mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline
|
quote:
Germans pretty much stopped deveopment on MK IV with the H model. J had turret power traverse removed and additional fuel tank put in. Was the Mk IV really at a dead end with no possiablity of improvement. What would have happened if they put a little time and work into the MK IV??
Maybe they could have modifies the Hull of the MK IV to that shape they used on the Jagd version and put a turret on the top with with that 75/60 gun they had planned for the Panther. Hmmmm sloped armour front, sloped sides above track, larger turret ring on wider hull top, gun with 15-20% better penetration than 75/48, over loaded chassis but better balanced than the Jagd version with the L 70 gun. Might need a little bit bigger engine. There is a 30 ton what if for you.
I am doubtful that the Mk IV could have been improved much beyond what was already done historically. (Like all the "improvements" done to the Mk II, Mk III, PzKw 38(t), and so on.) The Panther may have been able to accept a larger turret ring, I dunno.
quote:
As for the subject of air, which is easier to target 1-2 Tigers or 8-10 Panzer MK-IV's?
Answer: "Depends". *chucles* Nothing is ever simple...
1) It's easier to scout/spot a formation of 8-12 tanks than just one (or two) tank from the air.
2) Air defence of a smaller formation is simplified. (Though bombers will probably leak through anyway...)
However, the air effort wasn't the only factor I had in mind when measuring the effort expended to defeat a Tiger.
What happens when air power is not available? (Bad weather, for example.) A bazooka bounces off a tiger, but not a Mk IV.
Also for further consideration: While it takes that many more bombs and sorties to kill the extra tanks, it also means that the number of Gemans dead is more. (2 5man tanks versus 10 3 or 4 man tanks.) This matters when manpower is at a premium.
Don't get me wrong, I think that the key to Allied victory was it's ability to field the vast quantities of men and material that eventually overwhelmed the Whermacht. But the quality of the German gear (and the decent training of it's NCO's) led to a long dragged out slugging match.
I am just trying to think up of the reasons why the Germans did what they did, and suggesting that their decisions were not made "willy nilly". There are many "ripple effect" considerations involved. And not all of those considerations make sense (like the political ones). Were there areas that could have been streamlined, and with a single controlling authority (with an accurate grasp of what works/will work and what doesn't/won't), were improvements to war production and quality control possible?
Yes, I suspect so. (And that applies to all of the belligerents, too.)
quote:
Then also it took the Germans what about 6 months or so to fix the major problems with the Panther, but in 3 years they couldn't fix the Tiger's problems?
Maybe they didnt really try?
I speculate that the Tiger may have been seen (at first) as a (prewar) design that will hold the line until the Panther is produced in numbers. The Tiger was mechanically finicky, but it might have been seen as "good enough for now". The fact that the Panther had many new innovations (requirements deduced from actual combat experience) and teething problems delayed it's mass production severly. The Tiger was needed now, and no money and rescources were diverted to improving the Tiger because the Panther was seen as "just around the corner".
quote:
Then with the Tiger II multiple the Tiger I's problems by at least a factor of 2 and I think that does show how much of a waste these two tanks really were.
I agree. I suspect that the Tiger II may have been an Industrial lobby victory, and a propoganda icon of German power and technical might for the ruling party. It seems to me that the German armaments industry was as fractured, and as much controlled by competeing self interests, as the ruling political regime itself.
From your last quoted statement, it seems that you have already reached a conclusion, and are looking for evidence to support it... Please be careful. That may cause you to ignore some evidence that doesn't support your thesis. But I hope you do well! I have had a life long interest in WW2, and I am just an amatuer around here.
|
Printable Version
RE: Request for Information - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread