 T-34 with 3 Tigers in a few hours? fine but you did not make a step forward and the 3 Tigers must retreat for repairs, refueling, maintanance, getting newa ammo.

Also Tigers were top arty and airplane targets. Whenever spotted russians send massive arty barrages on them. There was a day or week where germans lost 45 Tigers but only 7 of them total losses. The other 38 had secondary damages at gunsights, tracks etc etc and Tiger Maintanance wasnt easy and german logistic was really not the best and supply line long. The best way to knock out Tigers was not to fight them but rather to force them to run from one defensive operation to another. Tiger Groups worked most of the Time as "Firefighters". Also just half of all Tigers in the army was serviceable.

So having more Panthers which cost less then half of materials and which combined armor, speed and firepower are more effective as there are always enough operational while others are in maintanance.

And Panther losses had been higher as they took the main part of the Fight in 44 together with Tank IV and stugs while Tiger production ran out in august 44 with final 4 tigers build. So at the time the Germans had the greatest losses and in the year with the greatest production and losses the Tiger I already disappeared more or less while Panthers saw their biggest action.

Furthermore the First Panther version D came in mid 43 for Kursk and soon they lost the first 200 due to heavy technical problems while the Tiger served already one long as superior tank on the battlefields. And The weapons allied developed during the that year and which came in 44 in greater numbers were also able to knock out Panthers.


I did not say that Tiger was usless at all but in 43/44 germans should have switched their production to Panthers, Hetzer, Stugs and JP´s with much easier production, easier maintanance instead Heavy material and maintanance intensive super tanks such as Tiger II, Elephants, JT´s etc.

Such as axis did their blitzkrieg with inferior tanks when compared in 1 vs 1 to allied counterparts the russians won it with inferior tanks but which combined easy maintance, production, numbers etc.


Honestly idk what axis thought in 42/43-45 when they started with their "monster" projects. Instead keeping up their flexible army as they had in 40/41 they invested tons of materials in Super Tanks and Super guns which did absolutely not fit in the new mobile Warfare. While russians got very flexible with tanks and arty which were quickly build and useable by novice the axis did build guns and Tanks which required experts to handle it.



Another mistake was done in Airplane production. Axis rather wasted ressources into heavy flak batteries and the ammo instead into more figthers and just 1% of all flak shots caused critical damage and thus shooting down the airplane. If The Axis would have invested it into airplanes their Figher production instead flak batteries the monthly airplane production would have been twice as high. You think they had no pilots? wrong. Axis trained 800 pilots each month in 40 but build only 200 Fighter Airplanes. Brits 400 per month but just 300 Pilots but those lost less pilots and had also polish, french and other pilots in their army. In Fact from 39 till 43 alone CW build twice as many Fighters each year as Axis and they had not more Pilots.
Also German Agents in the USA did warn the German Military leaders that the new 4 engined Bomber Generation from US would be a much bigger thread than the old 2 engined brits Bomber. Many German high ranked officers took that serious and warned Göring and told him to build up an effective Fighter Defense over France and Germany but Göring did not listen and told to Hitler that his few Pilots would kill that 4 engined US bombers just like the british 2 enigned from 1940. In 42 The first small US Bomber formations not larger than 24 Airplanes bombed German targets without losses and any fighter resistance. First then they realized that the Flak isnt sufficient against the high flying (8 km) and heavy armored Bombers and withdrawn huge parts of their frontline Fighter squadrons which contributed to the collapse of air support there. In a book ive read about hans Joachim Marseille (German figher ace in north africa with 186 kills) It was written that sometimes just 25 operational german Fighter Airplanes opposed up to 200 and more british in north africa in 42 and shortly before total defeat in africa in 43.


So instead building Tigers and bigger guns and Tanks germany should have increased its Fighter Airplane production to maintain air supperiority and on the ground good Medium tanks with Panther and some tank buster incluidng the stugs which alone claimed more than 20.000 kills of enemie Tanks, light tanks and vehicles and being thus best axis tankbuster.

User avatar
V13dweller
Posts: 128
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 09:18
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby V13dweller » 13 Dec 2014, 16:36

I understand, and know all of this, but mistakes were made, cost them the war.

Though, heavy flak batteries worked wonders against tanks of all sizes.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2450
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby Warhawks97 » 13 Dec 2014, 16:47

V13dweller wrote:Though, heavy flak batteries worked wonders against tanks of all sizes.


Sure, too bad that about half of them had been placed in germany in 44^^. So reducing production of that flaks would have had little impact on frontlines but huge at home country defense as they would have had much more Airplanes^^.


Sure its not sure that this would have changed the end as US airplane production was crazy but still.
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 13 Dec 2014, 17:47, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
V13dweller
Posts: 128
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 09:18
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby V13dweller » 13 Dec 2014, 17:39

In the final days, the heavy 12.8's and other rooftop heavies on the flak towers turned even the biggest of Soviet tanks to trash with a single hit, but this doesn't really count. :D

MeatshieldNZ
Posts: 28
Joined: 26 Nov 2014, 22:13
Location: New Zealand

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby MeatshieldNZ » 14 Dec 2014, 22:03

Warhawks97 wrote:Another mistake was done in Airplane production. Axis rather wasted ressources into heavy flak batteries and the ammo instead into more figthers and just 1% of all flak shots caused critical damage and thus shooting down the airplane. If The Axis would have invested it into airplanes their Figher production instead flak batteries the monthly airplane production would have been twice as high. You think they had no pilots? wrong. Axis trained 800 pilots each month in 40 but build only 200 Fighter Airplanes. Brits 400 per month but just 300 Pilots but those lost less pilots and had also polish, french and other pilots in their army. In Fact from 39 till 43 alone CW build twice as many Fighters each year as Axis and they had not more Pilots.
Also German Agents in the USA did warn the German Military leaders that the new 4 engined Bomber Generation from US would be a much bigger thread than the old 2 engined brits Bomber. Many German high ranked officers took that serious and warned Göring and told him to build up an effective Fighter Defense over France and Germany but Göring did not listen and told to Hitler that his few Pilots would kill that 4 engined US bombers just like the british 2 enigned from 1940. In 42 The first small US Bomber formations not larger than 24 Airplanes bombed German targets without losses and any fighter resistance. First then they realized that the Flak isnt sufficient against the high flying (8 km) and heavy armored Bombers and withdrawn huge parts of their frontline Fighter squadrons which contributed to the collapse of air support there. In a book ive read about hans Joachim Marseille (German figher ace in north africa with 186 kills) It was written that sometimes just 25 operational german Fighter Airplanes opposed up to 200 and more british in north africa in 42 and shortly before total defeat in africa in 43.


So instead building Tigers and bigger guns and Tanks germany should have increased its Fighter Airplane production to maintain air supperiority and on the ground good Medium tanks with Panther and some tank buster incluidng the stugs which alone claimed more than 20.000 kills of enemie Tanks, light tanks and vehicles and being thus best axis tankbuster.


I didn't know that about Goering, that is very interesting. I wonder if he was an allied spy because he was responsible for some of the biggest tactical blunders of the war. Firstly switching from bombing airfields in the Battle of Britain to bombing cities giving the RAF time to recover and then convincing Hitler he could supply Paulus from the air when he was surrounded at Stalingrad, now this about the US bombers, wow!!

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2450
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby Warhawks97 » 15 Dec 2014, 00:08

^^

Hmm... this theory sounds reasonable:) Could be worth further researches. oO


About bombing london. There was one date in september 40 afaik which became famous as "The Day of the battle of britain". It took one entire day and night using all available airplanes and in many books you can read that many British feared that those attacks would hit the british airfields which would have destroyed their air defense more or less entirely. But they only bombed London which gave time again to the british fighters to recover.


But he did another huge mistake. At the beginning the German Fighter had permission for free hunting which means to attack enemie fighters even on their airfields but leaving bombers alone. During that time Axis destroyed more fighters as they lost and got their first ace with 50 kills (Helmut Wick iirc). Most british fighters had been Hurricanes and not Spitfires and those were send against axis bombers. So Whenever one attacked a German Bomber or destroyed one the Axis fighter could follow it untill shooting it down. But then Göring gave order to stay close with the Bombers which didnt allow the axis fighters to follow the enemie Airplanes. They more or less screwed the british fighters only away but couldnt shoot them down. Due to that brits could build up larger fighter formations which finally resulted in even more bomber losses. Again Brits fighter defense was close to collapse but the order for axis fighters to stay rather with bombers instead killing the enemie fighters also contributed in a loss. Many axis Pilots and in particular higher ranked and experienced aces really raged about that order but couldnt do anything.

Also axis Bombers had been made for tactical warfare and had been tactical bombers and air supperiority was absolutely neccessary. Heavy armored and armed Bombes did not exist and again a couple of axis militarys said that they need also long range, heavy armed and armored long range strategic bombers to attack enemie production etc but axis leaders again failed and wasted tactical bombers, light armed bombers, in a strategic air war (The used Do 17, Ju 88 and He 111 versions of that time had just 3 small 7,92 mm MGs and only He 111 had 5-6 single 7,92 mm MG´s but only 4 gunners of which two had to handle two MGs at different positions) . Also missing long range Fighter. The twin enigned ME 110 was considered to do that job but it wasnt adequate for that job and outdated but again nobody of the axis leadership did listen to the warnings. The Me109 could spend just 20 mins over britain and just 10 or less mins when doing Dogfights. Many axis pilots died due to lack of fuel. External fuel tanks got introduced first in 42.

MeatshieldNZ
Posts: 28
Joined: 26 Nov 2014, 22:13
Location: New Zealand

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby MeatshieldNZ » 15 Dec 2014, 01:15

Warhawks97 wrote:^^

Hmm... this theory sounds reasonable:) Could be worth further researches. oO




Yeah the bit about him being a spy was meant to be sarcasm, hopefully that was obvious....

Yummy
Posts: 43
Joined: 08 Dec 2014, 01:58

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby Yummy » 15 Dec 2014, 02:02

Even with the big mistakes made by the german oberkommando the war was doomed. Even if germans rushed to Moscow and it has failed Russians wouldn't surrender the results would have been the same - severe skirmishes on every street and german tanks that are stuck during the winter, even if germany produced more panzer IVs (which weren't that good against russians armour anyway) and panthers they couldn't win USSR, which had endless manpower (17,000,000 mobilizated troops during 41 o.O), even if Germany won the battle of Kursk it wasn't capable to make another offansive on a large front, unlike russians it was just matter of time before USSR to launch another offansive and push back germans. The biggest mistake was to attack USSR, when you have ragging brits at your doorstep.

MeatshieldNZ
Posts: 28
Joined: 26 Nov 2014, 22:13
Location: New Zealand

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby MeatshieldNZ » 15 Dec 2014, 02:15

Yummy wrote:Even with the big mistakes made by the german oberkommando the war was doomed. Even if germans rushed to Moscow and it has failed Russians wouldn't surrender the results would have been the same - severe skirmishes on every street and german tanks that are stuck during the winter, even if germany produced more panzer IVs (which weren't that good against russians armour anyway) and panthers they couldn't win USSR, which had endless manpower (17,000,000 mobilizated troops during 41 o.O), even if Germany won the battle of Kursk it wasn't capable to make another offansive on a large front, unlike russians it was just matter of time before USSR to launch another offansive and push back germans. The biggest mistake was to attack USSR, when you have ragging brits at your doorstep.


Yes that famous Russian commander "General Winter" was underestimated by many in the German High Command. But even the ultimately doomed invasion of the Soviet Union can be linked back to Goerings failed tactics during the Battle of Britain. Hitler cancelled Operation Sea Lion (the invasion of England) mainly based on Goerings inability to gain air superiority over Britain. Then Hitlers gaze turned East.....

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 840
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby Sukin-kot (SVT) » 15 Dec 2014, 10:11

Interesting opinios from all members, + :)

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2450
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Historical backgrounds to Tigers topic "axis & allied ta

Postby Warhawks97 » 15 Dec 2014, 16:37

Yummy wrote:Even with the big mistakes made by the german oberkommando the war was doomed. Even if germans rushed to Moscow and it has failed Russians wouldn't surrender the results would have been the same - severe skirmishes on every street and german tanks that are stuck during the winter, even if germany produced more panzer IVs (which weren't that good against russians armour anyway) and panthers they couldn't win USSR, which had endless manpower (17,000,000 mobilizated troops during 41 o.O), even if Germany won the battle of Kursk it wasn't capable to make another offansive on a large front, unlike russians it was just matter of time before USSR to launch another offansive and push back germans. The biggest mistake was to attack USSR, when you have ragging brits at your doorstep.



with an earlier attack on russia as planned, increased number of tanks and increased production it would have been possible to win. Note that military production got not really increased in preparation for barbarossa and the number of used airplanes and tanks was not larger than those that attacked france. A single look at a map and a simple size comparision between france and russia would have pushed every sane and well thinking military leader to increase the number of units and tanks and to increase logistics and military production. Beside that russians air force was considered as strongest of the world at that time and had more airplanes than any other. Luckily for russia Hitler and other responsible guys were not sane but rather insane and completely crazy. The size of russia alone killed that attempt to beat russia with an army not larger than those that attacked france.

When they increased production a bit in 42 and 43 they have lost the initiative more or less, the offensive stood, supply line overstretched and russia moved factories to the east of russia and american supply reached the russians. In 44 the doubling of production on german side came too late as they lost air supperiority, initiative and running out of fuel while all allied increased production even furhter+ getting weapons to beat the axis "wonder Weapons" and super Tanks. Just saying airplanes, beast killer, 17 pounders and arty. Also did you know that russia build 103.000 zis3- 76 mm field guns that could be used as arty and pak and could be carried by kind of "bigger" jeeps from US as the zis weight only 1,4 tons. Germans had compared to that like 15 k 105 mm howitzers of which more than 7k got build in 44 on pak 40 chassis and arround 20 k 75 mm pak 40:D


Return to “History/Realism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest