Archive - GOOD LORD-The P. 1000 "Ratte" Land Cruis

[Gen. Sandworm]

I would not want to see this tank coming down the road (hell both lanes of the autobahn) at me!!!! :shock: :?:

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=1636

http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/p1000.html

This thing is so big it's retarded. Good thing they never actually made it.

[FW-190 Pilot]

even the tank would be produced and put into front line, i dont think it would have much use for the army though, first of all, the tank is so big, so the engine must be eating a lot of oil and therefore cutting travel range a lot. The tank itself is not fast so mobility is very low. Plus the cannon itself is strong, but it might take a long time to reload (for example, korean 170mm tank took 5 mins before it can shoot again)

[South African Military]

WOW :(
Check this American Experimental tank, dont want to see it coming down the road either. :) http://www.military.cz/panzer/index_en.htm

[TexWiller]

lol,it's almost like a damn Warhammer 40000 tank!

[Gen. Sandworm]

Maybe they are trying to compensate for something :lol:

[South African Military]

Maybe they are trying to compensate for something :lol:

HAHA :D

[FW-190 Pilot]

If i have to choose, i rather have JS-3 tank:P

[Gen. Sandworm]

If i have to choose, i rather have JS-3 tank:P

Uh I think this thing can roll over your JS-3 :)

[South African Military]

If i have to choose, i rather have JS-3 tank:P

Uh I think this thing can roll over your JS-3 :)

thats for sure. Who would of ever thought of making such a big tank? What is its use in battle? Most likely it had a slow turning rate, and so a russian T-34 medium tank could probably take this thing out if it got behind it.

[Gen. Sandworm]

Acutally S.A.M. if you look at that second link you can see that it has a rear mounted gun. Assuming that you could angle it down far enough you could take out the T-34. Which would need at least 6 shots minium to take out all the tracks.

[FW-190 Pilot]

Acutally S.A.M. if you look at that second link you can see that it has a rear mounted gun. Assuming that you could angle it down far enough you could take out the T-34. Which would need at least 6 shots minium to take out all the tracks.
yeah, but in every 1 big giant tank you build, the russians are able to produce six T-34/85 in the same period, so acutally in battlefield, its not one on one, its about 5 to 1, haha 8)

[Gen. Sandworm]

Yea but im sure this thing could handle quite a few T-34's and whatever else thrown at it. Of course its not completely unstoppable. But sure would cause alot of problems and would be fun to watch if your not on the receving end. :)

[Dani]

Speaking about what was actually built by Germans pls check the Maus:
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/html/germany/tanks_heavy/maus.html
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/html/germany/tanks_heavy/maus_photos.html
One of them is displayed in Kubinka Tank Museum in Russia: http://www.tankmuseum.ru/p6.html (check N17 picture)

[South African Military]

Acutally S.A.M. if you look at that second link you can see that it has a rear mounted gun. Assuming that you could angle it down far enough you could take out the T-34. Which would need at least 6 shots minium to take out all the tracks.

Ya thats true but how do you get that big thing in the battlefield? It would never operate in forests and swampy lakes etc. And it would take ages to get there. It might be usefull in N africa, if they made it before 1943.

[Gen. Sandworm]

I think it would be more of a moveable bunker more than a tank. I cant really see this thing being very pracitcal.

[WhiskyAlpha]

Don't worry kids, nobody was going to produce such a thing, it was only a playing with ideas. Most of all, if one had a idea how (possibly) to win the war, you couldn't (possibly) being orded to the eastern front...
There had been a lot of "good ideas" !! :idea:
Servus

[Gen. Sandworm]

Don't worry kids, nobody was going to produce such a thing, it was only a playing with ideas. Most of all, if one had a idea how (possibly) to win the war, you couldn't (possibly) being orded to the eastern front...
There had been a lot of "good ideas" !! :idea:
Servus

Actually they did produce part of it. The Turret. But it ended up as a coastal defense battery in Norway i believe.

[HEINRICI]

I think it would be more of a moveable bunker more than a tank. I cant really see this thing being very pracitcal.
Even the 'little' Maus couldn't use any bridge, so it was going to be modified with a schnorkel system for fording rivers. Neither tank was useful for offensive operations due to their poor speed. They would be useful for defending fixed points like cities, river crossings or narrow passes, or even better in a large cave overlooking the Normandy beaches. For the Ratte to function in this capacity, however, the enemy must not have air superiority. While it's possible to camouflage the Maus, the Ratte is just impossible. What a target!
As far as a direct confrontation with JS-3 tanks, the Ratte was equipped with heavy cruiser armor plate all-round, about 9" thick. The JS-3's could shoot at it all day, and not make a dent. I suppose the Ratte would have a tough time hitting the JS-3's, because of it's slow rate of fire.
Imagine this, however: It is Berlin, April 29, 1945. The Red Army is approaching the center of the city. They have just turned onto the Siegesalle ( The Avenue Of Victories ), and are setting up their howitzers to blast through the barricades in front of the Brandenburg Gate. Suddenly the ground begins to tremble. Six blocks distant a black shape three stories high turns the corner. The howitzers open fire, but their 152mm shells glance off the monster. Then the twin 11" guns roar, and the howitzers disappear in flame....
In reality, though, the Lancasters would blast it in short order. One 'Tallboy' bomb would do the trick. Can't hide this baby inside any
building. The Maus is much better for streetfighting; with a 128mm main cannon and a 75mm secondary cannon, it can keep up a reasonable rate of fire. It can crawl through the wall of a large building to hide from aircraft, or can mow down an entire block of buildings holding the enemy.
Imagine the Maus additionally equipped with a flamethrower..... :shock:

[FW-190 Pilot]

I think it would be more of a moveable bunker more than a tank. I cant really see this thing being very pracitcal.
Even the 'little' Maus couldn't use any bridge, so it was going to be modified with a schnorkel system for fording rivers. Neither tank was useful for offensive operations due to their poor speed. They would be useful for defending fixed points like cities, river crossings or narrow passes, or even better in a large cave overlooking the Normandy beaches. For the Ratte to function in this capacity, however, the enemy must not have air superiority. While it's possible to camouflage the Maus, the Ratte is just impossible. What a target!
As far as a direct confrontation with JS-3 tanks, the Ratte was equipped with heavy cruiser armor plate all-round, about 9" thick. The JS-3's could shoot at it all day, and not make a dent. I suppose the Ratte would have a tough time hitting the JS-3's, because of it's slow rate of fire.
Imagine this, however: It is Berlin, April 29, 1945. The Red Army is approaching the center of the city. They have just turned onto the Siegesalle ( The Avenue Of Victories ), and are setting up their howitzers to blast through the barricades in front of the Brandenburg Gate. Suddenly the ground begins to tremble. Six blocks distant a black shape three stories high turns the corner. The howitzers open fire, but their 152mm shells glance off the monster. Then the twin 11" guns roar, and the howitzers disappear in flame....
In reality, though, the Lancasters would blast it in short order. One 'Tallboy' bomb would do the trick. Can't hide this baby inside any
building. The Maus is much better for streetfighting; with a 128mm main cannon and a 75mm secondary cannon, it can keep up a reasonable rate of fire. It can crawl through the wall of a large building to hide from aircraft, or can mow down an entire block of buildings holding the enemy.
Imagine the Maus additionally equipped with a flamethrower..... :shock:
so the monster didnt really have much sucess on killing soviet tanks?

[HEINRICI]

I think it would be more of a moveable bunker more than a tank. I cant really see this thing being very pracitcal.
Even the 'little' Maus couldn't use any bridge, so it was going to be modified with a schnorkel system for fording rivers. Neither tank was useful for offensive operations due to their poor speed. They would be useful for defending fixed points like cities, river crossings or narrow passes, or even better in a large cave overlooking the Normandy beaches. For the Ratte to function in this capacity, however, the enemy must not have air superiority. While it's possible to camouflage the Maus, the Ratte is just impossible. What a target!
As far as a direct confrontation with JS-3 tanks, the Ratte was equipped with heavy cruiser armor plate all-round, about 9" thick. The JS-3's could shoot at it all day, and not make a dent. I suppose the Ratte would have a tough time hitting the JS-3's, because of it's slow rate of fire.
Imagine this, however: It is Berlin, April 29, 1945. The Red Army is approaching the center of the city. They have just turned onto the Siegesalle ( The Avenue Of Victories ), and are setting up their howitzers to blast through the barricades in front of the Brandenburg Gate. Suddenly the ground begins to tremble. Six blocks distant a black shape three stories high turns the corner. The howitzers open fire, but their 152mm shells glance off the monster. Then the twin 11" guns roar, and the howitzers disappear in flame....
In reality, though, the Lancasters would blast it in short order. One 'Tallboy' bomb would do the trick. Can't hide this baby inside any
building. The Maus is much better for streetfighting; with a 128mm main cannon and a 75mm secondary cannon, it can keep up a reasonable rate of fire. It can crawl through the wall of a large building to hide from aircraft, or can mow down an entire block of buildings holding the enemy.
Imagine the Maus additionally equipped with a flamethrower..... :shock:
so the monster didnt really have much sucess on killing soviet tanks?
Which monster? The Ratte probably couldn't hit any moving vehicles that were trying to avoid it; it would take a couple of minutes to load those 11" shells. The Maus would do very well in theory, because it had very good
all-round armour. The Maus never saw combat-there were only two examples built by April of '45, and they never left the proving grounds at Kummersdorf. One was blown up by it's owners, and the other was captured intact by the Red Army.

[HEINRICI]

I would not want to see this tank coming down the road (hell both lanes of the autobahn) at me!!!! :shock: :?:

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=1636

http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/p1000.html

This thing is so big it's retarded. Good thing they never actually made it.
They also were planning a P. 1500 that weighed about the same, but was to carry the infamous 'Dora' howitzer. 'Dora' and it's twin 'Gustav Schwere' were 31" mortars built by Krupp and mounted on special double-track railroad carriages. Gustav Schwere was used to bombard Sevastapol, managing one shot about every hour. One of those shots landed in the harbor, penetrated 150' of rock, and blew up an ammuntion dump the Soviets had built under the harbor. It was the only time this big waste of resources was used in the war. I'm wondering why they didn't build a bombproof bunker for it opposite Dover?

[Gen. Sandworm]

....... I'm wondering why they didn't build a bombproof bunker for it opposite Dover?

Im assuming you mean in Calias. The had a similar design to hide a V-2 rocket launch pad or ..... maybe it was they were building them in northern france. Anyhow the allies took it out iwith a remote controlled bomber fully loaded with bombs. One of the first missions failed and Joe Kennedy died. (Brother of President John Kennedy) Im guessing the Germans didnt go for that idea coz the V-2 were doing a decent amount of damage. Good question thou.

[South African Military]

....... I'm wondering why they didn't build a bombproof bunker for it opposite Dover?

Im assuming you mean in Calias. The had a similar design to hide a V-2 rocket launch pad or ..... maybe it was they were building them in northern france. Anyhow the allies took it out iwith a remote controlled bomber fully loaded with bombs. One of the first missions failed and Joe Kennedy died. (Brother of President John Kennedy) Im guessing the Germans didnt go for that idea coz the V-2 were doing a decent amount of damage. Good question thou.

Well without the German scientist, we would never had landed on the moon as early as we did. The captured German scientists who agreed to help, where the backbone of the American space agency.

[Komissar Ombrok]

All countries was tying to create such big tank... For example Soviet heavy tank T-35, 1936 y. with 5 turrets:

http://armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/BeforeWWII/T35/index.html

But big - don't means good. This is slow constuction an ideal target for sturm planes...

[Gen. Sandworm]

Yea the T-35 was big but about comparable to the Maus. The P1000 just blows this out of the water as far as size.

[Komissar Ombrok]

Of course. But try to compare the date of research! 1936 - is a date of produce, not research. War was extremely raise a speed of progress. But pre-war tanks of Red Army like T-34, KV-I, KV-2 was efficient and in the end of war too... If the soviet was need the ultra-heavy tank, they could make it, and make it very powerfull. But the Soviet command realized that no need to such types of tanks. It's only spending resourses in nothing..

[Gen. Sandworm]

Of course. But try to compare the date of research! 1936 - is a date of produce, not research. War was extremely raise a speed of progress. But pre-war tanks of Red Army like T-34, KV-I, KV-2 was efficient and in the end of war too... If the soviet was need the ultra-heavy tank, they could make it, and make it very powerfull. But the Soviet command realized that no need to such types of tanks. It's only spending resourses in nothing..

On that we are in total agreement :D

[HEINRICI]

Yea the T-35 was big but about comparable to the Maus. The P1000 just blows this out of the water as far as size.
Here's your comparison between the T-35 and the Maus:
T35A ( the main production model ), built between 1933 and 1939
Weight-52 tons
Maximum speed-30 mph, Cruising speed-18 mph
Armor-60mm max, 30mm min.
Weapons- 1 76.2mm main gun, 2 45mm guns, 2 machine guns, (all in seperate turrets ), and 1 machine gun mounted forward below main gun.
Crew-10 or 11 men.

PzKfw VII Maus, built in 1945
Weight-188 tons
Maximum speed-12 mph, Cruising speed-5 mph
Armor-160mm max, 80mm min.
Weapons- 1 128mm main gun, 1 75mm secondary gun, 2 machine guns,
multiple mortar projectors on side of turret.
Crew-5 men.

[Komissar Ombrok]

As I told above, the T-35 was old tank. But he heal Soviet command from love to the BIG weapons. German have no such experience and was spending a lot of resources to the big, but useless weapons like "Dora" or "Mouse"

[Dani]

Big, but not useless: "Anzio Annie"
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-weapons/anzio_annie.htm

[Dani]

Very big (gun caliber) but useless (in a way): YAMATO battleship:
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/japan/japsh-xz/yamato.htm

[Komissar Ombrok]

I'm not disagree that big caliber may be in a good use, but it may be big more then need. Like "Dora". It's shot near Svastopol is an only one known good shot. When it shooted to normal, not rock ground the ammo (forgot term of bullet for big gun) of it go to subterrain at 13 meters and do there qiet "Boom"... Without any damdge. The mass of warhead wasn't enough to excavate the masses of ground...