PDA

View Full Version : PzKpfw V Panther....the best tank in WW2 ?



Pages : [1] 2 3

Panzerknacker
11-27-2006, 02:27 PM
It was the german response to the T-34, but it was a heavier and more complicated vehicle than the soviet ones.

It was the best or not, history and debate here.

VonWeyer
11-27-2006, 04:09 PM
I feel that all the tanks mentioned in your poll were very good, and at some stage or other in the war out performed the others.
T-34 was more practical and easier to run, I do agree.
As for me, I vote the Panther... Call me a sucker for German technology.

alephh
11-27-2006, 05:45 PM
I wouldn't mind facing a group of allied tanks in PzKpfw VI Tiger 1. :-)

"Field Marshal Montgomery was obliged to crack down on a strange new sickness that appeared to be gripping his men – 'Tiger Fever' - as they faced the Germans' superior Tiger tanks."

Panzerknacker
11-27-2006, 08:03 PM
Well, there was a said when the war was over from a british tanker that "I prefered to enter in combat with an early Mark IV ( panzer IV) than a late Cronwell cruiser"...But I think that is a extreme statement. Aniway there was 2 unquestionable things, the combat capacity of the Tiger and the dislike of some tommy tankist with their combat armor vehicles.

Some Panther History.

When Germany invaded Russia, Panzertruppe encountered KV series and T-34/76 (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/t34.htm) tanks, which were far superior in firepower and armor protection to any Panzer at the time. It was then decided, because of the constant reports from the Eastern Front to design a new more powerful medium tank, which could be quickly put into production. On November 25th of 1941, Adolf Hitler ordered Wa Pruef start work on the new tank. In December of 1941, Wa Pruef ordered Daimler-Benz and MAN (Maschinenfabrik Augsburg Nuernberg) to design new 30-ton tank armed with 75mm KwK L/70 gun as a response to the Soviet T-34/76 (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/t34.htm) tank. Rheinmetall-Borsig was in charge of the development of the turret for this new tank. In March of 1942, Daimler-Benz was the first to produce their version of VK3002's design based on previously rejected VK3001 (direct copy of T-34/76 (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/t34.htm)) design from January of 1942. Two versions of VK 3001 with different suspensions were designed by Daimler-Benz - one with spring suspension and other with torsion bar suspension. Daimler-Benz VK3002 design was largely based on T-34/76 (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/t34.htm) and was more like a modified German version of it. MAN finished their design of VK3002 in early Spring of 1942.

Daimler Benz VK3002

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/7726/vk3002db9ew.jpg

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/pz4.htm

SS Tiger
11-27-2006, 08:12 PM
I think the Panther was the best tank because everything was good as you could possibly make it without getting too impractical, most of the developments after this were better on paper but in practise often had problems due to there size, weight, fuel consumption ect.

Panzerknacker
11-27-2006, 08:20 PM
It had some troubles in the beggining, some things did not work as espected like the overloaded transmition but that problem was mostly because the rushed production.

But the subsecuents varianst ,the ausf A and G are fearsome vehicles.

Panzerkampfwagen V Panther Ausf D1 (Ausf A)
Initial Production Series by MAN (only 60 mm glacis armor)

tom!
11-28-2006, 11:53 AM
Hi.

Afaik is this the only existing picture of the Daimler-Benz VK 3002, taken post-war:

http://www.ww2technik.de/Bilderchen/sonstiges/daimler_panther.jpg


I have some problems with the Panzer V as there are rumors that the US light M5 was able to penetrate the side armour on up to 500 m with its 37 mm gun.....

So my vote for the Panzer VI E.

Yours

tom! ;)

Panzerknacker
11-28-2006, 05:48 PM
Hmmm..probably it was the case in some rare engagements, the panther 45-40 mm side armour wanst much after all.

according to this site the maximum armor penetration was 50-60 probably with some tugsten core ammo.

http://www.wwiivehicles.com/usa/guns.html


http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/8150/pantera14gp.jpg

Lancer44
11-29-2006, 04:18 AM
I feel that all the tanks mentioned in your poll were very good, and at some stage or other in the war out performed the others.
T-34 was more practical and easier to run, I do agree.
As for me, I vote the Panther... Call me a sucker for German technology.

Practical... Easier... to run...

Legends! Faulty exhaust fans caused crews womiting after 4 - 5 shots and forced them to open hatches... Very good in action! Perfect in urban areas...

Driver hatch at the front of the hull is the most stupid feature in any tank from WWII.

T-34 as well as Sherman was good because "of plenty of them".

Panther rules! The best tank of WWII.

Cheers,

Lancer44

pdf27
11-29-2006, 01:32 PM
Panther best of the German ones by a mile. Savagely flawed with major mechanical and manufacturing problems however.

Best of the lot to see action would be the US M26 Pershing, and the best tank to see service would be the UK Centurion. That is still in active service, with the last of the UK ones being withdrawn within the past 5 years. The Panther was good, but not as good as either of these two and was much more difficult to make.

Panzerknacker
11-29-2006, 05:56 PM
But most of the mechanical problems were caused by the rushed service imposed by "Zitadelle"

The later variants Ausf A and Ausf G were not as bad like the early Ausf D.

I am convinced that for the tank vs tank combat the KWK 42 of the Panther was simply the best gun in the WW2.

Panther gunner handling the 75 mm ammo

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/2914/panther2jr.jpg


The german Pzg 39/42 actually penetrate the same armor at 2000 meters than a T-34/76 at point blank .

Ammunition type: 100m 500m 1000m 1500m 2000m

Panzergranate 39/42: 138mm 124mm 111mm 99mm 89mm

Panzergranate 40/42: 194mm 174mm 149mm 127mm 106mm


http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/8065/dibujo7xc.jpg




and the best tank to see service would be the UK Centurion


Did the Centurion actually saw some service in WW2..?...when ?

SS Tiger
11-29-2006, 08:10 PM
Did the Centurion actually saw some service in WW2..?...when ?

They were produced in 45/46 but I don't think any saw service in WW2, I think the Korean was the first major conflict they saw service in. There is a debate as to whether it could have been rushed into service for the final days of the war.

Gen. Sandworm
11-30-2006, 10:23 AM
Did the Centurion actually saw some service in WW2..?...when ?

I thought that they were shipped to European fronts but never engaged in combat. War ended to soon.

I voted for the T-34.......which was hard because the Sherman was my second choice. When the T-34 came out it was devastating to the German offensive. To me this is the tank that won the war on the Eastern Front. The Sherman did the same on the Western Front but not near the scale.

However if i had to pick one of the 4 to go to battle in I would pick the Panther hands down.


And one more thing just a bit off topic..........A ranking by a show on the Discovery channel put the British Challenger behind the Centurion and the M1A1(2)Abrams tank which was second. Out ranked by the T-34. Even thou I do think the Challenger is a better tank than the Abrams series tank it does lack the production and experience of the American counterpart. Not list was the Leopard and the LeClerc. The Leopard is probably the best tank around but has next to no experience. Not wild about the LeClerc .... maybe due to lack of confidence in french things. :) But the T-34 beat them all out in the 5 catagories named.

pdf27
11-30-2006, 12:32 PM
And one more thing just a bit off topic..........A ranking by a show on the Discovery channel put the British Challenger behind the Centurion and the M1A1(2)Abrams tank which was second. Out ranked by the T-34. Even thou I do think the Challenger is a better tank than the Abrams series tank it does lack the production and experience of the American counterpart. Not list was the Leopard and the LeClerc. The Leopard is probably the best tank around but has next to no experience. Not wild about the LeClerc .... maybe due to lack of confidence in french things. :) But the T-34 beat them all out in the 5 catagories named.
There was one about military rifles recently that got the denizens of another board I visit rather hot and bothered. Their ranking system does seem rather... odd. Asking random journalists how good a rifle is does not a good system make methinks.

George Eller
11-30-2006, 02:07 PM
-


Panther best of the German ones by a mile. Savagely flawed with major mechanical and manufacturing problems however.

Best of the lot to see action would be the US M26 Pershing, and the best tank to see service would be the UK Centurion. That is still in active service, with the last of the UK ones being withdrawn within the past 5 years. The Panther was good, but not as good as either of these two and was much more difficult to make.

-




Did the Centurion actually saw some service in WW2..?...when ?

-

The Centurion was developed during WWII, was rushed to Germany in May 1945 for testing in combat conditions, but did not see action. I would have to agree that the Centurion was the best to see service. For this poll however, I will go with the Panther.

Centurion Tank
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showpost.php?p=82383&postcount=6
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showpost.php?p=83169&postcount=30

-

Panzerknacker
11-30-2006, 07:07 PM
All right then The centurion did not see any combat.


I think that there is some influence of the Panther in the Centurion design, specially in the sloped front armor. I really like the coaxial 20 mm gun in this.


Centurion.

http://i16.tinypic.com/4hhkjtl.jpg



Panther ausf G.

http://www.topedge.com/panels/ww2/na/panth.jpg



Despite being a desing completely influenced by the T-34, the Panther did provoque a Russian response...that was the medium tank ( Or MBT according to some historians) the T-44, check the front armor and the schurzen, quite similar.

T-44 proto.

http://i17.tinypic.com/2ro2d8o.jpg



And one more thing just a bit off topic..........A ranking by a show on the Discovery channel put the British Challenger behind the Centurion and the M1A1(2)Abrams tank which was second. Out ranked by the T-34. Even thou I do think the Challenger is a better tank than the Abrams series tank it does lack the production and experience of the American counterpart.


I saw that TV show, the main reason that caused M1A1 wasnt the winner was his fuel comsumption.

Chevan
12-01-2006, 05:09 AM
Considering our poll guys
I think its not correct to make equal the heavy Tigers (57 tonns) and half-heavy Panther (45 tonns) and with really medium T-34-85 (32 tonns) and Sherman M4 (30 tonns).
If we'll talk about it's role in the WW2 - certainly each tank was the best in it's kind.
In common view i agree with Gen Sandworm.
Heavy germans tanks were extremaly effective in the defence but during the offencive they were very vulnerable as it was in Poland in 1944 ( when near the Oglenduv 502 heavy battallion of King Tigers was destroyed buy the 20 T-34-85).
In the history of WW2 (especialy in the Eastern front) there're a lot of cases when maneuverable medium tanks won the duels with heavy Tigers.
Having the better optic and more effective gun germans has a less maneuverableness and maintainability.
Lets consider some figures-The relation engine power to the mass:
Soviet T-34-85 has (500 h.f.)/(32 tonns) =15.6
Sherman M4 - (400 h.s.)/30 tonns = 13.3
Panther PzIV - 690 h.f./45 tonns = 15.3
Tiger PzVI -700 h.f./57 tonns = 12.3
King Tiger - 600 h.f/68 tonns = 8.8
As can you see T-34 has a best figure - as the resault T-34 was the most maneuverable and fast ( maximum speed -55 km/hour) then any german or allied considering tanks.
Moreover T-34 has economical diesel engine ( in difference from any other tank) therefore the stock of motion -360 km( for instance petrol's Pamther - not more 200 km , petrol's Sherman - only 160 km).
By the way I think it was the stupidest mistake of germans - to create heavy tanks with petrol's engines. Germany since 1943 had a big problems with petrol.
According to the information above we can compare Panther and T-34-85:
if you has the batlle like in Kurs - the big open distances about 1-2 km certainly germans tanks has advantage becouse better optic and gun.
But if you in the urban -close maneuverable battle - i think the T-34-85 the best.
And gentlemens why has nobody vote for Sherman?
This was the single mass tank of WW2 which has the gyroscope stabilized systen for the gun - very excellent thing.
Soviet tankers who fight on the lend lese Shermans very good recalled this tank.
Very soft suspension , excellent electric equpment and stabilized system - this were the things by which Sherman was better T-34.
But Sherman has a weak armour and 75/76-mm guns in was not good ( especialy against Tigers).


T-34 as well as Sherman was good because "of plenty of them".

This is very importain advantage my friend. Becouse both Sherman and especially T-34 was a high-unificaited and standartized of production. Therefore T-34 and Sgerman had a much more maintainability than germans Panther and Tiger.Becouse T-34 had a lot of spare parts.
Soviet tank industry had just TWO basic chassis medium T-34 ( all of modification T-34, SU-85, SU-100) and heavy KB ( KB-1/2, IS-1/2, SU-122/152) during all the war. Therefore it was possible to produce the great quantity of tanks - much more than germans. Besides this situation made the repair of the tanks much easy.

Cheers.

Chevan
12-01-2006, 05:13 AM
-
The Centurion was developed during WWII, was rushed to Germany in May 1945 for testing in combat conditions, but did not see action. I would have to agree that the Centurion was the best to see service. For this poll however, I will go with the Panther.
-
I hear the Centurion was the best british tank all of the times, but i think the history of Centurion belongs to the post WW2 period and it could be compare with post war tanks like T-54.

Cheers.

George Eller
12-01-2006, 07:59 AM
-

The Centurion was developed during WWII, was rushed to Germany in May 1945 for testing in combat conditions, but did not see action. I would have to agree that the Centurion was the best to see service. For this poll however, I will go with the Panther.

Centurion Tank
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showpost.php?p=82383&postcount=6
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showpost.php?p=83169&postcount=30

-



-


I hear the Centurion was the best british tank all of the times, but i think the history of Centurion belongs to the post WW2 period and it could be compare with post war tanks like T-54.

Cheers.

-

Certainly the active career of the Centurion and it's use in combat belong to the post-war period, but the tank was developed during the war years and did enter service before the close of the war. The war in Europe ended in May, but Japan did not surrender until August 15, 1945. So technically the Centurion's service began during the closing months of WWII.

-

HG
12-01-2006, 05:27 PM
The Panther is a better tank than the T-34. Why do I say so? Well guys do not look at the fact that the Panther had a weak engine and thus make it out as sh*t. IF the Panther were build in the same numbers as the T-34 what do you think would have happend?

I think the Russians had greater numbers and thus used it to their full atvantage.

Panzerknacker
12-01-2006, 07:10 PM
The Panther is a better tank than the T-34. Why do I say so? Well guys do not look at the fact that the Panther had a weak engine and thus make it out as sh*t. IF the Panther were build in the same numbers as the T-34 what do you think would have happend?



Combat and Experience Report on the Action near Wilkowischken from 9 to 11 August 1944 by Oberfeldwebel Heinz Bergmann of the 4. Kompanie/Panzer-Regiment 26 (Extract from T. Jentz's Panther book, courtesy of Rob White's Panther page (http://members.tripod.com/~dietmagic/panther.html)).


The East Prussian border was threatened. The enemy had succeeded in reaching Wilkowischken. Counter measures were initiated. During the night of 8/9 August, heavy Panzers, Artillerie, Fusiliers, Grenadiers and Flak came rolling together on the roads Ebenrode-Eydtkau-Wirballen and gathered in the assembly area. It is the best division in the East, "Grosssdeutchland" with its attached units. The fire fighters of the East as they are called. It had the objectives of pushing back this corner of the Front and to retake Wilkowischken.
The assembly area was lit by the dawn and quiet reigned. A gigantic portrait of military might and power had gathered here in a confined area. Punctually at the ordered time for the attack, the motors started and their droning ripped through the still of the morning. Like an avalanche, the impregnable spearhead rolled toward the enemy main battle line and bored through. Closely followed by the Fusiliers and Grenadiers enlivened by a spirit to attack against which every resistance must break. Also, the enemy is awakened and sent his artillery and motar shells against the juggernaut.
Enemy destroyer aircraft attack in waves attempting to force a halt. Fountains of earth climb skyward. Sheds in which the enemy take cover, go up in smoke and flames. Unstoppable, the spearhead advanced toward Wilkowischken, grinding guns and positions underneath. Often in man-to-man combat, the Fusiliers and Grenadiers engage the tough and stubborn enemy. At about 1200 hours, the city is in our hands. The battlefield shows the mark of heavy combat. The enemy has lost large quantities of both men and material. Positions were established to defend the city.
Toward the southeast, in the rear of the city, two Panthers pulled into their defensive area. Russian tanks were reported. Not a half hour had passed when four Russian tanks approached the city from from the southeast. They were spotted immediately, but the range was still too long. Then they disappeared into a depression. Will they come up again is the question. There, somewhat left, all four appeared in a line at a range of 1300 meters. Now their full size was seen and the defenders opened fire. Five shots quickly followed each other and three columns of smoke stand out against the sky. The fourth was lucky to turn right and disappeared into a patch of woods. Was it only an advanced spearhead? Will still more follow or were they recon vehicles? The eyes of the commanders search the terrain. But nothing stirs.


http://i16.tinypic.com/2hs7xqo.jpg


Twilight slowly enveloped the terrain in darkness. What will the next day bring? Will the Russians try to counterattack and retake the city or not? The leader decided to change to another position to get a better field of fire. During the night running motors from moving tanks were heard. Toward morning, a Panther was called back for resupply and the other Panther had to take over the entire defense.
Daybreak has long since passed and an attack was no expected when out of the depression at full speed fourteen Russian tanks carrying infantry charged toward the defending Panther. The loader was outside well away from the Panther finishing his business when shelling forced him to take cover. This made the situation more difficult. The driver took his place and fire was opened at a range of 1000 meters. Shot after shot was sent toward the attacker. The enemy had charged to within 600 meters turned right and disappeared into a hole. Four enemy tanks remained as smoking wrecks on the track. An immediate call on the radio alerted the defenders positioned further to the north. They managed to destroy six of the ten remaining tanks. Driving wildly, the rest escaped. An attack behind our front had been repulsed and cost the enemy heavy losses.
Again the defending Panther changed his position. After an hour, the second Panther returned from being resupplied and took up his defensive position. The enemy hadn’t given up their attempt to enter the city. During the afternoon, the enemy with an infantry battalion supported by four SU assault guns, under cover of the tall corn fields, tried twice to break in from the southeast. But, both attacks were completely repulsed by the two defending Panthers. All four SU assault guns that took part in both of these attacks were shot up. Two Panthers defending the city from the south and southeast had broke up two tank and two infantry attacks. The enemy suffered the loss of eleven tanks and very heavy losses of men.

HG
12-02-2006, 01:52 AM
Now that just proves the Panther were superior, but just think if there were the same numbers of the German heavy tanks in the battle of Kursk then it would have turned out not the way it did.

pdf27
12-02-2006, 04:22 AM
Now that just proves the Panther were superior, but just think if there were the same numbers of the German heavy tanks in the battle of Kursk then it would have turned out not the way it did.
Not quite - it demonstrates that as a tank the Panther is superior. When you start throwing in production numbers and realise that you can get maybe 20 T-34 derivatives for the cost of one Panther it becomes rather less clear.

Lancer44
12-02-2006, 06:20 AM
This is very importain advantage my friend. Becouse both Sherman and especially T-34 was a high-unificaited and standartized of production. Therefore T-34 and Sgerman had a much more maintainability than germans Panther and Tiger.Becouse T-34 had a lot of spare parts.
Soviet tank industry had just TWO basic chassis medium T-34 ( all of modification T-34, SU-85, SU-100) and heavy KB ( KB-1/2, IS-1/2, SU-122/152) during all the war. Therefore it was possible to produce the great quantity of tanks - much more than germans. Besides this situation made the repair of the tanks much easy.

Cheers.

Hi Chevan,

You are perfectly right!
Soviet industry and their decision makers concentrated, (as well as Americans), on one kind of chassis on which they build different versions.
Even Sherman had it's predecessor - Grant.

Germans tried to build "wonder" each time they approached design board.
I will not even mention their crazy ideas like "Mouse"...
Our Panzerknacker friend is a real specialist in this field!
Just think how much energy Germans wasted designing and even producing prototypes of such useless monsters...

Cheers,

Lancer44

Panzerknacker
12-02-2006, 03:36 PM
you can get maybe 20 T-34 derivatives for the cost of one Panther it becomes rather less clear.

20 x T-34 = a single Panther ¡¡.... :shock: :shock: ...as far as I know the Panther weight 44 tons not 440 tons.

Ausf D.

http://www.waffenhq.de/panzer/panther-d-2.jpg

George Eller
12-02-2006, 04:59 PM
-

One of the threads on the topic of the best tank of WW2 at The History Channel forums:

http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=300018732&tstart=75&mod=1162554307158

http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=300018732&start=15&tstart=75

http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=300018732&start=30&tstart=75

A few examples of the many posts:


Re: the best tank of WW2? Posted: Nov 2, 2006 2:39 PM (43 of 45)

When talking about "best tanks" I think in terms of how they stack up, one on one, to each other. Each tank taken as an individual and not i terms of how easy it may have been to produce, maintenance requirements or even experts opinion(s) on the History, Discovery or Learning Channel.

Personally I like the Panther tank. I think it combined speed, agility, manouverability, armor and firepower in the best balance of any tank in the war. I also love the way it looks which shouldn't factor in, but it does.

In my opinion the only flaw was the length of the main gun which made it less than ideal for city street fighting and deep woods battle. On the other hand the L/70 gun had better penetration than the Tiger I's 88mm, though not the L/71 88 on the King Tiger. That latter gun was being fitted to the Panther at the end of the war however. The 75mm rounds were smaller than the 88 and allowed for greater ammunition loads as well.

The Panther's frontal armor was better than the Tiger's as well. Once the problems that plagued the "D" model at Kursk were solved the Panther became the most dangerous if not the most feared tank on the battlefield. That latter honor was the Tiger's throughout the war.

The Panther continued to serve in the French army until the early fifties (quite ironic, there) and never surrendered to anybody even in that capacity.

The T-34 was the inspiration for the Panther and while always a bit faster it was T-34-burgers (dead meat) when it faced the Panther. Even the T-34/85 couldn't stand up to the Panther 'tanko a tanko' because the optics as well as the 85mm gun weren't up to the German standard.

Comments are of course welcome...


Re: the best tank of WW2? Posted: Jul 23, 2004 9:17 AM (4 of 45)

In my opinion if you want to also count battlefield capabilities than the panther was possibly the best tank. German comparison of German tanks with the new (at the time) Russian T-34/85 and JS-II (122mm), from March 23rd of 1944, stated that: "The Panther is far superior to the T34-85 for frontal fire (Panther Ausf G could penetrate frontal armor of T-34/85 at 800m, while T-34/85 could penetrare frontal armor of Panther Ausf G at 500m), approximately equal for side and rear fire, superior to the JS for frontal fire and inferior for side and rear fire." In 1943 and 1944, Panther was able to destroy any enemy tank in existence at ranges of 2000m, while in general veteran Panther crews reported 90 percent hit rate at ranges up to 1000m. According to US Army Ground Forces statistics, destruction of a single Panther was achieved after destruction of 5 M4 Shermans or some 9 T-34s.

"To destroy a Panther, a tank destroyer with a three inch (Gun Motor Carriage M10) or 76mm gun (Gun Motor Carriage M18 Hellcat) would have to aim for the side or rear of the turret, the opening through which the hull-mounted machine gun projected, or for the underside of the gun shield (mantlet)." - U.S. Army report prior to September of 1944.

-


Re: the best tank of WW2? Posted: Aug 2, 2004 9:56 AM (21 of 45)

Dear Friends:
While the 85mm gun on the T-34/85 was excellent for both AP and HE ammunition, the Panther's 75/L70 had superior muzzle velocity and superior armor defeating capability. I don't know which had the better HE shell, but the Panther's 75mm was good enough.
The Panther had far superior optics and a rudimentary ranging system for its main gun. This gave it the ability to outrange the T-34 and hit and kill it where the terrain was clear enough for extended range engagements.
The Panther had superior hull and turret protection against the frontal arc engagements. The T-34/85 had excellent armor, well sloped and a smaller silhouette. However, the Panther had superior ballistic protection.
While the Panther was a better tank, the T-34/85 was excellent and the force ratio and superior numbers of T-34s made up for any qualitative difference.
Stalin was right when he said quantity has a quality of its own.

-


Re: the best tank of WW2? Posted: Aug 3, 2004 6:00 AM (22 of 45)

Probably in 1941-1942 the T34 was the best. Since 1943 is clear that the german Tiger and Panther tanks were better. BUT the Tigers were too expensive to form large batlegroups and to slow for the blietzkrieg. The Panthers were endeed the best tanks from ww2. Easy to maneuver, hevy armoured, high velocity, speed was good enough for divisional purpouses, much fiable than the T34.
The diference between the T34 and the Panther was that the Panther entered the batle too late(1943) and in small numbers.
But these two are for sure the best tanks of WW2 - the Panther and the T34.

-


Re: the best tank of WW2? Posted: Aug 6, 2004 7:10 AM (30 of 45)

In the Pacific the tank on Midway island played a VERY significant role!!

Part of the water system...

Time and time again, there was not overall "best" tank of the war. I really like the Panther, but it wasn't bulletproof either. The T34/76 WAS a wonderful tank, and for the job it was designed for so was the Sherman. The M-10 was a real beauty, tho' a TD a perhaps not a qualifier...

What about the Hetzer Flammenpanzer, or the Churchill flamer version? Altho' as I've said before the AVRE is my favorite in the Churchill line.

Tanks aren't like "Rocky Balboa", I don't think there was a single tank that could take on all comers! Even an M3 would have a shot at a Panther with a lucky "up the kilt" shot!

Anybody know how gammon bombs were activated??

When it comes down to it, picking the "best tank" is like your choice in beer. It's not neccessarily the best, it's YOUR best, your favorite. Bud and Bud lite are certainly the Sherman and T34 of the beer world, but Newcastle is still better, there just isn't nearly the same amount produced!

I think I like zymurgy...anybody notice?

lol...

-


Re: the best tank of WW2? Posted: Aug 7, 2004 12:10 PM (34 of 45)

'Bud and Bud lite are certainly the Sherman and T34 of the beer world, but Newcastle is still better, there just isn't nearly the same amount produced!'

I have to say, there have been many of these 'Best tank' discussions before. Hell, every board you go on that talks about WW2, there is bound to be a 'best tank' thread.

I can honestly say that I have never read a better metaphor then the one above. I have never heard anyone use beer to explain their opinion of these best tank discussions.

-

HG
12-03-2006, 07:02 AM
Panzerknacker he meant the Russians could build 20 T-34 for the price of one Panther, but I just want to ad the Germans thought to big and produced these heavy machines that had a lot of power but just frankly took to long to build and were to expensive. They could stand there ground greatly but they could not produce enough of them to be fully usefull.

Chevan
12-03-2006, 08:52 AM
Combat and Experience Report on the Action near Wilkowischken from 9 to 11 August 1944 by Oberfeldwebel Heinz Bergmann of the 4. Kompanie/Panzer-Regiment 26 (Extract from T. Jentz's Panther book, courtesy of Rob White's Panther page (http://members.tripod.com/~dietmagic/panther.html)).

Panzerknacker there're a lot of stories when Tiger or Panther being in ambush or use a tactical suddenness shoted a big number of medium allies tanks. Look for instance 27 jule of 1944 Ernst Barkman on the its Panther meeted the US tank column and hited 9 Shermans for the single battle.
Or like Michael Wittmann in the Villers-Bocage killed 21 british tanks (Cromwell, Sherman and Farefly) and other 28 armoured vechicles ONLY FOR 20 MINUTES(!!!)
But all this stories just prove the Panzer and Tiger (being the heavy tanks) could be very danger in defence or ambush. But in the attack they weren't so good and allies tankers could effectively fight with germans. Becouse Germans "monsters" were often too slow and vulnerable. Look for instance to the battle 13 august 1944 in Poland when leutenant Oskin on the T-34-85 shooted 3 King Tigers and fired one.

Cheers.

Chevan
12-03-2006, 09:18 AM
Panzerknacker he meant the Russians could build 20 T-34 for the price of one Panther, but I just want to ad the Germans thought to big and produced these heavy machines that had a lot of power but just frankly took to long to build and were to expensive. They could stand there ground greatly but they could not produce enough of them to be fully usefull.
Panzercnacker is right .
One Panther couldn't be equal the 20 T-34 in production. Indeed the prime cost of the production of one Panther was no more then two Pz-IV (i.e. 3 or maybe 4 T-34-85) . Certainly not 20 T-34.
And i have to convince that German strategy of limited production of heavy tanks since 1943 ( which were very effective in defence) was very right and succesfull becouse after 1943 germany really wage a deffence war and only total war resources and material superiority (thanks for the god) helped us to win the war.
Even if Germans could prodused instead of 6 000 Panthers in 1943-45 --- 12 000 of Pz-IV they could prepeared so much professionals tankers ( 60 000 mens of crew). Therefore German tank strategy was right and 1850 Tigers were much effective then 5000 or 7000 Pz-IV.

Cheers.

Nickdfresh
12-03-2006, 05:19 PM
The T-34/85 hands down --more reliable and it was on the winning side...

Chevan
12-03-2006, 11:41 PM
The T-34/85 hands down --more reliable and it was on the winning side...
That's right Nickdfresh :D

Gen. Sandworm
12-04-2006, 02:24 AM
Even thou I voted for the T-34 myself I kinda surprised no one voted for the Sherman. Of course when you mention tank I guess more ppl think of the ETO than the PTO.

Panzerknacker
12-04-2006, 09:28 AM
Panzerknacker he meant the Russians could build 20 T-34 for the price of one Panther, but I just want to ad the Germans thought to big and produced these heavy machines that had a lot of power but just frankly took to long to build and were to expensive. They could stand there ground greatly but they could not produce enough of them to be fully usefull

Dont be confused HG, as Chevan said the T-34 was not that cheap, the diference lay in the large availability of raw material and the fact that the russian cam manufacture their weapons undisturbed by long range bombers...the germans did not.





But all this stories just prove the Panzer and Tiger (being the heavy tanks) could be very danger in defence or ambush. But in the attack they weren't so good and allies tankers could effectively fight with germans. Becouse Germans "monsters" were often too slow and vulnerable. Look for instance to the battle 13 august 1944 in Poland when leutenant Oskin on the T-34-85 shooted 3 King Tigers and fired one



You are right , if you can manage to get in the sides of a Panther the armor was helpless, the 40-45 side plate cannot withstand even a 75 american gun. Anyway if you give to the Panther a little space in fight, let say 1000 meters open field..well watch out of that 75 mm mm high speed cannon. It penetrate 10 % more steel that the 88 from tiger 1.

Kursk:

Despite Guderian's warnings, Hitler's desire to employ these tanks in the up-coming "Operation Zitadelle" (the assault on the Kursk salient) conducted to a disaster. Not fully developed Panther were simply too ready to mechanical faults and the engine easily over-heated: of the 200 Panthers the 4th Panzer Armee had on July 4th 1943 (most in the ad-hoc formed 10th Panzerbrigade with panzer abteilung 51 and 52 and the others assigned to several companies of privileged units such as the GD and the IInd SS Panzerkorps's divisions) only 43 were still functional the following day (note that Panther's problems were known as the large complement of tanks to the two battalions was seen as remedy to this). Grossdeautschland Panzerregiment reported to have lost six of its brand new Panthers while moving towards the attack positions because of technical failures. In the mid-day of July 4th the same unit had a quarter of its Panther broken-down and by July 5th it has lost the 80% of its Panthers! Gefreiter Werner Kriegel of Pz.Abt. 51 remembers:



"[...] By the evening of 5th, Pz.Abt. 51 had only 22 Panthers operationa. Some 28 were totally destroyed, the rest damaged. My comrades complained about the final final drives and of their engines overheating. The engine compartiment was very tight because of UK equipment (diving equipement) ... On the 8th of July we again headed for Oboyan south of Kursk. Our tank received a hit form a tank gun at the commander's cupola. We carried on the attack with an open hatch and a cracked cupola. My commander shill has the shell ... We lost one tank to one of those heavy assault guns [SU-152], the mantlet was simply penetrated. We also met American tanks [M3A3 Lee-Grant] which were no match for us ... We destroyed a number of T-34s at ranges well over 2,500 meters ..."

pdf27
12-04-2006, 05:42 PM
Panzercnacker is right .
One Panther couldn't be equal the 20 T-34 in production. Indeed the prime cost of the production of one Panther was no more then two Pz-IV (i.e. 3 or maybe 4 T-34-85) . Certainly not 20 T-34.
Cost for the steel, etc. will be similar. The problem comes when you allow for the fact that the Panthers were a much more complicated beast, built to much closer tolerances and with more finely machined parts.
While it is still possible to built such machines without the use of highly skilled labour, it needs very advanced production engineering techniques, statistical process control and the like. The only nation on earth capable of doing this at the time (and for many years afterwards until Deming went to Japan) was the United States - hence the massive production of all sorts of weaponry in the US.
The Russians got around this problem by design - the overwhelming majority of their weapons were designed to be made from very roughly machined parts, with loose tolerances, and to work anyway. Hence, they're crude but they work and can also be produced in huge numbers with an unskilled workforce such as they found themselves with when the factories were reestablished behind the Urals.
Germany tried to make complex, closely toleranced machines with an unskilled labour force (the skilled labour was largely off at the front, and they were using a mix of unskilled German, skilled foreign and slave labour instead) and without the genius the US were applying to production engineering. It didn't work, hence the immense US and Soviet production totals in comparison to the German ones.

Incidentally, the UK had similar problems to Germany if less severely because they used their skilled labour better (keeping it in factories rather than sending it to the front). UK war production was ultimately limited by labour availablility however.

Guy Sajer
12-05-2006, 09:50 PM
The Centurion tank would not measure up very well against the Panther when it came out in 45/46. A couple of reasons:

650 horsepower ( 13 hp/t ) to the 700 + for the panther ( 15hp /t). This translated to a lower top speed ( 34 km/h ) than the Panther ( 45km/h )

A crash gear box transmission which was extremely difficult to operate. Mobility was severely hampered until the British redesigned the transmission several years later.

The Centurion had less armour on the front where it was most needed than a Panther.




To suggest that a Sherman or T34 was the better tank based on the thousands manufactured is not really addressing the real issue of battlefield performance. All that does is identify the massive economic power of the US and Russia.

If I was a tanker in WWII, I would be most concerned about the ability to kill the enemy before they could kill me. That concern is remedied by having the gun to kill at long range and the armour to protect me.

Take the Tiger over the Panther.

As a gun platform the Tiger was extremely stable with interleaved roadwheels which provided for a very smooth ride even over rough ground.

The 88 while not having the highest velocity, had the mass of shell to punch through heavier armour at long range whereas the 75 of the Panther would shatter or bounce off. The ability to reach out and touch someone from long range ( 1500 yds out to 3000 yds on the Russian plain ) allowed the Tiger to dominate a battlefield by engaging the enemy first.

The optics and ranging equipment to use the 88 to its fullest. The Allies did not have range finding equipment built into their gun optics. They could not even hope to hit a German tank at long range let alone penetrate.

The armour was of the highest quality rolled homogenous steel plate, and was considered to of a higer quality than the Panther, which was somewhat brittle. Although not sloped like the Panther, it was thick enough to stop all Allied guns except for very late in the war with the apperance of 100mm + anti tank guns.

It was far more mobile than many think with a ground pressure that was almost identical to the Sherman. In fact with its wide tracks, it had better off road ability than the Sherman. Also, it had regenerative steering which allowed it to turn 360 sitting in one place. A Sherman's turning circle was 32 feet. A Tiger could pivot in one spot always presenting it's thick frontal armour to the enemy.

German army records indicate that Tigers averaged 9 - 12 kills for every Tiger.

I would rather be in a Tiger.

George Eller
12-05-2006, 11:31 PM
The Centurion tank would not measure up very well against the Panther when it came out in 45/46. A couple of reasons:

650 horsepower ( 13 hp/t ) to the 700 + for the panther ( 15hp /t). This translated to a lower top speed ( 34 km/h ) than the Panther ( 45km/h )

A crash gear box transmission which was extremely difficult to operate. Mobility was severely hampered until the British redesigned the transmission several years later.

The Centurion had less armour on the front where it was most needed than a Panther.

-

Guy, are you sure about the armor?

The figures I have are:

Pzkw V Ausf G
max. armor
turret front 110mm
upper hull front glacis plate 80mm

Pzkw V Ausf F
max. armor
turret mantlet 120mm
upper hull front glacis plate 80mm

Centurion Mark I (Prototype) never went into full production.
turret mantlet 152mm
upper hull front glacis plate 76mm

Centurion Mark II (A41A) prototype produced January 1945, first production model.
turret mantlet 152mm
upper hull front glacis plate 118mm

sources:

Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two, Revised Edition, Peter Chamberlain and Hilary Doyle, Arms and Armour Press, 1993, pp 124-126.

British and American Tanks of World War II, Peter Chamberlain and Chris Ellis, Arco Publishing Company, 1975, pp 52-53.

Centurion tank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_tank

-

Chevan
12-05-2006, 11:31 PM
You are right , if you can manage to get in the sides of a Panther the armor was helpless, the 40-45 side plate cannot withstand even a 75 american gun. Anyway if you give to the Panther a little space in fight, let say 1000 meters open field..well watch out of that 75 mm mm high speed cannon. It penetrate 10 % more steel that the 88 from tiger 1.

Kursk:

Despite Guderian's warnings, Hitler's desire to employ these tanks in the up-coming "Operation Zitadelle" (the assault on the Kursk salient) conducted to a disaster. Not fully developed Panther were simply too ready to mechanical faults and the engine easily over-heated: of the 200 Panthers the 4th Panzer Armee had on July 4th 1943 (most in the ad-hoc formed 10th Panzerbrigade with panzer abteilung 51 and 52 and the others assigned to several companies of privileged units such as the GD and the IInd SS Panzerkorps's divisions) only 43 were still functional the following day (note that Panther's problems were known as the large complement of tanks to the two battalions was seen as remedy to this). Grossdeautschland Panzerregiment reported to have lost six of its brand new Panthers while moving towards the attack positions because of technical failures. In the mid-day of July 4th the same unit had a quarter of its Panther broken-down and by July 5th it has lost the 80% of its Panthers! Gefreiter Werner Kriegel of Pz.Abt. 51 remembers:



"[...] By the evening of 5th, Pz.Abt. 51 had only 22 Panthers operationa. Some 28 were totally destroyed, the rest damaged. My comrades complained about the final final drives and of their engines overheating. The engine compartiment was very tight because of UK equipment (diving equipement) ... On the 8th of July we again headed for Oboyan south of Kursk. Our tank received a hit form a tank gun at the commander's cupola. We carried on the attack with an open hatch and a cracked cupola. My commander shill has the shell ... We lost one tank to one of those heavy assault guns [SU-152], the mantlet was simply penetrated. We also met American tanks [M3A3 Lee-Grant] which were no match for us ... We destroyed a number of T-34s at ranges well over 2,500 meters ..."

Sure Panzerknacker, first Panthers in the Kursk battle weren't a good. Also we know the "sad" story about Elephant/Ferdinand self-propelled gun in Kursk.
About hundred Ferdinands were practically all destroed by the soviet infantry becouse this monsters (which was deadly for the soviet tanks) hadn't machin gan and it was so slow.
By the way first SU-152 on chassi KV-1( developed in 1943) which took part in Kursk battle showed itself as effective mean to fight any german armored technics.
http://howard-stern.narod.ru/tankuww2/ussr_t19.jpg

Cheers.

Chevan
12-06-2006, 12:44 AM
Cost for the steel, etc. will be similar. The problem comes when you allow for the fact that the Panthers were a much more complicated beast, built to much closer tolerances and with more finely machined parts.
While it is still possible to built such machines without the use of highly skilled labour, it needs very advanced production engineering techniques, statistical process control and the like. The only nation on earth capable of doing this at the time (and for many years afterwards until Deming went to Japan) was the United States - hence the massive production of all sorts of weaponry in the US.
The Russians got around this problem by design - the overwhelming majority of their weapons were designed to be made from very roughly machined parts, with loose tolerances, and to work anyway. Hence, they're crude but they work and can also be produced in huge numbers with an unskilled workforce such as they found themselves with when the factories were reestablished behind the Urals.
Germany tried to make complex, closely toleranced machines with an unskilled labour force (the skilled labour was largely off at the front, and they were using a mix of unskilled German, skilled foreign and slave labour instead) and without the genius the US were applying to production engineering. It didn't work, hence the immense US and Soviet production totals in comparison to the German ones.

Incidentally, the UK had similar problems to Germany if less severely because they used their skilled labour better (keeping it in factories rather than sending it to the front). UK war production was ultimately limited by labour availablility however.
All this is true pdf.
In the soviet tanks plants there're a lot of women and even 12-14 children workers becouse the enourmous lost of mens population in first period of war.
And certainly soveit tanks production line was less complicated then germans or allies.
But have you accurate figures of prime cost of the production (or total labor expense and the materials) for the one Panther. I think no, becouse in this way you figure 20 T-34 = 1 Panther will be another.
What i read that Germans made a great forces to to reduce the cost of production of Panther. We have the statistic figures : sine 1943-45 were made about 6 000 Panthers, 7 000 Pz IV and 1850 Tigers.(i.e. Panthers were the most mass the heavy tank) And i read that Panther's production were the best (in comparision with other germans tank) in the relation effectiveness/price.

Cheers.

Tiger-I
12-06-2006, 10:35 AM
Something of interest.
What do reenactors use for their tanks?
Without seeming overly enthusiastic or or hawty in my questioning, it is simply a matter of curiosity for me---
Where, if one wanted an original Tiger or Panther, look?
And what would be the initial cost of obtaining one?
Demilled guns, of course.
I have seen individuals on the web who own originals, but I have never found any sales or ways or places they have obtained them.
I ssume the cost would be great?
I would be willing to go a certain amount, but I am guessing they would be out of range. Certainly more than say, a Corvette?
It would be interesting, historically speaking, and one could be used as learning aides for schools, and demonstrations.
Surely, it is out of range for me, I suppose.
But, curiosity is overwhelming.

Panzerknacker
12-06-2006, 06:27 PM
Sure Panzerknacker, first Panthers in the Kursk battle weren't a good. Also we know the "sad" story about Elephant/Ferdinand self-propelled gun in Kursk.
About hundred Ferdinands were practically all destroed by the soviet infantry becouse this monsters (which was deadly for the soviet tanks) hadn't machin gan and it was so slow.
By the way first SU-152 on chassi KV-1( developed in 1943) which took part in Kursk battle showed itself as effective mean to fight any german armored technics.




A very interesting picture. A captured Panther ausf D in the bulge with the inscription "tiger" ( or at list in achtungpanzer said it so) in the glacis plate.

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6962/sovpz5fv6.jpg


I wonder if this explain the large amount of "Tigers" claimed as destroyed for the Kursk defences, more than 200 when only there was 147 operative Tigers and less than 30 were actually knocked out.

Guy Sajer
12-06-2006, 07:19 PM
-

Guy, are you sure about the armor?

The figures I have are:

Pzkw V Ausf G
max. armor
turret front 110mm
upper hull front glacis plate 80mm

Pzkw V Ausf F
max. armor
turret mantlet 120mm
upper hull front glacis plate 80mm

Centurion Mark I (Prototype) never went into full production.
turret mantlet 152mm
upper hull front glacis plate 76mm

Centurion Mark II (A41A) prototype produced January 1945, first production model.
turret mantlet 152mm
upper hull front glacis plate 118mm

sources:

Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two, Revised Edition, Peter Chamberlain and Hilary Doyle, Arms and Armour Press, 1993, pp 124-126.

British and American Tanks of World War II, Peter Chamberlain and Chris Ellis, Arco Publishing Company, 1975, pp 52-53.

Centurion tank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_tank

-



I will double check. Thanks for the info.

Chevan
12-06-2006, 11:22 PM
A very interesting picture. A captured Panther ausf D in the bulge with the inscription "tiger" ( or at list in achtungpanzer said it so) in the glacis plate.
I wonder if this explain the large amount of "Tigers" claimed as destroyed for the Kursk defences, more than 200 when only there was 147 operative Tigers and less than 30 were actually knocked out.

The picture is excellent.
Yes i heared about mythical tigers ( which really were the Panthers , PzIV with armoured shields or something else) in the Kursk battle. And certainly real Tigers suffered less from the soviet AT-guns ant T-34-76.

Strina-Croatia
12-08-2006, 04:13 PM
I thin that if the germans where beater organised they could succesfuly beaten the russian army because you can always destroj 6-7-8- T-34 but there will always be the 9 T-34 that will fire on you.What i wont to say is that the T-34 was a mass production taank and it could ber driven by anyone but the german thanks couldnt.That is the reason that there was russian superiority in armour.My vote is the Tiger tank because it was everybodys worsat nightmare

Chevan
12-10-2006, 08:49 AM
...it could ber driven by anyone but the german thanks couldnt...
Well Strina, i'm not sure you easy could drive T-34 :D

Panzerknacker
12-15-2006, 07:27 PM
The t-34 as many other russian tank was everything but easy to drive.

Panthers of the Gross deustchland Div in action.


http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5572/lngleitej4.jpg

Panzerknacker
02-14-2007, 05:21 PM
Ernst Barkmann, Panther ace:

http://www.dasreich.ca/Barkmann2.jpg



Ernst Barkmann was born in Kisdorf in Holstein on August 25th of 1919.He was a son of a local farmer.


On April 1st of 1936, Ernst Barkmann joined SS-Standarte Germania as a volunteer and after three months of training joined the III Battalion of the Standarte at Radolfszell. Barkmann took part in Polish Campaign of 1939 serving with 9th Kompanie of SS-Standarte Germania as a machine gunner and was wounded there.

In Autumn of 1941, Barkmann was seriously wounded during fighting near Dnieprpetrowsk (Operation Barbarossa) and received the Iron Cross (Second Class).


In late 1941, Barkmann was transferred to Holland as an instructor of European SS-Volunteers but in early 1942, he volunteered for service with division's Panzer Regiment. Ernst Barkmann returnedto the Eastern Front in winter of 1942 and was transferred to 2nd Kompanie of 2nd Panzer Regiment of 2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich.Barkmann's unit was equipped with tanks panzerkampfwagen III with 50 mm guns which were outclassed by Soviet t-34 and others. In early 1943, 2nd Panzer Regiment took part in the Battle for Kharkov, where Barkmann won the Iron Cross (First Class). In mid 1943, Barkmann was transferred to 4th Kompanie which was equipped with new Panther tanks.

In late 1943, Ernst Barkmann was promoted to the rank of SS-Unterscharfuhrer. In early 1944, the entire division was transferred to Bordeaux area in southern France for rest and refitting as a panzer division. Following the D-Day (June 6 of 1944), 2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich was ordered to move northwards and was committed to battle.

In early July of 1944, Das Reich was moved to Saint Lo to halt the advance of the US Army's 9th and 30th Infantry Divisions and the 3rd Armored Division. On July 8th, Barkmann's Kompanie was a spearhead of Regiment's attack on the advancing American units. On this day, Ernst Barkmann knocked out his first Allied Sherman tank near St.Lo. On July 12th, he destroyed two more Shermans while disabling the third one. During that engagement Barkmann moved his camouflaged Panther to ambush position and awaited for more Allied armor, knocking out three Shermans. After that Ernst Barkmann's tank was hit by an anti-tank gun which caused fire. He decided to abandon his burning Panther and along with his crew he quickly put out the fire. After that engagement his Panther ended up in the workshop for repairs. After a day of rest, in morning of July 14th, Barkmann was ordered to recover four Panthers that had been cut off behind enemy lines. He succeeded in his task and added three more Shermans to his score.


On the same day at noon, Ernst Barkmann was ordered by the Regimental Commander SS-Obersturmbannfuhrer Tychsen to recover wounded German soldiers from their American captors.

Once again he succeeded and in the evening his own Panther was returned to him from the workshop. On July 26th, Barkmann's Panther suffered from engine problem and was sent to field workshop.When mechanics were working on it, field workshop was attacked by Allied fighter-bombers and Barkmann's Panther was hit in the engine compartment. By the dawn of July 27th, his Panther was repaired but he was cut off from the rest of the Kompanie and was on his way to rejoin it. On his way back, near the village of Le Lorey, Barkmann was stopped by the retreating German infantrymen who reported that Americans were closing in.

Ernst Barkmann decided to send two of his men to verify that report. They soon returned with news of American column made up of some 15 Shermans and other vehicles approaching.


Then Barkmann moved his tank up the road to the crossroad where he positioned his Panther in the surrounding oak trees, awaiting the enemy. When the American column approached, Ernst Barkmann opened fire, knocking out two leading tanks and then tanker truck.Two Shermans tried to go around burning wreckage that blocked the road and one of them was knocked out followed by the other one.

Ernst Barkmanns (Das Reich, 2nd SS Panzer Division) famous day long solo engagement against an American Armoured breakthrough towards St. Lo, Normandy, 26th July 1944. (art by David Pentland)

http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/1953/dhm792vx9.jpg


In the response, Americans retreated and called up the tactical fighter support and Barkmann's Panther was damaged and some of the crew members were wounded. Using the element of suprise two Shermans attacked "wounded" Panther but were also knocked out.Barkmann and his crew repaired their Panther and knocked out single Sherman while leaving.His driver managed to moved their damaged Panther to the safety of nearby village of Neufbourg. During that brave engagement often called "Barkmann's Corner", Ernst Barkmann destroyed approximately nine Sherman tanks and many other various vehicles.



On July 28th, Barkmann reached Coutances and joined the rest of his Kompanie. During two day period, he destroyed fifteen Shermans and other vehicles. On July 30th, Americans surrounded Granville but Barkmann towing one more damaged Panther was able to break out. In order to destroy their disabled Panther their crew decided to set it on fire and soon by mistake both Panthers caught fire. Both crews were forced to make their way to the German lines 7 kilometers away on foot. Barkmann reached Avranches on August 5th, and was warmly welcome by his comrades who heard about his exploits. For his bravery and skills Ernst Barkmann was recommended for Knight's Cross and was accepted on August 27th and was awarded on September 5th.

SS-Oberscharfuhrer Barkmann continued his successful career and took part in the Ardennes Offensive in December of 1944, where on December 25th he was seriously wounded. During the Ardennes Offensive, Barkmann's Panther drove into the group of American tanks from the 2nd Armored Division. Quickly combat begun and outnumbered Barkmann managed to knock out few Sherman tanks. One Sherman rammed Barkmann's Panther but didn't cause much damage although both tanks got stuck and Panther's engine stall. After few minutes, Barkmann's mechanic managed to restart the engine and Panther retreated with blocked turret. Even with the damage, Barkmann knocked out Sherman that waspursuing him and retreated to safety although his Panther was beyond the point of repair.

In March of 1945, Barkmann was once again fighting with Soviets in the area of town of Stuhlweissenburg, where he knocked out four T-34s and brought the total score of the Das Reich Division for the war so far to 3000 enemy tanks destroyed. At the time Das Reich was exhausted by non-stop fighting and lack of replacement tanks. Barkmann's unit alone had only nine fully operational vehiclesfrom which three were soon lost to Soviet Josef Stalin tanks.


The remaining six Panthers were ordered to link up with the remnants of the Panzer Regiment of the 1st SS Panzer Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler commanded by SS-Standartenfuhrer Jochen Peiper.By April of 1945, Barkmann saw action south of Vienna during the fighting in Austria. There his Panther was hit by a mistake by friendly soldiers and Barkmann along with his crew members was wounded. Later on his Panther was disabled in a huge bomb crater and was destroyed by its crew. Ernst Barkmann was able to reach British zone of operation where he was taken into captivity.

During his very successful career, Ernst Barkmann earned Knight's Cross for his bravery and skills along with the Panzer Assault Badge for 25 and 50 engagements with the enemy. He survived the war and lives in Kisdorf, Germany, where he was the long-time fire-chief and also major (Burgmeister).



http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/506/brk012dx1.jpg

George Eller
02-16-2007, 01:18 PM
-

Mostly Modern Color Video Clips:

Pzkw VI TIGER I

German Tiger tank No 131 at the
Bovington Tank Museum. It is the
only Tiger I left that is capable
of running under its own power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mihak7XPcQ

Bovington UK 1943 Tiger Tank working restored original.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzLRbDzk3mk

Bovington Tiger 2006 scene 1 by Vince Abbott
Tiger I running at Tankfest 2006 in Bovington, England.
The rebuilt engine is running smoothly and shows how the
Tiger would have sounded during the war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3I1dj7SJ0A

Bovington Tiger 2006 scene 2 by Vince Abbott
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPdEtq_INh0

Bovington Tiger 2006 scene 3 by Vince Abbott
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KmvVQn5m-k

Tiger
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1JKd6hiCu4

Tiger Tank 131
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDTtBEdKVqI

Tiger 131 again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DArKBhOlwAY

Tiger 131 Backing Up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17zhWLY5kPA

Tankfest 2006 - Tiger 131
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2ecuTygoow

Panzer VI (Tiger 1) and Panzer III at Tankfest 2006
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7Xc7M-N9nw

Inside a German Tiger I tank
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFzlZbfpQUo

-

Pzkw VI B King Tiger / Tiger II

Tiger II. in Aberdeen Proving Grounds
8mm movie film taken when 332 arrived at APG in the summer of 1945
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34GezMHX77w

Königstiger 104 is dragged out of one of the halls at Bovington Tank Museum,
17th June 2003.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEpADL9MI9Y

A restored King Tiger driving.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSmgMzFdv4M

Tiger II tank - restored & running
From the Musee de Blindes in Saumur, France this footage is of the last running Tiger II panzer.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7696001690439086249&pr=goog-sl

Musee de Blindes in Saumur, France
www.musee-des-blindes.asso.fr
http://www.musee-des-blindes.asso.fr/2blindes/2jpresent.htm

-

Pzkw V Panther

Restored Panther tank
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSc6dWyVMhg

Restored Panther is back again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_ZuYstvQ8k

Another restored Panther
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf1KrH1ZelY

Pzkw V Panther versus M26 Pershing - WWII video footage
Duel in Cologne (Koln), Germany.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqH_WEqNK5Y

-

Sherman Tank

Colour footage of some Sherman tanks during World War 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-7JZIHsRN0

A Bridge Too Far movie clip - Artillery support and Sherman armored column
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCBHtf4hYWQ

A Bridge Too Far movie clip - ambush of Sherman armored column
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbV2v2eBhYE

Tankfest 06 Easy 8 Sherman and Valentine set off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPeBzJduEZc

Sherman tank Firefly from the Royal Army Museum of Brussels.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrqqi6OJv4c

Sherman M4A1 "Combat Camel"of the Brussels Army Museum
is going to the garage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-ntf7XYUO8

Sherman tank - 'Ron'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6mzLSvL938

Sherman tank M4A1 driving lesson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La1n_qIFZhs

A Sherman tank driving away
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHGYy7wT9bc

Sherman tank in action at Bovington Museum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROQCCf1N0oU

Sherman tank M4 105mm "Spit Oil" at Tanks
in town 2006 event, at Mons in Belgium.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bkhhZYKMQU

Sherman tank M4 105mm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyOxeYXXWPA

Sherman tank
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSEgXZYCzUU

Sherman tank reenactment in Luxembourg (10 september 1944-2004)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6clUhvjYaKg

Sherman M4A1 and Swiss made Panzer 68 in Mons-Belgium
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suqOTSxpizQ

Sherman tank running over car.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCg4xSq1ezE

Sherman M74 Tank recovery driving past
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn41pW4WCLs

Sherman Tank at Bayeaux War Museum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmcfGkk3yTc

Sherman Tank Engine. This is an 1100 Cu in. all aluminum
Ford 4 cam, 32 valve v-8 that is used in a WWII Sherman Tank.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt5uSx3eFYU

Sherman tank M4A1 sound of the Continental R-975-C4 engine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n100GpJ7UB4

-

T-34 Tank

T34 Tank driving around at the Imperial War Museum Duxford
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H2yB97-QnU

Soviet T34 Tank
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoTgSNtHXFA

Cross of Iron - Battle Scene WW II - Eastern Front
A tribute to James Coburn, Sam Peckinpah, some T34
and the Landsers on the eastern front.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-u24EjzD-Y

Stalingrad movie clip - Germans fighting off a Russian tank and troop
advance near Stalingrad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rq5edjlhcaQ

T34 cap.1 Documentary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqYF56cF8z4
T34 cap.2 Documentary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgfZreNYrbo
T34 cap.3 Documentary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLP7Vb0akhA

T34 Tank
Iron Maiden's Bruce ****inson, driving one of his very own!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osHI0_MRLac
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pg15U2ruOZc

T-34 russian tank recovered from the swamp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtJkyd3JJWE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZHVgMzfD38

T-34 tank used in Budapest protests 2006
Anti-government protesters start up a T-34 tank that was part
of an exhibition commemorating the 1956 uprising.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohz9NzpkrQ8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUbZDhgF8kg

-

Ace Tankkiller
02-16-2007, 08:42 PM
Is it alright if I copy a story from another forum?It is a game community forum and you have to be registered to view the page otherwise.

Panzerknacker
02-16-2007, 08:50 PM
Is it alright if I copy a story from another forum?


Is all right as long you quote the source.

George..that is a gallery. :cool:

Ace Tankkiller
02-16-2007, 10:22 PM
http://images14.fotki.com/v220/photos/1/133612/2689450/pzkpfw_v_10-vi.jpg

WWII: Were you able to clear a route through?

Langanke: We reached the area of the one-sided fight and shortly drove off the American infantry into a field to the left. Back on the road we were hit by a round from an anti-tank gun and were deeply shocked. The driver and radio operator cried, "We are burning, we can't see anything anymore." Here, for the first time in the war, we experienced phosphorus shells. It must have been a towed gun, because I couldn't see any armor. We backed up a couple of meters and crawled into a small side lane. Just around the corner and out of sight we ran our tank up onto a big heap of ammunition boxes and other junk, thereby killing the motor. Several attempts by the driver to start the motor were in vain. We didn't dare let the Panther roll forward down that heap because we would be helpless in sight of the enemy. We had to crank up the motor. I jumped out of my turret and put some boxes together so I could stand on them. I stuck in the crank at such an angle that I could force down its handle with my stomach and push it up with my arms. I did this several times as quickly as possible, and finally the motor turned over. Fear increases your strength considerably; normally you needed two men for this action. We then rushed around the corner and, firing with cannon and machine guns, we eliminated the anti-tank gun. The way was now free, and we returned to the head of our column. All that had taken some time, and under the impression that we couldn't break through the roadblock, Schreiber had decided to turn back, swing to the west and try another route south. I pleaded with him not to do that, pointing out the traffic jams and the fact that, come daylight when aircraft were overhead, there would be no movement at all. He insisted, and I had to obey, of course. At the next corner, we talked to the leader of a small battle group that had already been in contact with the enemy. He was confident he could hold his position. He was too optimistic.

http://images14.fotki.com/v222/photos/1/133612/2689450/panzer86-vi.jpg

WWII: Was it still dark when you were done with all this?

Langanke: The night was gone by now, and we moved in full daylight. Pretty soon aircraft dotted the sky. First they were busy north and south of us, and we were able to drive another three to four kilometers in the next hour or so, thereby passing St. Martin-de-Cenilly. Then our route was taken care of -- after the first attacks, the road was blocked for good. The planes could then, quite calmly, pick target after target. Since there was no defense, it must have been a picnic for those guys in the air. For us on the ground it was terrible. To make it even worse, artillery started shelling us. Here we were with quite a bit of combat capacity and no chance to use it, just being smashed. Our division lost about two-thirds of its weapons and equipment in the pocket. When all was over in the afternoon, I guess the same number of vehicles as were destroyed could still have moved. But the jam on the road was complete. Just before the first attack on our column, we had reached a point some 200 meters from the Hambye-Roncey Road near la Valtolaine. In front of us a burned-out tractor with a big artillery piece and other vehicles blocked the way. Schreiber jumped off our Panther and tried to find out what was going on in front of us. He ran across the Hambye-Roncey Road, but American troops had established a roadblock at that point, and he couldn't come back. From then on, the rest of the men relied on me.

http://images12.fotki.com/v216/photos/1/133612/2689450/ww2_falaise2-vi.jpg

WWII: Were there no other officers present at that point to take command?

Langanke: Yes, but this was an unusual and unexpected situation. Normally the next rank took over, but this was different. It just happened. Somebody had to do it, and I was the guy on whose tank Schreiber had sat.

http://images12.fotki.com/v215/photos/1/133612/2689450/panzer103-vi.jpg

Ace Tankkiller
02-16-2007, 10:31 PM
WWII: Now that you unexpectedly found yourself in command of this ad hoc force, what did you do?

Langanke: After the first couple of attacks, the radio sets on the back of my Panther caught fire. I quickly opened the back hatch of the turret, leaned out and pushed the ignited stuff off the vehicle. I burned one hand, but it wasn't too bad. What was real bad was that the planes had seen one tank left down there, seemingly still operable and with the crew in it. They now concentrated on us. It was finally a considerable number that dealt exclusively with us. The continuous rattle of the bullets on all sides of the turret drove you crazy. Then a big bang! In the turret roof there was a hole, where a discharger for smoke grenades should be installed. When that piece of equipment was not available, this opening was covered with a round plate fastened with four bolts. We had such a lid. The enormous number of bullet impacts had broken the bolts and flung the lid away. Daylight in the turret! The loader and myself had the same reaction. We grabbed our blankets, turned them together into a kind of cone and wedged them into the hole so it served as a backstop. Twice, the impact of so many projectiles threw our contraption down, but luckily we had it in again before more bullets rained down on us.


http://images15.fotki.com/v11/photos/1/133612/2689450/panzer49-vi.jpg

WWII: Can you describe the scene around your tank?

Langanke: Some 20 to 30 meters in front of us a group of paratroopers had been mowed down by the first air attack. Among those pilots must have been some extremely queer characters. Time and again they buzzed this group and fired into the dead bodies. They flew just above the treetops, so they must have seen all the details. Slowly the limbs were torn off, the intestines were spilled. It's one of the most terrible impressions I remember from the war. The gunner had a view out of the tank with his sighting telescope and its narrow field of vision. That, unfortunately, was pointed at this group of dead soldiers. In this tremendous stress we all had to suffer, the horrible sight tipped the scale, and he cracked up. Hollering and swearing, he wanted to get out. He was for a short while out of his mind. I drew my pistol and stuck the barrel in his neck, hollered back at him and told him to stop playing the crazy idiot. He immediately got back to normal. This man was one of the finest comrades we had, absolutely reliable, sturdy and imperturbable. But I am sure every man exposed long enough to really extreme pressure will have a weak moment.

http://images14.fotki.com/v224/photos/1/133612/2689450/pzkpfw_v_14-vi.jpg

WWII: Clearly the pressure was mounting. How did you keep your group together?

Langanke: I had to change the situation somehow. We started the motor, turned to the right and hit the hedgerow regardless of the danger for our drive sprockets and reduction drives. Behind the hedgerow there was a very big orchard where we could hide. The planes strafed and bombed that area for a while but then lost interest and gave up. Soon thereafter, one of the roaming soldiers told us that close by, in a bunker at a farmhouse, a regimental commander of some infantry and 10 or 12 officers sat together. I assumed they were discussing what action to take to cross the Hambye-Roncey Road and continue their retreat. I told my crew I would run over and find out how we could join this group. Still close to my tank, I got caught in a burst of artillery fire. All around me shells fell. I felt forlorn, hit the ground and started crawling around in an absolutely senseless way. It was my breakdown. When I had myself under control again, I first ascertained that my crew hadn't seen me. Most probably there is no closer and unrestricted comradeship than in a tank crew that has to live and fight together through real hard times. If they had watched me crawling, those nice guys would have asked me -- in a mighty compassionate way, of course -- what kind of beetles I was trying to catch or was it moles or other nonsense like that.


http://images14.fotki.com/v222/photos/1/133612/2689450/halftrackrumbles-vi.jpg
An American halftrack rumbles through the wreckage of Roncey. During his escape, Langanke’s column stumbled upon several halftracks, destroyed them and drove off their crews. (NATIONAL ARCHIVES)

WWII: Once you regained your composure, did you continue to the farm?

Langanke: I got to the bunker, snapped to attention and reported to the regimental commander and asked for orders. He didn't have any for me, and I left the shelter. For the next two or three hours I was quite busy. I ran back 200-300 meters down the road looking for vehicles from our task force and others. Most of the men who had abandoned their vehicles were back now. I found two operable Panthers and one Panzerkampfwagen IV. With them I was able to move enough obstacles so that our halftrack and wheeled vehicles could pass. We formed quite a column. I told those with me that, come darkness, we would break out. I reported this fact to the regimental commander and checked in another two or three times. He finally told me not to make any noise and wait. He would, under cover of darkness, sneak stealthily through the American blockade with his infantry and all the stragglers, without shooting. I thought he was kidding me, because that was mere nonsense.


http://images15.fotki.com/v10/photos/1/133612/2689450/panzer54-vi.jpg

Ace Tankkiller
02-16-2007, 10:39 PM
WWII: It sounds like that officer was losing his nerve.

Langanke: Shortly after my last encounter, some seasoned parachute noncoms came and said to me: "You poor bastard. You're the only one around here who doesn't know what's cooking. Those guys don't plan anything. They are going to surrender." I felt ashamed for my stupidity. I went over to the bunker and told them I would start with my column at 2200 that evening and the hell with them. Then two officers came to my tank. One, a major, was the commander of an assault gun battalion, and the other was his adjutant. They had camouflaged their two vehicles in a sunken lane close by. They asked me whether they could join our column. By that time I had given up wondering why an officer of his rank would ask a platoon leader, who wasn't even an officer, if he could join instead of taking over command. I then drove with my tank back to the road and broke two passages through the hedgerow on the left side in order to pass the big gun and other destroyed vehicles in front of us. In the attempt to move the destroyed vehicles to the side of the road, one of my Panthers had broken a sprocket wheel and had to be abandoned.

WWII: What other preparations did you make for your anticipated breakout?

Langanke: I set up a march formation. First my tank with grenadiers on the left side and about 50 to 60 paratroopers on the right side as a safeguard against close combat fighters with bazookas. Then the two assault guns, the wheeled vehicles of our task force, various stragglers, self-propelled infantry guns and mobile flak followed. The rear was brought up by the Panzer IV and my second Panther. The frequency of our radio communication was set, and at 2200 hours we started. Of course, no scouts had moved at all before this.

http://images15.fotki.com/v226/photos/1/133612/2689450/AAFHDDayp33-vi.jpg

WWII: Had the other three Panthers of your platoon been knocked out by that time?

Langanke: No. The second Panther that took part in the breakout was the only one from my platoon left. The commander's name was Panzer. Sounds funny! The other Panthers were stuck in traffic or mechanically disabled. On the right side a farm was in flames. In the wavering light I thought I saw a Sherman in the field to the left. We fired twice and hit it, but it didn't burn. Then I drove full speed across the Hambye-Roncey Road, where I expected stiff American resistance and, if I remember correctly, we rolled over an anti-tank gun. I shot into the lane that led into the main road from the other side and stopped. Passing the intersection, I saw two Shermans to my right side standing at right angles, sticking their heads into the hedgerow. Now I realized these were the machine guns that had fired at our paratroopers when we started and had wounded a number of them. We had to be quick to use the surprise effect, so I ordered the assault guns to rush to the crossing, turn right and knock out the two tanks that showed them their sides. They hesitated and started deliberating. I was enraged. I turned my turret and told them to start immediately or I would knock them out. They did, turned right and had no problems destroying the American tanks. I proceeded down the lane. To my right side there was a wider field with a hedgerow bordering it. Along this hedge a number of armored vehicles were parked, pointed toward the main road. I was lucky. We hit the last one, probably an ammunition carrier, and it was like fireworks at a summer festivity. The flare ammunition with the different colors was a fantastic sight. The whole area was illuminated, and I could easily pick out another four to six of these armored halftracks. I don't remember the exact number. With all this, a great many soldiers of the infantry units behind the north-south road were encouraged to jump up and follow us. They did this in an unmilitary manner, with shouts and yells, firing in the air and the like. At first I was appalled, but then I realized it was quite useful. The Americans seemed to be completely surprised and even dumbfounded. They left a number of cars, which were taken over by Germans, and there was practically no further resistance. I drove on and maybe 150 meters in front of me an American tank raced from the right toward the road. We wanted to stop it, and that thing happened that all tank crews are most afraid of -- you pull the trigger or push the button, and the gun doesn't fire. Figuring that was the end for us, I turned my head and got an even bigger shock. From the south, four American tanks rushed onto the road that joined ours, which came from la Valtolaine. They turned back and disappeared at full speed. I again looked forward. That first tank had such momentum when it hit the road that it couldn't stop in time and got stuck with its nose in the ditch next to the road. Only with great trouble could it get out, turn around and get away. We were sitting there in our Panther, not only undamaged but even unmolested and almost couldn't believe it


http://images14.fotki.com/v221/photos/1/133612/2689450/MarderIII-vi.jpg
German Marder III self-propelled guns sit idle amid the ruins of Roncey following the fighting. (NATIONAL ARCHIVES)

Langanke: The column we had started with comprised about 300 men. By now it was around double that number. As we moved farther, our progress was made easier by a number of captured [Allied] vehicles. Some stragglers joined us, while others separated and chose different ways. We were a motley, mixed bunch. I figured that combat action would occur in this intersection area, which appeared to be more than a mere roadblock. I ordered the other Panther to take the lead, and I brought up the rear. Radio communication still worked, and we began our erratic wandering. We first reached Lengronne, continued to Carences, crossed the Sienne River and drove on to Gavray.

http://images14.fotki.com/v219/photos/1/133612/2689450/Panzer4H-vi.jpg


WWII: What did you find in Gavray?

Langanke: When we reached the town, it was under fire. Here our column became mixed with a number of other vehicles. Outside the town we continued without loss and turned toward St. Denis-le-Gast, but before reaching it, we left the road and drove to the bridge at la Baleine. As we approached, our movement nearly stopped. I climbed out of my Panther to find out the reason. Artillery fire, which continued sporadically, or bombing had damaged this bridge, the sides of which were partly destroyed. The drivers were very reluctant to go on it. I then took over, organized the approach to the bridge and directed each vehicle across. When our tank crossed, as the last vehicle, only half the width of the tracks found footing in some places. On the south side of the river, tactical signs of quite a number of units were installed, and the column could dissolve. Most of them now knew where to go. My self-appointed mission was finished. It was full daylight by now, and the first planes appeared. We drove into a lane that led up a hill, and at the first farm with an orchard we stopped. I told the crew we would now have a good nap after three nights of nearly no sleep at all. We crawled under our tank and were lost to the world around us. It was high noon when we were awake again, and we were alone.


http://images12.fotki.com/v215/photos/1/133612/2689450/M4A176W4-vi.jpg
M4A1(76) Sherman

WWII: What happened to the remaining Panther of your platoon, Panzer's tank?

Langanke: Panzer went along with the vehicles from Deutschland and reached the regiment. My crew and I couldn't continue after the river crossing, we were completely spent. The driver and gunner fell asleep every so often while we were moving, and I was totally exhausted. When I got all the vehicles over the river -- which was a beastly business, with yelling, swearing and threatening -- all my energy was gone. Physically and mentally we were just done, we couldn't continue, we had to get some sleep. That was the reason we stopped alone at the orchard.

Ace Tankkiller
02-16-2007, 10:42 PM
WWII: What happened after you finally woke?

Langanke: Some 100 meters away we saw a Panther on the right side of the lane pointed toward us. From the left side another lane joined ours. There, Americans must have come up the hill, because the Panther was knocked out. It had a hole in the gun mantlet.

http://images15.fotki.com/v11/photos/1/133612/2689450/knockedout-vi.jpg

WWII: Was this Panther knocked out before you went to sleep?

Langanke: I don't know, but I can't believe that the Americans were already there when we reached the farm. I went over into the field on the left and met some German soldiers. They told me that there were already plenty of American troops down in the valley, and you could hear it, too. I went back and then had a mighty strenuous afternoon. The sky now swarmed with planes. I would run ahead some 50-100 meters, watch the direction of the flight of the various groups of aircraft, give a sign when it was favorable for us to move, and then the tank would race to its new position. After some hours, shortly before dark, we met a supply column of our division, where we could partly replenish our fuel. In this area Americans must have been present, because there were no planes above. We had lost one wheel set from artillery fire, and the bogies had damaged several track links. With a one-kilogram standard explosive charge we blew off the damaged part and were lucky not to harm the other tracks and suspension parts. During the night we completely lost track of our direction. In the morning we arrived at Beauchamps. Then we found a road sign that told us we had only 15 kilometers to Granville. That gave us our orientation back. We turned and sneaked around Villedieu-les-Poêles, evaded American columns several times on the roads south of that town, turned north, then east of it and reported back to our regiment during the night of July 31-August 1, in the Percy area. The regimental commander had already heard about our action and was mighty glad to see us, all the more so as he now had one more operational tank. Before the night passed we were on the way to another roadblock.


http://images12.fotki.com/v216/photos/1/133612/2689450/panzer126-vi.jpg

For his part in ensuring that hundreds of soldiers and their equipment managed to escape from the Roncey Pocket, Fritz Langanke was recommended for the Knight's Cross on August 7, 1944. He was awarded that medal on August 27, 1944.

[Scource:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-vetscor/1491929/posts]


The link is dead though

George Eller
02-18-2007, 08:30 AM
Is all right as long you quote the source.

George..that is a gallery. :cool:
-

Thanks Panzerknacker :)

I posted a couple more Sherman clips to it from the movie A Bridge Too Far
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showpost.php?p=94633&postcount=48

-

Panzerknacker
02-18-2007, 04:02 PM
Very good story Acetankiller. A Panther with penetration in the gun mantlet ?.... :confused: I wonder with what weapon they do that.



posted a couple more Sherman clips to it from the movie A Bridge Too Far



Very nice, that was a movie, I gues that today the holliwood gurus would draw those DC-3 with 3d computer graphic. :rolleyes:

Egorka
03-15-2007, 05:48 AM
It is time to speak up the truth!

Panter was a Soviet tank and only due the American and Icelandic
cold war propaganda the truth has been widthheld from the public.

Here is photo from 1938 showing the wedding party of one of the tank regiment officers.

http://www.zorich.ru/articles/day9/panter_sotnikov.jpg

Panzerknacker
03-15-2007, 08:53 PM
¿?

No more vokda before posting.

Panther railway Transport:


http://panzerkeil.dre.hu/harcjarm/panzer/panther/gal/Transport.jpg

Egorka
03-16-2007, 04:43 AM
Panzerknacker,

Why do you have to be so damn serious? This is not Polish-Russian relationship, right? ;)

Chevan
03-16-2007, 04:51 AM
Panzerknacker,

Why do you have to be so damn serious? This is not Polish-Russian relationship, right? ;)

He absplutly serious when somebody touchs ( or doubt) his knowlege in german wearponry :D This is too personal question for him( rather then the polish-russian problems), right Panzerknacker?

Egorka
03-16-2007, 08:41 AM
Me no comprende humora hispanica! ;)

By the way, the picture of the Panters with the stars is real, not Photoshoped.
Depicted is the unit of Senior Leitenant Sotnikov, 1945. See bottom of this page: http://www.zorich.ru/articles/b19_2.htm

veldm. keitel
03-31-2007, 01:54 PM
the tiger is and stays the best Tank there is no doubt about it.

Splinter54
03-31-2007, 05:08 PM
Panther gunner handling the 75 mm ammo

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/2914/panther2jr.jpg

Isn´t that a concrete post? ... right of the Soldier you can see concrete and grass ... but those Pantherturmstellungen, e.g. at Italy, had been built like a block, but this coppula ... strange :neutral:

Panzerknacker
04-01-2007, 03:02 PM
Odd loking perhaps, but is a very practical use for the Panther turret, this emplacement was know as "Pantherturm" , "Panther stellung", "PantherOstwallturm", and it was extremely hard to spot and destroy:


Panther turrets as pill-boxes

During the Italian campaign the Germans mounted Panther's turrets on concrete pillboxes for anti-tank defence. Some were installed for saving the vehicles while providing a cheap but powerful anti-tank capability, but the most were expecially designed ones with increased 40 mm roof armor to whithstand heavy artillery shells, and heavier 70mm side armor. Most of the Italian inland was mountanous: by blocking a few passes with assault guns and anti-tank pill-boxes (as the Panther's one) the Germans were able to contain the menace with their thinily spread forces.

Although the majority of this Panther Ostwallturm saw employement in the East, in the effort of building strong German defensive positions along along a line going from Narva to Crimea. As war progressed many German cities were named felde platze (fortress) and turrets (both appositely designed ones or from damaged tanks) were used to strengthen these improvised positions.
The turrets, with their low profile, resulted quite impressive to Allies commands and an evaluation of the Panther turrets employed as pill-boxes by the British Mediterranean theatre high command (circa August 1944) expressed in these terms (extract from T. Jentz's Panther variants):

Panther turrets are not of course AFV but their impact on the course of AFV affairs is thought to be sufficiently important to justify a few words. Panther turrets were first met in the Hitler line and were in fact the salient features round which the other defences were built up. They are actual tank turrets, though perhaps of a lightly earlier vintage than those now on tanks. They are mounted on a turret ring fitted on an armoured box, built up of welded plate about 63mm (2.5 inches) in thickness. The whole of this box is sunk into the ground and earth is banked up close to the turret so that it is first cleared by the gun at depression and yet offers some additional protection to the base of the turret skirts.

Traverse is by hand only and no power is supplied. Access to the turret is either by access doors in the turret itself or from underneath the armoured box by means of a steel ladder communicating with a deep dugout. It is obvious that the crews live in the turret and dugout permanently, as electric light is supplied and there are other signs of continuing operation.




This system of static defence was backed up by SP equipment and ordering anti-tank guns. In front of each position there was a graveyard of Churchills and some Shermans; perhaps eight tanks to a gun and all within 200 metres of it. This is, at present, the cost of reducing a Panther turret and it would see to be an excellent investment for Hitler. Obviously these turrets are most formidable unless each one is dealt with by a carefully prepared and co-ordinated attack.

The turrets are almost invisible till they fire and, when located, there is very little to shoot at and, unless the turret happens to be pointing elsewhere, it will not be penetrated either by 75mm or 6 pounder guns. HE fire is obviously useless. In all cases where there was enough of the turret left to diagnose the method of destruction, penetration of the turret side had been effected. One Churchill crew who destroyed one with their 6 pounder say that the turret blew up immediately it was hit. This was presumably due to the ammunition, since a large quantity is stored. If anti-tank defence is to consist of these turrets in the future it cannot but emphasise the need for a proportion of tanks to carry a really effective AP weapon, though it is not by any means accepted that attack by tanks is the best and correct method of dealing with them.



http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/121/002az5.jpg


http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/3716/004nk1.jpg


Note that some turrets had cuppolas, and some not.

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/6472/005da1.jpg


http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9969/turretpz5berlinbigdz6.jpg

Ace Tankkiller
04-01-2007, 03:38 PM
That is pretty impressive,never had heard of them before.I did a google search and found this
http://www.orasoft.net.pl/~leszek.ch/e_pt4.jpg

http://www.orasoft.net.pl/~leszek.ch/e_pt1.jpg

http://www.orasoft.net.pl/~leszek.ch/e_pt3.jpg

http://www.orasoft.net.pl/~leszek.ch/e_pt2.jpg
I also noticed on the map they provided it was near a bridge next to a river,looks like a pretty good defensive position.


In panzerknacker's post I like those kids playing in the turret lol.



http://www.orasoft.net.pl/~leszek.ch/e_pt.htm

Splinter54
04-01-2007, 06:15 PM
In all cases where there was enough of the turret left to diagnose the method of destruction, penetration of the turret side had been effected.

:shock:


One Churchill crew who destroyed one with their 6 pounder say that the turret blew up immediately it was hit. This was presumably due to the ammunition, since a large quantity is stored.


Was the Ammonition stored at the side of the turret??? I thought down in the "container". :neutral:

ww2admin
04-01-2007, 06:42 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the Japanese perfect the "turret in a hill" defense in the late stages of the Pacific war? Or, were the Germans more effective?

Panzerknacker
04-02-2007, 05:46 PM
Was the Ammonition stored at the side of the turret??? I thought down in the "container".



There was ready-to-use patronen in the inner turrets wall, if is the same configuration that in the Panther vehicle some 40-45 rounds of 75mm. One API hit in those large cartrigdes may cause a fire in the turret and a fire in the turret...well the effects above mentioned.


Pantherstellung before being emplaced in dug out position:

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/8128/0001bu1.jpg


http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/9259/0002lw3.jpg



http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/9239/0003zr3.jpg



http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/5397/0004ws8.jpg




Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the Japanese perfect the "turret in a hill" defense in the late stages of the Pacific war? Or, were the Germans more effective?



Sorry, no info about then jap turrets, the member Tom probably know better. In any case I am pretty sure that the high velocity 75mm german Kwk 42 was by far more effective that any gun of the japanese got in caliber between 75-100 mm

Splinter54
04-03-2007, 06:32 AM
I found a topic abot th e Patherturmstellungen:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=213&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=pantherturm&start=0

Sites 1,2 and 3 show very interessting plans and pictures!;)

Panzerknacker
04-03-2007, 07:08 PM
Nice, some emplacements seems to be protected with trenchs and machineguns on it. However some pics in Italy shows a very lone turret.


Engine change Panther ausf A.

http://ostpanzer.asty.ru/topics/tanks/panther/G/i/01.jpg

Splinter54
04-04-2007, 07:18 AM
Transmissionchange.

The Pantherfibel:

http://www.panther1944.de/Panther/fibel/fibel.htm

Panzerknacker
04-04-2007, 08:20 AM
Very nice, the Pantherfibel is not famous as the Tiger handbook, very few had survived.:)

Panzerknacker
04-04-2007, 07:38 PM
More information ( if needed) of the Pantherturm emplacement, this time extracted from "Pzkfw V Panther Vol. 6" AJ press.

Note the blewed up muzzle brake in this first picture:

http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/9118/page073of6.jpg



http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/5766/page074ap3.jpg



http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/6097/page075eu5.jpg



http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/9949/page076zv5.jpg

Panzerknacker
04-04-2007, 08:05 PM
...continue from above.


http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/5885/page078zu5.jpg




http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/892/page098fc9.jpg


http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/8798/page099ph4.jpg


If you are not all Pantherturm experten after this...:rolleyes:

Splinter54
04-05-2007, 08:35 AM
WOW! Fantastic informations and Pictures!! THANK YOU!! The more, the better! That´s awesomely excellent!! :D

You got also some nice informations about the Schmalturm? I only fond some pictures via Google and some Blueprints on the panther44.de (?) forums.

Btw. did you noticed, that the T-55 Enigma (sorry) looks quite similar to that on the German Paper Tank E-79, which looks also a bit like a Panther?

Panzerknacker
04-05-2007, 10:30 AM
You got also some nice informations about the Schmalturm? I only fond some pictures via Google and some Blueprints on the panther44.de (?) forums.



I have some, let me put togheter, I will post it later.



Btw. did you noticed, that the Israelian MBT Merkava´s turret looks quite similar to that on the German Paper Tank E-79, which looks also a bit like a Panther?


Can you post a picture of the E-79 in the topic Panzer projekts for comparison ?

Panzerknacker
04-05-2007, 06:29 PM
Pz V Panther Ausf F.


The Model F was the final combat version of the Panther that the Germans intended to introduce during the war, although in reality German factories did not manage to finish a complete Model F tank before the war ended.


Mixed vehicle comprised of ausf G chassis, kwk 42 normal gun and schmalturm.

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/3636/pantherf4xe0.jpg


This variant married the newly developed Narrow Turret (Schmalturm) with its modified 7.5cm L/70 gun to an altered Model G chassis. The latter featured thicker frontal hull roof armour (25-40mm instead of 16-40mm),
improved armour casting on the glacis plate surrounding the Kugelblende 50 machine gun ball mount, and modified guides for the sliding driver's and radio operator's hatches.

The Germans decided to develop a new turret to replace that of the Model A and G tanks because combat experience had shown that this design sometimes deflected incoming rounds down onto the thin hull roof armour. In addition, the designers had concluded that the front of the current Panther turret presented too large a target to the enemy.

During winter 1943-44, two prototype were developed with narrow-fronted and better-armoured Panther turrets - the Narrow Gun Mantlet Turret (which Jentz asserts was to be mounted on the Panther II), and the Rheinmetall Narrow Mantlet Turret. As an outgrowth of these designs, during 1944 Daimler-Benz designed a new Narrow Turret (Schmalturm) that the Germans intended to install on a modified Model G Panther chassis to create the Model F variant.


Close-up to the schmalturm, note the circular protection for the right lens of the rangefinder.

http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/5356/schmalturm1be4.jpg


The Schmalturm mounted a slightly modified gun, the 7.5cm KwK 42/1 L/70, ( sometimes named as Kwk 42/KM, for keine mundungbremse, no muzzle brake) together with a co-axial MG 42 (instead of the MG 34 included on previous Panther designs). The turret had a narrow conical gun mantlet and a narrow turret front, as well as 40-120mm-thick armour instead of the 16-100mm plates on the Model G turret. A very improved characteristics were the aiming devices for the gun, in adition of the normal telescopic Zielfenrorh ZF 12, it used a 1,8 m wide optical coincidence rangefinder wich provide a much more precise distance prediction that the stadimetric scale used in the ZF 12.


KWK 42/1

http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/1955/schmalturm2ej9.jpg

Experimental Narrow Panther Turrets (Versuchs-Schmalturm) during mid-1944, and then in August mounted one of them on a standard Model G chassis for test purposes.


Next, in late October, the High Command issued a production schedule for the Panther F: Daimler-Benz was to produce the first 50 tanks during February 1945, and by May - when Model G construction was to have ended - Krupp, MAN, MNH and Ni-Werk were to join Model F production. But the combination of Allied air strikes and ground advances, plus the administrative chaos engulfing the tottering Nazi Reich, delayed manufacture of the Model F. Consequently, when the Soviets overran the Daimler-Benz factory at Berlin-Marienfelde in late April 1945, they discovered four well-advanced Model F chassis, plus several completed Narrow Turrets.

Indeed, during late April, Daimler-Benz did fit several Model G Panther turrets to completed Model F chassis and delivered these tanks to the troops then desperately defending Berlin.

Clearly, while the Germans did not manage to finish a single Model F Panther prior to the end of hostilities on 8 May 1945, they remained literally only a few days away from achieving this goal when the Soviets overran the Marienfelde factory.

Another close up, for some uknown reason the barrel was sawed off in this schmalturm captured by the british.

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/4513/schmalturm3qe4.jpg

Splinter54
04-05-2007, 06:44 PM
I heard about the fact, that also some late Königstigers / Tiger II had been equipped with those Entfernungsmessers (the "bubbles in front of the turret sides) - is that true?

You have any other pictures concerning the Schmalturm?

Panzerknacker
04-05-2007, 07:13 PM
The later Tiger II were designed to fit that device but I am not sure if they actually were equipped with that.



You have any other pictures concerning the Schmalturm?


More ????? :shock:

I have to dig in 4 book to get the later ones, "Deustche Panzer Rariteten" , "Panther Medium Tank" "Panther Variants" "Panzerkampfwagen Maus und andere Panzerprojekte"

Aniway I going to see if there is more, but I dont make you any promise.

Splinter54
04-05-2007, 07:58 PM
More ????? :shock:
Aniway I going to see if there is more, but I dont make you anty promise.

I am sure you will find some, because of your unyielding courage concerning history :cool:

Panzerknacker
04-05-2007, 11:02 PM
I am sure you will find some, because of your unyielding courage concerning history

The flattery comments usually work with me, this time ius not an exception ;) :

THREE-QUARTER VIEW OF ARTIST'S IMPRESSION OF MODEL F PANTHER, GERMANY, MID-MAY 1945

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/3463/schmalku8.jpg

This plate is an artist's impression of what a completed Model F Panther would have looked like had one been delivered to the Army. However, the Soviets captured the Daimler-Benz

factory at Berlin-Marienfelde in late April 1945 before this could be achieved.

The Soviets discovered in this factory four well-advanced Model F chassis plus several unmounted completed Narrow Turrets (Schmalturm); the Model F Panther would have been created by simply marrying these Narrow Turrets to the completed chassis. The Narrow Turret of the Model F mounted a slightly modified gun, the 7.5cm KwK 42/1 L/70, with a co-axial MG 42 (rather than MG 34), and featured a narrow conical gun mantlet and turret front, plus thicker armour, so as to increase its battlefield survivability. The chassis remained virtually identical to that of the Model G, except that it had enhanced armour casting on the glacis plate surrounding the machine gun ball mount, modified guides for the sliding driver's and radio operator's hatches, and thickened frontal hull roof plates. In this artist's impression, the tank has been painted in Dark Olive Green (RAL 6003) throughout as its base paint, a procedure authorised by the German High Command in late November 1944.

The kwk 42/1 is in place with his lack of muzzle brake, now I guess that the strain in the recoil hidro-pneumatics cilinders of the turret must be a lot harder without this element.

Splinter54
04-06-2007, 07:19 AM
You got also some pictures about the production of the Panther Series?
I think the production statistics had been already metioned here, but no pictures had been shown up.
It would be interessting to see, because in late war they tried to change the production lines to make them similar as far as they could go, so that the Panther II could use more similar parts as the Königstiger?

Panzerknacker
04-06-2007, 09:30 AM
That was the intentions but I think never really works because the differencs in weight of both designs.

The figure of manufactured Panther is 5508 in "Panther variants" by Jentz/doyle.

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/1535/dibujotj0.jpg




http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/6568/dibujo2ce2.jpg

Splinter54
04-06-2007, 05:30 PM
http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/5356/schmalturm1be4.jpg

Those constructions on which the turrets had been fitted before they got adapted onto the tanks - had they been standardized?

Are there plans of them?

Panzerknacker
04-06-2007, 06:19 PM
Ich versteh dich nich, I dont follow you, you mean If there was pantherstellungs with narrow turrets ?

http://i19.tinypic.com/2rfq4bl.jpg

Splinter54
04-06-2007, 06:40 PM
No on this photo in my first post on this site e.g. - this Steel Construction on which the turret is fitted. Perhaps those construction had been standardized or did each fabric had it´s own construction?

Panzerknacker
04-06-2007, 06:56 PM
That is simply a steel frame to put the turret after it had been finished in the factory, no need of standarization on that.

French soldier with some Panther KwK 42 cartigdes, the bullet was an Panzergranate 39/42, armor piercing capped high explosive-tracer.


http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/6112/dibujooy3.jpg

tankgeezer
04-26-2007, 06:07 PM
The Panther was a very good tank, had excellent firepower, and very good hot rolled armor. But could not be produced quickly enough to meet the threats of the T-34, or the swarms of M-4 sherman tanks of the U.S. Germany for some reason, could not just "pick one," and run with it,but chose to parse, and piecemeal their production capacity and limit their ability to field an adequate armored force capable of dealing with the conditions on the battlefields of western Europe, and later, Russia.
My vote is for the T-34, as it was well designed for its environment, had advanced armor,and automotive features. A side note, The Russian tank program was based on the designs of Walter Christie, an american who offered his "fast tank" designs to the U.S. Gov't, but was turned away. The Russians took the time to listen....

Panzerknacker
04-26-2007, 06:30 PM
My vote is for the T-34, as it was well designed for its environment, had advanced armor,and automotive features.



The T-34 is fine, but the advanced armor only work for 1940-41, in 1942-43 with the introduction of new Tanks and infantry AT weapons it was outdated.

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/2985/tige2ky2.jpg

Firefly
04-26-2007, 08:21 PM
I dont think the Panther was very good in 1941. In 1941 the T-34 was much better and thus gets my vote every time. For the Germans I think the Stug and PzIV should get the aclaim.

Panzerknacker
04-26-2007, 08:35 PM
Well, there was no Panthers in 1941. In that year I agree that the best tank in the world was the T-34/76, but in 1943 was outdated by the latest german designs.

http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/7315/french5hz.jpg

tankgeezer
04-26-2007, 10:56 PM
Against a shaped charge A.T. weapon, any tank of the second war was unprotected. The T-34, like the M-4 were produced in such numbers, that any technical superiority enjoyed by Germany's tanks was negated. I cant speak for the T-34, but the M-4 was mechanically superior in meantime between failures, far more reliable than the German counterparts.

Panzerknacker
04-27-2007, 08:20 AM
Yea, but this topic is not about what was the more numerous tank (i think that discussion would be iddle) but wich was the better.



the M-4 was mechanically superior in meantime between failures, far more reliable than the German counterparts.


Probably so, but the Sherman ws not much preciated by his crews, at list no in the ETO.

http://bookweb.kinokuniya.co.jp/bimgdata/FC0891417222.JPG


http://valkiria.net/uploads/pic/historia/wwii/uzb/gtanks/panther/panther_g_1.jpg

tankgeezer
04-27-2007, 09:04 AM
Yea, but this topic is not about what was the more numerous tank (i think that discussion would be iddle) but wich was the better.



Probably so, but the Sherman ws not much preciated by his crews, at list no in the ETO.

http://bookweb.kinokuniya.co.jp/bimgdata/FC0891417222.JPG


http://valkiria.net/uploads/pic/historia/wwii/uzb/gtanks/panther/panther_g_1.jpg
You are correct that it wasnt the most popular ride available, it had little protection to offer,and the early 75 mm gun lacked the velocity needed to get the 1st round hit/kill. so it needed to have lots of friends around to help out against German AFV's which did have good weaponry, and very good armor(for the most part) But they had trouble in the automotive area. The primary attributes of a tank are the ability to move, shoot, and communicate. The T-34. and the M-4, did all three very well. If you cant get it where you need it, when you need it, the rest doesnt matter. -Raspenau-

tankgeezer
04-27-2007, 12:38 PM
Panzerknacker, I neglected to acknowledge your point about the Panther, It was a well thought our concept ,and design, and suffered its frailties mostly as a result of a hurried deployment. Decades ago, I was stationed at Ft. Knox Ky. and visited the shrine of American Armor, the Patton museum very often. there was one example of a Panther , unrestored, and even so in very good condition. It had little paint, or Zemmerite paste left on it, so the welds were exposed to view. I
spent a long time studying this tank,as we were allowed to go aboard, and the manufacturing processes were flawless. If a thing could be music, this was a symphony. It was the most popular exhibit at the museum. I believe it was later fully restored, and is operable under its own power. At the time I saw it, it was displayed in a small space, and had to have the tracks off in order to fit. Had it been fully De-bugged, and fielded in great numbers, it would have made a great difference. At least until shaped charge rounds became available to A.T. guns, and tanks. -Raspenau-

Panzerknacker
04-27-2007, 05:19 PM
Indeed, your opinion is not unique, the Panther was probably the tank wich impressed the most to the Allied tankers in France 1944.

Some were put again in service against his former owners like this:


http://www.twenot.nl/Articles/Cuckoo1.JPG




History

In the aftermath of the failed Arnhem offensive the British 6th Guards Tank Brigade was engaged in heavy fighting to gain control of the small Dutch village called Overloon. It was during these fierce battles that tankers of the 4th Armoured Battalion - Coldstream Guards, one of the 2 tank battalions in the brigade, entered a large barn, only to find a Panther tank of the PanzerAbteiling 2, Panzer Brigade 107. This Panther was in running order and quickly put to work in the staff units of the brigade. The use of this captured vehicle was a unique event, so it appears more than once in the official history of the brigade. (6)

After some adjustments were made to the appearance of the vehicle (more about that later) this Panther was used to help the artillery barrage on the Geijsteren castle, just north of Venlo, on the Meuse River. The tank was christened “Cuckoo”, which seems to be an appropriate name for such a strange “bird”




In the artillery bombardment on the castle, Cuckoo proved to be a worthy newcomer. After an infantry attack at the castle failed, the decision was made to bombard the castle with artillery. This barrage proved to be not very successful, as the relatively small target was hard to hit with artillery. The 75mm tank guns and 6-pounders were more accurate, but too light to do real impressive damage to the thick walls of the castle.
The Panther tank on the other hand did an outstanding job: “ The 95mms were a great success, but “Cuckoo”, [………], did best of all, hurling its shells through selected windows with unfailing precision.”
Later, during operation “Blackcock” (In an area to the south of Venlo) Cuckoo was deployed again, now to join in on an attack on the German town called Waldenrath. Cuckoo preformed very well again, it’s mobility was especially noticeable.

The historian wrote; “The road conditions were abominable all day, but whereas the Churchill’s and the Crocodiles, with no ice bars, slid into ditches at every possible opportunity, “Cuckoo” the Panther, eight tons heavier, trundled merrily along with no difficulty at all

http://www.twenot.nl/cuckoo.htm

Splinter54
04-30-2007, 08:17 AM
Nice Pantherturm pictures site:

http://ostpanzer.asty.ru/topics/tanks/panther/ostwallturm/images.html

Panzerknacker
04-30-2007, 06:30 PM
Nice.

That is a weird one.

http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/5915/panterarecuperacionflaktj0.jpg



http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/9409/panterarecuperacionflaksu4.jpg


Does anybody know what city is ?

Splinter54
05-01-2007, 02:12 AM
Looks like an 3.7cm Flak mounted on a Panther Ausf. D Chassis ( the Radiomans MG has not yet the Kugelblende)

I think this picture was taken somewhere in Poland (last picture the writing on the left side of the house - a typical ending for polish words. ;)

Actualy this is crazy! Where did you found it? :D

Panzerknacker
05-01-2007, 10:42 AM
Probably is Poland then.

Here:

http://www.elgrancapitan.org/foro/viewtopic.php?t=11956

Splinter54
05-01-2007, 02:27 PM
Too bad i can´t speak spanish, but this is actually very interessting with the Flak 43!! :)

Ace Tankkiller
05-01-2007, 03:35 PM
I find it odd that they have 2 pictures of it in the same spot from what seems to be 2 different cameras.And having them surviving.

Chevan
05-01-2007, 04:51 PM
And who did shot those excellent photos - look like the intelligence work of polis resistence.;)

Egorka
05-01-2007, 05:02 PM
I think this picture was taken somewhere in Poland (last picture the writing on the left side of the house - a typical ending for polish words. ;)


I think the sign reads "Pharmacy". Actually there are 2 different words writen. Both of them to me mean "pharmacy" but in different languages. One "Lekarna" may be in Czech. Could it be a Polish town close to Polish border and with other ethnic minority?

Is not it also a Polish flag on the houses?

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4688/panteraokkn5.jpg

Panzerknacker
05-01-2007, 08:19 PM
Too bad i can´t speak spanish, but this is actually very interessting with the Flak 43!!


Well.. in our forum we are puzzled too.



I find it odd that they have 2 pictures of it in the same spot from what seems to be 2 different cameras.And having them surviving.


Yes, that I dont note yet but is true.:cool:



And who did shot those excellent photos - look like the intelligence work of polis resistence


We dont know yet, but the your is a plausible teory.


I think the sign reads "Pharmacy". Actually there are 2 different words writen. Both of them to me mean "pharmacy" but in different languages. One "Lekarna" may be in Czech. Could it be a Polish town close to Polish border and with other ethnic minority?


I cant visualize the flag but thank for your input.


A provisory name for this would be Bergepanther ausf d mit 3,7 cm Flak 43"

Splinter54
05-02-2007, 02:57 AM
I think the sign reads "Pharmacy". Actually there are 2 different words writen. Both of them to me mean "pharmacy" but in different languages. One "Lekarna" may be in Czech. Could it be a Polish town close to Polish border and with other ethnic minority?

You are right. The picure you posted as actually very interessting - i think left is "Apotheke" written (as you said Pharmacy), but this word is German.
And the right writing has this symbol just upside down on some letters -> ^ ... perhaps Czech?

I think (now i am sure, because of the better quality pictures of the writings) that picture was taken somewhere in or near the Sudetenland, where Germans and Czech Peopled lived together.

Panzerknacker
05-03-2007, 01:18 PM
Another weird variant: Panther ausf D with panzer IV ausf H turret.

http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/1826/6xsxmutz4.jpg


This vehicle seems to be build from an Bergepanther chassis married with a Pz IV turret. it was used only by the Heavy tankhunters Battallion 563 in Poland and Ruthenia (Belarus) in 1944.

http://img343.imageshack.us/img343/7954/panther19ug.jpg



http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/5423/panther27dp.jpg


Is not clear if the turre was actually capable of revolving movement or it was bolted to the chassis.

http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/3001/panth4tjn9.jpg


The Sch Jagd Pz Abt 653 had a interesting collection of rare vehicle including Porsche Tigers and captured T-34 with flak guns.

Nickdfresh
05-03-2007, 05:01 PM
Nice.

That is a weird one.

http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/5915/panterarecuperacionflaktj0.jpg



http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/9409/panterarecuperacionflaksu4.jpg


Does anybody know what city is ?

Seems like a waste to have used a Panther chassis for a pedestrian AAA mount when anything would due for this purpose...

Panzerknacker
05-03-2007, 07:22 PM
Probably a turretless Bergepanther was used, in this way the vehicle could have two uses, recovery tank and AAA vehicle.

http://ostpanzer.asty.ru/topics/special_vehicles/bergepanther/i/03.jpg

Splinter54
05-16-2007, 09:35 AM
The green (base), yellow,brown striped Panther Ausf. G is a 1945 finished tank by MAN.

The red (base), yellow, green striped Panther saw action at the Oderfront.


http://ic1.deviantart.com/files/f/2007/120/5/8/2_Panthers_with_splinter_camo_by_Cobra6.jpg

http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs11/f/2007/118/0/5/Panther_Splinter_camo_v1_by_Cobra6.jpg

Another pattern:

http://ic3.deviantart.com/fs13/f/2007/056/6/3/Panther_WIP5_by_Cobra6.jpg

http://ic3.deviantart.com/fs15/f/2007/076/0/1/Panther_WIP6_by_Cobra6.jpg

Splinter54
05-16-2007, 09:35 AM
http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs13/f/2007/083/1/9/Panther_WIP7_by_Cobra6.jpg

http://ic1.deviantart.com/fs14/f/2007/091/1/3/Panther_tank_WIP8_by_Cobra6.jpg

http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs15/f/2007/099/e/1/Panther_Tank_WIP9_by_Cobra6.jpg

Panzerknacker
05-17-2007, 08:54 AM
Very nice rendering here Splinter, note the modified mantlet in the G variant, worked out to do not deflect the incoming bullets to the drivers top armor as in the earlier variants.

Panzerknacker
05-18-2007, 08:49 AM
The juicy russian war booty after Kursk, Tiger, Panzer IV, Ferdinand, Stug III and Panther ausf D.

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/7168/kurskwystawaee3.jpg

Splinter54
05-18-2007, 10:55 AM
Some stripe painted Panthers:

http://www.panzernet.net/panzernet/fotky/tanky/pz5/118.jpg

I am sure his one belongs to Grossdeutschland :|

http://www.panzernet.net/panzernet/fotky/tanky/pz5/150.jpg

-> ?
http://perso.orange.fr/smallworld.com/profils/profils/images/Panther231droite.jpg

I like this shot from the Italian Campaign:

http://www.panzernet.net/panzernet/fotky/tanky/pz5/169.jpg

Photos by: http://www.panzernet.net/panzernet/stranky/galerie/tanky/galeriepanther.htm

Profile by: www.profils.tk

Panzerknacker
05-21-2007, 07:04 PM
Nice pictures,

another one, who said that a 40 tons Panther cannot cross wooden bridges ?

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/2341/puentetw5.jpg

Jenkin
05-21-2007, 11:03 PM
i have seen the limits on some of the bridges, and the 40 Tonne Panzer was the average wieght that were crossed. I have seen a bridge in Miltenburg, which is a town near aschaffenburg. their main bridge can hold a maximum of one 80 Tonne tank and a maximum of two 50 tonne, tanks over the bridge at one time. and this bridge dates back to 900 ad, and the main frame is wood, with brick overlay, so this is pritty cool, but there were bigger bastards that came out of the German factories.

cooke24
05-21-2007, 11:14 PM
you know if i was one of those guys on that panther i would be a little nervous, that bridge doesnt look extremly sturdy it would probably be creeking. but hey if u saw one before that did ok then thats a different story

Jenkin
05-21-2007, 11:19 PM
all so true

cooke24
05-21-2007, 11:29 PM
i personally think the germans were greedy. all they had to do is stick a new engine in the panther preferably one larger than 690hp slap on some amour plates 40mm on the sides and another say 70mm in the front and 20mm on the back and maybe 10mm on the top. we go a whole new tank called the panther 2, which i know they had one prototype but they should of went further with it.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Panther_II.Fort_Knox.jpg

bluedonkey99
05-22-2007, 03:53 PM
...as with many things today there is probably a forumula that could be defined for determining if a tank could cross a old wooden bridge.

.....i'd imagine one some of the facotrs would be age of bridge, length of bridge, distance from home, distance from next bridgge across the river.....

but i imagine the most important factor was how close where the russian from your tail, and how much you feared for your life!!!!!!

Panzerknacker
05-22-2007, 07:48 PM
Wathever be the reason that bridge seems to weak to take 43 tons...:shock: however it seems to work.

Panther ausf D in the Ardennes offensive.

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/5205/forosgmpanterarq4.jpg

Panzerknacker
05-23-2007, 10:41 AM
Nice pictures,

another one, who said that a 40 tons Panther cannot cross wooden bridges ?

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/2341/puentetw5.jpg


I was definately wrong, it cant pass that small bridge :rolleyes:.


http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/8435/359zq7.jpg

This Panther belong to the Wiking SS division.

Panzerknacker
05-24-2007, 06:32 PM
A very tiring work...to change the internal interleaved wheel, this was necessary when the rubber worn out, it was need to remove first the external wheels, use the manual jack as in the picture and later remove it by means of special extrators. It take his time.


http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/8583/rueda3ou7.jpg



And changing the battle tracks, not so difficult but still a healty job for 3 men.

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/3019/cambiandoxw3.jpg

cooke24
05-24-2007, 08:30 PM
now was changing of the tigers tracks more difficult that of the panthers?

Panzerknacker
05-24-2007, 08:46 PM
I guess so, because the Tiger tracks were wider and heavier.

Panther ausf D in his way to the front, note the pistol port is open and its closing cap is hanging from his chain...perhaps the Panther defend itself from some agressive russians trough the village ?

http://i11.tinypic.com/4pmdb0y.jpg


In the later variant the side pistol port was deleted for speed up production, fact that did not help in the urban enviroment always dangerous for armored vehicles.

tankgeezer
05-24-2007, 10:29 PM
The juicy russian war booty after Kursk, Tiger, Panzer IV, Ferdinand, Stug III and Panther ausf D.

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/7168/kurskwystawaee3.jpg

Thats one used car dealer I would like to work for.Can we get financing?

Panzerknacker
05-25-2007, 08:35 AM
I hope that you got some spare thousands rubles TankG :).

Early series ausf A, knocked out and captured by british soldier 2 june 1944. Note the pistol port also opened in this tank. The tank was battling outside Rome with the 4th panzer Regiment. It have a penetration (6 pounders ?) below the tactical number.

http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/8457/tapare1.jpg

Panzerknacker
05-27-2007, 01:02 PM
Front and rear view of the ausf A model, the most distintive characteristics was the integral ball mounting in glacis, and the newly designed hemispherical cast cupola. The tools layout and exhaust gas conduct were different than the ausf D.

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/6835/forosgmpantera2yy8.jpg


In the last series the side turret pistol port were deleted.

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/4083/atrasau5.jpg


Close up of the cupola equipped with 8 periscopes, The circular shaped bar welded over was used to support the AAA MG-34 and/or the scissor telescope.

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/2900/cupula3mf1.jpg



Inner view.The tank commander is using the handle to adjust the vision height in the mirrors.

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/9100/cupulabk1.jpg

Panzerknacker
05-29-2007, 12:45 PM
Panzerschule Panther, with erdgaz, Panzer driver schol Panther fueled by natural gas.

http://img365.imageshack.us/img365/5539/98481385up1.jpg




http://img365.imageshack.us/img365/9996/13468560is9.jpg



http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/131/panrhregaser3pi.jpg



http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/7674/dibujo6ag.jpg

Wolfgang Von Gottberg
05-29-2007, 05:06 PM
I've seen Tiger I tanks with this same style of turret. Supply shorteges?

Panzerknacker
05-29-2007, 06:01 PM
It does, never enough fuel to feed all the machinery in the German military.

Panzerknacker
05-29-2007, 07:17 PM
Panzerbefehlswagen panther ausf A, this tank had reveiced a hit ib the gun mantlet near the tzf 12, the tank survived witouh too much trouble.

http://i19.tinypic.com/4vgqwk3.jpg


Normal ausf A also hit right over the optic sight aperture, it must be really scary fro the gunner a hit like that. nonetheless it failed to penetrate the heavy 110 mm armor.


http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/3765/sustoeb7.jpg

Panzerknacker
05-30-2007, 07:56 PM
2 Panther ausf G withdrawing from france 1944.
The heavy concern of being attacked by from the air is clearly depicted the crew watching the skies behind the tank.

This one have zimmerit, also is noted the inertia starter handle and the termal shield for the exhaust tubes.


http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/9526/mirandoausfg1vu7.jpg


The straight rim in the lower hull over the wheels is a tipical characteristic of the ausf G variant, The kwk cleaning rod is transversally over the engine room in this tank. A spare rubber tired roadwheel is in the side of the turret.
the ausf G had the side turret armor increased to 45mm.

http://img485.imageshack.us/img485/3767/mirandoausfg2ob7.jpg

cooke24
05-30-2007, 10:44 PM
oooo i like that one shows alot of equipment of the tank, ive never seen another photo of a panther with the spare rubber road wheel. nice.

Panzerknacker
05-31-2007, 05:33 PM
Well probably they like to carry all given the lack of maintenance in the field when you are withdrawing of a battlefield, or perhaps was a desperate attemp to increase the side armor.

cooke24
05-31-2007, 10:19 PM
yes definatly panther side armour was very poor. i would of done the same, got a question, was it difficult in using that inertia starter for starting the engine? and i dont have a clue how the engines were started from inside do you have the answer?

Panzerknacker
06-01-2007, 08:45 AM
Two starters are fitted - one electric and one inertia. The Bosch 24V axial motor is mounted on the starboard side of the engine at the forward end and immediately above it a Bosch hand operated inertia starter, also of the axial type. The hand crank for the inertia starter, is carried in suitable clips on the tail plate, the orifice being covered by a B.P. sealing plate when it is not in use.

http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/2948/dibujofa1.jpg

The inertial startes was comprised by a big metal wheel with a reduction gear,you need to turn this thing with to accumulate energy and then once you got a 70-80 rpm, the driver enclucth it to the engine and the inertia generate by the wheel turn the crankcase and ( teorically) the engine starts.

It seems crazy but a single person could manage to start teh Mayback V-12 24 liters engine in temperate wheather, 2 persons were needed when was too cold.

The system was used when the batteries were low or simple when it was no need of a quick start to save the electric starter for combat situations.

Panzerknacker
06-01-2007, 07:07 PM
HISTORY of the PANTHER Ausf. G

Following a directive from Hitler on 27 February, 1944, the designation for the Panther-PzKpfw V- was dropped, and the final production variant built between March of 1944 and April of 1945 was simply known as the Panther Ausf. G. MAN, Daimler-Benz and MNH all built the Ausf. G. with a combined total output of 2953 Panthers. To simplify production, the Ausf. G had modified superstructure sides, and hull sides increased in thickness to 50mm.



http://www.missing-lynx.com/articles/dio/rwpanth/Image7.jpg (http://www.missing-lynx.com/article)
(http://www.missing-lynx.com/article)


The angle of slope was also altered. The headlight was repositioned from the left side of the glacis to the left fender and the engine deck was also redesigned and shortened.

The Kinnwalzenblende, or chin mantlet was also newly designed for the main gun mantlet to eradicate a shot trap deflecting shells through the hull roof. The driver's vision port was replaced by a traversing vertical periscope since the fixed episcopes restricted vision. The tool racks were also revised and some very late production vehicles had all-steel resiliently sprung wheels of the type, but not size, fitted to the late production Tiger and Tiger II. In very late production Ausf G's, the cylindrical stowage box for the gun pull-through and cleaning gear was removed from the port side and mounted across the hull at the rear of the engine compartment.

Ausf G's were no longer painted RAL 7028 (Dunkelgelb), instead leaving the factory in red oxide primer. In October of 1944 a raised heating tower over the rear portside circular engine fan was installed. Its purpose was to pull hot air from the engine radiator and direct it into the crew compartment. Beginning in December 1944 Flammvernichter, or exhaust flame suppressing mufflers were attached to a shortened exhaust pipe. This had a fan like grill in the outlet opening which killed flames or sparks from engine gases. These alterations to the basic Panther design were to be the last production modifications seen.

http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/6609/ausfgqm3.jpg

Panzerknacker
06-11-2007, 07:04 PM
Panther Ausf G with steel-rimmed road-wheels.

Originally, it was planned to manufacture model Ausf G with steel-rimmed road-wheels (instead of previously used rubber-rimmed road-wheels), the all steel stamped wheels would save manufacturing tim, but in 1944 only small series of 24 was produced.

http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/9535/panstenr6.jpg



And one fantastic picture of the all steel wheel G in the front, this Panther had already entered in combat as in noted in the 3 killmark painted near the muzzle of powerful Kwk 42. Note that one of the external roadwheel has been replaced with the standar rubber tired model.

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/3769/paisajenevadosu8.jpg

The location seems to be Belgium in the winter of 1944.

waffen-ss
06-14-2007, 03:56 AM
go panther g!!!!!!!

Panzerknacker
06-14-2007, 07:10 PM
Panther ausf A of the infamous "Leib Standarte Adolf Hitler" showing the "ambush" cammo in a french forest 1944.

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/5765/emboiscado1yd5.jpg



http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/6789/emboiscado2ll1.jpg


The initial of that SS combat formation are painted over the zimmerit antimagnetic paste.

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/8350/2283copiaft9jm1.jpg

Splinter54
06-15-2007, 05:14 AM
http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/2948/dibujofa1.jpg

Is there also Zimmerit on this round metal around the exhaust?
Isn't that a bit "exagerated"? Or is it just mud? :rolleyes:

Panzerknacker
06-15-2007, 08:33 AM
Looking closely to the pattern it seems to be zimmerit, and yes is exagerated.

Panzerknacker
07-16-2007, 10:06 PM
Panther destroying russian KV.

http://www.zippyvideos.com/5421891432936176/boom/

Cavalry Gunner
07-17-2007, 10:07 PM
Here is the greatest tank produced in world war ll

THE RUSSIAN JS-3 PRODUCED 1945-46
46 tons
520 hp - 11 cyl diesel
Max Speed 40 MPH
ARMAMENT - 1 - 122mm High velosity D-25-T Main Gun (our M-1-A1 Abrams has a 120MM smooth bore) The famous panther only had a little bitty 75MM
1 - 7.62 Coaxual machine gun
1 - 12.5 MM Machine gun
ARMOR - 250MM turret compaired to 120 MM in the German Panther
120MM front slope
During the parade ceremonies on V-E Day the British rolled out there comet
We Americans rolled out our new Chaffee
after they passed the ground started to shake and the soviets rolled out this monster 60 of them.

Patton leaned over to Monty and said "Its OK there still on our side"


Cavalry Gunner

Panzerknacker
07-18-2007, 05:21 PM
Is a very good tank, but is not really clear if actually saw some combat in WW2, so teorically the Panther still got his crown.

http://panzerkeil.dre.hu/harcjarm/panzer/panther/pzVg.jpg

galex
07-21-2007, 05:32 AM
Here is my point :

Maybe the pz.kpfw. V (Panther) was better than the T34, technologically speaking. Maybe it had better performances than the Russian tank. But it was quite a complex machine and very expensive to the 3rd Reich. It was also difficult to repair, being so complex. In the mean time, T34 was a really simple war machine, easy to repair (if the engine broke down, you could even replace it with a KV's one), easy to adapt it's production line to newer versions and quite cheap to the Soviet Union. Moreover, it didn't "eat" so much fuel as the Panther did.

Of course, technologically speaking, it was a tank which had very good performances and it was a tank with which you could succesfully lead an assault. Operation Bagration prooved it's qualities, both technologically and economically speaking.

In my opinion, the best tank is not the tank with the best technological qualities, it is the tank which succesfully combine both the technological and economical qualities.

Panzerknacker
07-21-2007, 10:25 AM
No question on that, but if a Panther can destroy 7 ot 8 T-34 before being put out of action...I dont really see the justification for the dead people inside a Sherman /T-34 in "hey man you might be burned and dead now but your tank is simplier and more easy to mantain that that panzer killing you"

See my point ? :rolleyes:

galex
07-21-2007, 02:01 PM
I see.....but for the 3 victorious leaders, the tank was much more important than it's crew.....remember the Allied saying during the Normandy campaign? : ammunition, not people.

It is sad, I recognize, but for the good to triumph, it has always been necesarly the sacrifice of it's defenders...as one historian said (I don't exactly remember his name) , the tree of liberty must constantly be wet with the heroes' blood ... otherwise it dries up and dies.

Cavalry Gunner
07-22-2007, 03:08 PM
Really its not the tank its what the crew can do with one I was distinguished gunner in 17 of 18 gunnerys on M-60-A1's and M-551 Sheridans and fought in the 72-73 Arab Israeli war in 60's and Ill tell you this the #1 tank ace OF ALL TIME was S/SGT Lafayette Pool and his crew he killed 258 German Armored vehicles among them a score of Panthers and King tigers and he did it in SHERMANS..

Of course he had 3 of them shot out from underneath him all three called IN THE MOOD and lost his leg in his last engagement.
The US Army allowed him back in the service in 1949 and he tought Armor tactics untill his retirement at the Armor School at Ft Knox KY.
I lived in Germany for 4 years and every WWll German tank crewman Ive run across said the same thing about the T-34 when we saw it we knew it was over for us.
Guederian said up untill the first T-34 appeared we enjoyed tank superiority and afterword the situation was reversed

About the 3rd Armored Division in Germany
http://hometown.aol.com/wawabat/therock.html

Panzerknacker
07-22-2007, 05:46 PM
Obviously a good crew is needed but in some tanks you had not many chances, put yourself in a japanese typ 97 and you ll see. :rolleyes:

There is something more about that U.S tank ace in the ww2 general discussion.


http://www.military.cz/german/armour/tanks/Panther_WW2/images/image004.jpg

mkenny
07-22-2007, 07:33 PM
No question on that, but if a Panther can destroy 7 ot 8 T-34 before being put out of action...I dont really see the justification for the dead people inside a Sherman /T-34 in "hey man you might be burned and dead now but your tank is simplier and more easy to mantain that that panzer killing you"

See my point ?

There is just one problem. There are no figures showing anything like the kill rates claimed for the Uber-Panzers.
In 1944 total British tank losses in France/Low Countries were some 2800.
German tank losses in the same area were just over 2100 (without The Bulge Decemberv1944 losses which were very high)
US Losses were 3107

So we would have a ratio of tank to tank losses of around 2100:5900 or a little over 2.8:1(without the German December Bulge losses)
Now if you include the German armored SP/JgdPzr loss totals of well over 1000 (again less the Bulge losses) you get an idea of how the claims of 5:1 Sherman losses are simply wishful thinking.

Panzerknacker
07-30-2007, 06:36 PM
Panther ausf A in a dug in emplacement in Berlin, March 1945, this vehicle has been shot until extintion.

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/992/pantherzv1.jpg



Servicing the Panther with the help of a 6 ton crane.

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/3610/dibujolr0.jpg

HG
07-31-2007, 06:22 PM
Why did the Germans not make a better engine for the Panthers, Tiger 1 and Tiger 2?

Panzerknacker
07-31-2007, 06:52 PM
It must be lack of time/resources.

There was plans for a 800 hp diesel engine for the Panther, the production of that would begin in ...1946 :rolleyes:

http://i16.tinypic.com/66o2hhg.jpg

HG
07-31-2007, 06:57 PM
It is a shame that such great minds were used for such evil.

Nickdfresh
07-31-2007, 07:14 PM
It is a shame that such great minds were used for such evil.

Well, some Panthers were used for good (sort of); the French Army (and several others I believe) deployed them after the War...

HG
07-31-2007, 07:24 PM
Oh did not know that.

Panzerknacker
08-01-2007, 07:26 PM
Panther knocked out in France, 1944, the resilience of the frontal armor was truly impressive, this vehicle have at list seven 75 or 76 mm hits at the front, 4 in the glacis and 3 in the gun mantlet, the only damage visible is a rupture in the mantlet near the gun and a small penetration ( better said craking) in the lower left corner of sloped armor.

http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/9716/pantherrz9.jpg

HG
08-01-2007, 08:12 PM
Wow that is impressive. To think that it survived so much damaged before getting knocked out.

mkenny
08-01-2007, 09:14 PM
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e312/schwere/pantherunkmmm_201-1.jpg

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e312/schwere/PantherUnknow.10jpg.jpg

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e312/schwere/PCD034033021383-IMG0075.jpg

tankgeezer
08-01-2007, 11:37 PM
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e312/schwere/pantherunkmmm_201-1.jpg

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e312/schwere/PantherUnknow.10jpg.jpg

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e312/schwere/PCD034033021383-IMG0075.jpg Some days you just cant win,,, take over a country, and you still cant find a good parking spot....

awack
08-02-2007, 02:10 AM
I remember reading a book years ago in B&N and in it there was a part about testing the mobility of the panther against a sherman and a us light tank, the panther was faster than the sherman and able to outturn both this was done by the us army in europe during war time i think.

About the protection of the panther... the british tested there 76 mm on a panther and a tiger, the glacis of the panther did much better than that of the tiger and the panthers mantlet did only a little better than the tigers.

Panzerknacker
08-02-2007, 08:43 AM
About the protection of the panther... the british tested there 76 mm on a panther and a tiger, the glacis of the panther did much better than that of the tiger and the panthers mantlet did only a little better than the tigers

It does, even the sub calibre apsv 6 pounder failed to penetrate.

By the way welcome to our forum.

http://img462.imageshack.us/img462/7754/dibujogv0.jpg

Nickdfresh
08-02-2007, 08:47 AM
I remember reading a book years ago in B&N and in it there was a part about testing the mobility of the panther against a sherman and a us light tank, the panther was faster than the sherman and able to outturn both this was done by the us army in europe during war time i think.
...

The Sherman was far more agile in cross country conditions...

Panzerknacker
08-16-2007, 06:53 PM
The sherman had greater ground pressure but I think it could climb slopes better.

Firing test agaist the Panther:

U.S. Army Test No.2
Firing Tests conducted 12-30 July 1944 by 1st U.S. Army in Normandy.


REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF BOARD OF OFFICERS
Organization: Headquarters, First U.S. Army.
Place: APO 230, U.S. Army.
Proceddings of a board of officers which convened at Headquarters, First U.S. Army, pursuant to Special Order No.196, Headquarters, First U.S. Army, 19 July 1944, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A1 (http://wargaming.info/armour06.htm#1).

The board met pursuant to the foregoing order at Headquarters, First U.S. Army, APO 230, at 1400 on 12 July 1944 and on subsequent dates to conduct the firing tests. The final meeting was held on 30 July 1944.

Present: All Members.
Purpose: To conduct tests to determine the effectiveness of tank and anti-tank weapons in First U.S. Army, against the German Mk V "Panther" and Mk VI "Tiger" tanks.
1a. Firing was conducted on terrain permitting 1500 yards maximum range with zero angle of site. All guns and types of ammunition, suitable for anti-tank purposes, available to First U.S. Army were defeated on targets whose armour plate was slightly burned. Upon determination of critical ranges, all penetrations were proven against the armor plate of a German Mk V "Panther" Tank with armor undamaged and in excellent condition. All firing was conducted normal2 (http://wargaming.info/armour06.htm#2) to the target. No firing was conducted against the German Mk VI "Tiger" Tank as there were none available.

1b. The following normal types of tank and anti-tank weapons and ammunition were tested;
WEAPONAMMUNITIONLauncher, Rocket, AT, 2.36"Rocket, AT, 2.36", M6A1Launcher, Grenade, M8Grenade, AT, M9A137mm Gun, M6, Mounted on Light Tank, M5A1APC M5140mm Gun, M1, AAAP M5857mm Gun, M1APC M86Sabot 3 (http://wargaming.info/armour06.htm#3)75mm Gun, M3, mounted on Medium Tank, M4APC M61HEAT M66 (Special)3-inch Gun, M5, mounted on Motor Carriage, M10APC M62, w/BDF M66A1AP M7990mm Gun, M1A1, AAAP M77105mm Howitzer, M4, mounted on Medium Tank, M4HEAT M67


1c. The board assumed that the effect of hollow charge ammunition is not dependent on terminal velocity but the effect does vary with the angle at which the projectile strikes. Hits approaching 90º angle of impact give better penetration.
2. Record of firing with Photographs. See Exhibit B1 (http://wargaming.info/armour06.htm#1).
Findings: The board having carefully considered the evidence before it, finds that:
1) Launcher, Rocket, AT, 2.36"
Rocket, AT, 2.36", M6A1 will penetrate the side of the turret and the side and rear armor plate of the 'Panther' Tank at 100 yards. On the bassis of the assumption in paragraph 1c it follows that as the range increases, thereby reducing the angle of impact4 (http://wargaming.info/armour06.htm#4) against the side of the turret and side armor plate, the possibility of penetration will materially decrease.
2) Launcher, Grenade, M8
Grenade, AT, M9A1, will penetrate the side of the turret and the side and rear plate of the 'Panther' Tank at 60 yards. On the basis of the assumption in paragraph 1c it follows that as the range increases, thereby reducing the angle of impact4 (http://wargaming.info/armour06.htm#4) against the side of the turret and side armor plate, the possibility of penetration will materially decrease.
3) 37mm Gun, M6, Mounted on Light Tank, M5A1
APC, M51 will penetrate the sides and rear of the 'Panther' Tank at 600 yards.
4) 40mm Gun, M1, AA
AP, M58 will penetrate the sides and rear of the 'Panther' Tank at 600 yards.
5) 57mm Gun, M1
a) APC, M86 will penetrate the sides and rear of the 'Panther' Tank at 1500 yards.

b) Sabot fails to penetrate front glacis slope plate and gun shield at 200 yards. Due to difficulty experienced in obtaining hits no conclusion as to the effectiveness of this ammunition was reached.
6) 75mm Gun, M3, mounted on Medium Tank, M4
a) APC M61 will penetrate the sides and rear of the 'Panther' Tank up to 1500 yards. APC M61 at 200 yards will not penetrate the front armor of the 'Panther' Tank.

b) HEAT M66 (Special) will not penetrate the front glacis slope plate at 500 yards (see assumption made in paragraph 1c).

7) 3-inch Gun, M5, mounted on Motor Carriage, M10
a) APC M62, w/BDF M66A1 will not penetrate front glacis slope plate at 200 yards. Will penetrate gun mantlet at 200 yards and penetrate sides and rear of the 'Panther' Tank up to 1500 yards.

b) AP M79 will not penetrate the front slope plate or the mantlet at 200 yards. It holds no advantage over APC M62 ammunition w/BDF M66A1.

8) 90mm Gun, M1A1, AA
AP M77 will penetrate front glacis slope plate up to 600 yards, the gun mantlet up to 1,000 yards and the turret up to 1,500 yards.

9) 105mm Howitzer, M4, mounted on Medium Tank, M4
HEAT M67 will penetrate front glacis slope plate and gun mantlet at 500 yards (see assumption made in paragraph 1c).
In addition to testing the normal types of tank and anti-tank weapons and ammunition, additional types were tested with the following results:

A) 75mm Gun, M3, mounted on Medium Tank, M4
WP M64 - Three rounds were fired at 500 yards for the purpose of obtaining an incendiary or blinding effect. The results were unsatisfactory.

B) 75mm Gun, M3, mounted on Medium Tank, M4
HE M48 w/fz T105 - Three rounds were fired at the front glacis slope plate at 500 yards to determine its armor penetrative characteristics. The rounds failed to penetrate, ricochetting from the plate and bursting in the air.


http://wargaming.info/armour06.htm

astupiddvdcase
08-30-2007, 07:56 AM
t-34/85= piece of junk (well in later war that is) it had poor visibility, poor crew comfort, troubled engines and a 85mm gun which is not as superior as the 76mm fitted on the american shermans. :mrgreen:

Panzerknacker
08-30-2007, 06:28 PM
Hmmm, where you get that data? , first of all I never read of bad engines in the T-34.

Second, the 85mm is superior to the 76 mm, and slightly inferior to the 88mm L56, and if you add that the russian have a lot of tugsten core ammo to work with since 1943....:rolleyes:

http://www.military.cz/panzer/tanks/germany/panther/image/panther_g.jpg

Strangy
09-07-2007, 03:54 AM
well, i see each tank differently, with different flaws and different advantages.

for example, The Tiger was the premier tank, but like most high cost, high material super weapons of the late war years german productivity just could not meet the demand. So i think that puts the tiger out of the running. Even though it might tear a t-34 to shreds with one shot of its massive 88 mm turret.

I hate the sherman, but it numbers it was the most effective thing on the battlefield. It didnt feature the best mobility, the best armor, the best camoflauge, or the nicest design. But its productivity was through the roof.

So i think the best medium in this poll is the t34. It was a mixture of strength, armor, mobility, a low horizon line, and it had a good sized cannon.

Strangy
09-07-2007, 04:04 AM
It is a shame that such great minds were used for such evil.

well who is to say that the German army was "evil". I agree with saying Hitler was evil. But the German army, they were fighting against Bolshevisms, to them it was freeing Europe from the chains of the communist system, and as German armored columns came into contact with many small villages in eastern Europe they were greeted as the heroes, they thought they were the heroes Hitler and Goebbels had claimed they would be. And for much of the occupation in some parts, moral was high among the local inhabitants. So no, the German army wasn't evil. They were normal soldiers just like when we thought we were "Liberating" and "De-Nazifing" Germany in the post war years.

Panzerknacker
09-15-2007, 03:07 PM
Nightfighting Panthers

http://www.pkymasehist.fi/infra02.jpg

Some few Panthers were equipped with special infrared devices for night combat. The "Heereswaffenamt" WaPrüf 8, in cooperation with the AEG was dealing with this kind of optical equipment since 1936, but devolopment was discontinued and the decision to further investigate in this area wasn´t made until the Allies gained total airsuperiority in 1943. From now on much energy was invested in the project.
The results of these investigations, which were lead by Ministerialrat Dr.-Ing. H.Gaertner Heereswaffenamt/WaPrüf 8, were, that in 1943 the Wehrmacht equipped some few Panthers with 200-mm infra-red searchlights FG 1250 and a BIWA (Bildwandler - image converter), which converted the infra-red image into a visible reproduction. In the first tests at the armoured forces school at FALLINGBOSTEL (North Germany) near HANNOVER the crews trained to drive and to aim at night. Admittedly the searchlight range wasn´t more than 600 metres, limiting the long range advantage of the excellent KwK42 75mm/L70.




The FG 1250 infared searchlight and scope mounted on the commander´s cupola of an Panther Ausf.G.

http://www.pkymasehist.fi/infra03.jpg


The steel band was fed through a hole in the turret roof at the base of the cupola. This steel band, connected internally to an indicator, allowed the gunner to recognize when the elevation of the gun was on target.

http://www.pkymasehist.fi/infra04.jpg

Because of this reason the developers mounted an even greater 600mm searchlight on a halftrack, the Sd.Kfz. 251/20 "UHU", which was intended to be attached to each platoon to enhance the night fighting range of the platoon. Finally the Wehrmacht planned to use a halftrack called FALKE in combination with the vehicles mentioned.

Nightfighting Panthers in Action

In summer 1944 the Panthers of 3.Kompanie, 24th Panzerregiment, 116th Panzerdivision, were equipped with UHU on the battle/excercise-area BERGEN, and actually trained the use of the nightfighting concept SPERBER. Hitler planned the mission of this Kompanie to be during the Operation WACHT AM RHEIN (Battle of the Bulge) and actually some squads were tranfered to the western front, but never saw action there.

One SPERBER squad including their Panthers was transfered to STUHLWEISSENBURG (Hungary) in early 1945 with 6th SS-Panzerarmee, intended to support the german counterattack to secure the area of Budapest. The rest of the Kompanie followed, but without nightfighting equipment. In 1945 the Wehrmacht planned to form 5 SPERBER Kompanies, but this concept proved to be illusory. 2 SPERBER squads joined the spontanuous formed Panzerdivision "CLAUSEWITZ", which was formed in spring 1945 on the western front. On 21st of april, these 2 squads ran down an american ambush, which has been set up at the WESER-ELBE-KANAL, and by this ensured the only documented action of the nightfighting concept SPERBER.


In march 1945 the Panzerdivision "MÜNCHEBERG" received one fully equipped Kompanie of 10 SPERBER capable Panthers and one SPERBER capable Panzer Grenadier Kompanie. The Division took part in the last fights during the battle of BERLIN. If this Division used the SPERBER concept isn´t documented.

h2so4
11-18-2007, 06:49 AM
Excuse me... for my intervention...

But....
For me .... the best tank is he, which win the war

I think there is something superior in that tank, which win the war, independently of our opinions, or our wishs. I see..... somebody hire likes comforts....

But are not the comforts doing the war.... and believe me, they d'not help in war...!


My Regards

Panther F
11-18-2007, 12:11 PM
In my opinion, the word 'best' isn't the correct word to use for it can mean or have many applications. To one, it may apply to the power and ability to deflect shots and to another it may apply to what the tank brought to the war effort.

If all of the tanks did what they were supposed to do (didn't break down, etc.), the Tiger I followed by the Panther would be the two top 'best' tanks. The Sherman followed by the T34 would be the two most important tanks.

It's a debate that will out live all of us and is always an interesting topic!

JMHO :D


Jeff

Panzerknacker
11-18-2007, 03:31 PM
Excuse me... for my intervention...

But....
For me .... the best tank is he, which win the war

I think there is something superior in that tank, which win the war, independently of our opinions, or our wishs. I see..... somebody hire likes comforts....

But are not the comforts doing the war.... and believe me, they d'not help in war...!


My Regards

Well, dont let us in the shadows, go ahead and please enlightened us...wich was the tank that won the war, and please also tell us in wich aspect it was superior to the Pz V?

Nickdfresh
11-18-2007, 09:38 PM
Well, dont let us in the shadows, go ahead and please enlightened us...wich was the tank that won the war, and please also tell us in wich aspect it was superior to the Pz V?

The numbers produced? That would be about any of them. :D

Panzerknacker
11-19-2007, 05:23 PM
Not quite, there was more Panthers than Pershings or Churchills.

Just two allied types models that I remember now. :rolleyes:


http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g61/angelh_01/Blindados/FabricaAlemanadePantherMA.N.jpg



http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g61/angelh_01/Blindados/FabricaAlemanadePantherMA.Na.jpg



http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g61/angelh_01/Blindados/FabricaAlemanadePantherMA.Nc.jpg




http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g61/angelh_01/Blindados/FabricaAlemanadePantherMA.Nd.jpg

h2so4
11-21-2007, 01:16 PM
Well!

Even you believeme or not, i want to help our friend "PANZERKNACKER" takeing away from shadows.
Let call some sun here, on our conversation.... I think, a little sun d'not demage, if you are not looking him at eye. Perhaps(and thes is my opinion), he makes the miracle and removes the shadows from "PANZERKNACKER"-s dreamland.


I see....
I have read all yours writings here in this theme.
I agreed with you!
"Panther" was beautiful looking tank, nice armoured, high ability, good precision, good balance. What can i say any ather..... "Panther" = Jewel

But the war is like the hunt!
My uncle, which is hunter..... he d'not take jewels with him..... one dog take he, with him! Do you think he is silly....?! Maybe.....yes!!!! Maybe.....no!!! Who knows...!!!!! I d'not recognize myself sometimes. But for something i em sure. The war is more nearly with the hunt, than is nearly with the party.

"T-34/85" was the dog. And he did! He bites and the germans that knows. He was there. In any time, in any condition of weather! He was there, when soldiery needs him.

2mm high, or 2mm down, there is no importance. When the bear is coming, the gun must shoot!

Yes......
Beautiful is the Wolf..... But my dirty, ugly, lazy dog...... helps me!

Hello my friend.... I can not change yours believes.... i d'not wantit too! But is something higher from them...... is the truth. And the truth is "T-34/85" win the war!

Dallas
11-21-2007, 02:14 PM
Tiger

Panzerknacker
11-21-2007, 05:13 PM
Even you believeme or not, i want to help our friend "PANZERKNACKER" takeing away from shadows.
Let call some sun here, on our conversation.... I think, a little sun d'not demage, if you are not looking him at eye. Perhaps(and thes is my opinion), he makes the miracle and removes the shadows from "PANZERKNACKER"-s dreamland.


I see....
I have read all yours writings here in this theme.
I agreed with you!
"Panther" was beautiful looking tank, nice armoured, high ability, good precision, good balance. What can i say any ather..... "Panther" = Jewel

But the war is like the hunt!
My uncle, which is hunter..... he d'not take jewels with him..... one dog take he, with him! Do you think he is silly....?! Maybe.....yes!!!! Maybe.....no!!! Who knows...!!!!! I d'not recognize myself sometimes. But for something i em sure. The war is more nearly with the hunt, than is nearly with the party.

"T-34/85" was the dog. And he did! He bites and the germans that knows. He was there. In any time, in any condition of weather! He was there, when soldiery needs him.

2mm high, or 2mm down, there is no importance. When the bear is coming, the gun must shoot!

Yes......
Beautiful is the Wolf..... But my dirty, ugly, lazy dog...... helps me!

Hello my friend.... I can not change yours believes.... i d'not wantit too! But is something higher from them...... is the truth. And the truth is "T-34/85" win the war!


:rolleyes:, despite some mishaps in spelling, that could be consider a proper ansewr, thanks, thanks H2 for take me out, there was so much darkness here. ;)

Steven
12-23-2007, 02:16 PM
I think T-34....but Panther is most beutiful...

h2so4
12-24-2007, 04:16 PM
despite some mishaps in spelling, that could be consider a proper ansewr, thanks, thanks H2 for take me out, there was so much darkness here.

Ohhhhh..... Sorry my frend! I'm very sorry! I'm really afflicted, that you feel so. But the good news is, that you find the light again. This make me feel beter.




Ahhhhhhh forgeted.......
Congratulations for your correct ENGLISH!!!!

kallinikosdrama1992
12-25-2007, 06:15 AM
come on now steve . here we choose which better , not which is more beautiful

Steven
12-25-2007, 08:30 AM
come on now steve . here we choose which better , not which is more beautiful
I have answer...T-34....:shock:

kallinikosdrama1992
12-25-2007, 09:34 AM
just keeding man . i saw your answer . But i think Tiger was better

Panzerknacker
12-26-2007, 04:38 PM
Congratulations for your correct ENGLISH!!!!


Thanks !!

I must say that in many ocassion for a T-34 crew the Panther did not look pretty...it look deadly. :twisted:

http://www.battletanks.com/images/PzKw_V_Panther_D-2.jpg

kallinikosdrama1992
12-27-2007, 07:15 AM
Very accurate comment there PK . We talked about the beauty and forgot how much lethal was the Panther (Killing Beauty) .

Moreheaddriller
12-30-2007, 05:11 PM
the best there was and the best there will ever be The Tiger!

Tanker Mike
01-08-2008, 09:57 PM
Hello,

I am looking for information regarding the colors used on the 2.Panzer-Division Panthers in Normandy 1944. Photos seem to be hard to come by and I've not found any color profiles or drawings either. Any ideas on camo patterns or books that would have this kind of info?

Thanks,
Mike

Major Walter Schmidt
01-09-2008, 12:25 AM
The tiger had mechanical problems. There were enough t34 to replace every broken/destroyed t34.

IRISH TIGER
01-09-2008, 09:22 AM
A Tiger from the 503 Feldherrnhalle (Army) number 121 with no less than 250 impacts from all guns and drove over a few mines made it back to its own lines under its own power and its crew a little groggy got out unscathed. No reports on panther taking this amount of damage and getting away with it. Still, the Panther was a out-standing tank in its own right and ya cant take it away from it.They were two differnt types of tank, tiger was a heavy brakethrough tank and the panther was a fast meduim tank to exploite the brakethrough which tiger had done.

Sickles
01-09-2008, 11:01 AM
If I am on the eastern front, give me the Tiger 1 over a Panther. All Around a better tank in regards to combination of Protection, firepower and mobility.

Protection: Tiger * Panther
Firepower: Tiger Panther*
Mobility: Tiger = Panther

All around protection was better in the tiger no doubt. In attack you want a tank that can withstand flanking hits, ie the Tiger. In Defense The Panther was virtually impenetrable in the hull front in most combat situations. Although the turret manlet was vulnerable to deflecting a shell downward into the roof of the hull. Panther, great in defense poor in attack, Tiger good at both.

The firepower of the '75 in the Panther was a flat shooting gun with outstanding accuracy and penetration even at great distances.
The kwk L56 -88 of the Tiger was slightly inferior to the 75, but was still capable of dealing with EVERY allied Tank till the end of the war, in other words it never became obsolete.

The Tiger and Panther were roughly equal in mobility, This is taking into account reliability. While the Tiger was not known for reliability, it had a better chance of being combat ready than the Panther. The Tiger is often thought of as a lumbering behemouth but in reality was a fairly agile for a 56 ton Tank. Wide tracks gave a lower ground pressure than the Sherman. The Panther is often regarded as being the more nimble of the 2 but neither is going to outrun a T-34 or Sherman. There are numerous tales of Panthers being bogged down (Peiper's Panthers in the "Bulge") Neither Tank had good range or a fast turning turret.

Bottom line. The Panther often touted as the best tank of WW2 really had 2 great attributes,
1- its gun, 2- frontal protection.
The Tiger also had these attributes as well as excellent protection from the side and rear. The tiger doesn't lag too far behind in the mobility arena either and was probably more mechanically sound.

GIVE ME tHE TIGER

Splinter54
01-09-2008, 01:06 PM
Protection: Tiger * Panther
Firepower: Tiger Panther*
Mobility: Tiger = Panther


That's your own conclusion?

The Tiger's protection was good against 'older' vehicles, but the new vehicles like T-34/85 etc. had been able to penetrate its armor.
But it's a question of the terrain and how the crew was trained - i am sure if the Tiger stood in the 'Klee' (~10-11, ~13-14 o'clock) it gave the allied tanks a hard fight.
But the Panthers frontal armor was able to even stop a 150mm artillery shell, when it impacted in a certain angle (however i wonder if the welding was still able to hold the tank together ^^)

Firepower? Well that has been discussed here quite often - personally i prefer the Panthers cannon, because i also like the PaK40 specifies ;)

Why has the Tiger a better mobility than a Panther?? Look at their stats. :rolleyes:

Sickles
01-09-2008, 04:10 PM
Splinter54
i guess the bottom line is, The Tiger really had no major weakness, the key word is [I]major. The Panther had a major weakness compared to the Tiger, - Protection.
Yes the Panther had a better gun as I stated, but it wasnt' that much better, The Panther had better mobility BUT, it wasn't that much better. The Tiger had the same mobility rating as the Panzer 4 as far as on road and off road speed. The panther could do 7 kph faster (if the transmission didn't blow) on road but both were roughly equal on off road terrain. It comes down to protection, here the Tiger wins.....

p.s. Neither was a war winning tank due to complexity of designs, ie. lack of numbers.

Splinter54
01-10-2008, 11:54 AM
Yes that is right Mr. Sickles ;)

The PaK43 L71 in Erdkampf role - i wonder why it has the Blende of the Jagdpanther and not a normal gunshield?

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/4204/erdkampfpak431vc3.th.jpg (http://img256.imageshack.us/my.php?image=erdkampfpak431vc3.jpg)

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/9081/erdkampfpak433hc6.th.jpg (http://img114.imageshack.us/my.php?image=erdkampfpak433hc6.jpg)

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/2053/erdkampfpak432gf8.th.jpg (http://img258.imageshack.us/my.php?image=erdkampfpak432gf8.jpg)

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/8048/erdkampfpak43wm3.th.jpg (http://img177.imageshack.us/my.php?image=erdkampfpak43wm3.jpg)

Note the umbrellas :D
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/7180/jagdpantherschirmeoy6.th.jpg (http://img177.imageshack.us/my.php?image=jagdpantherschirmeoy6.jpg)

Panther TaktNr 115
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/9758/pantherpanzer115lt6.th.jpg (http://img262.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherpanzer115lt6.jpg)

Infront of the Arc de Triomphe in Paris (LSSAH)
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/462/pantherlahparishh4.th.jpg (http://img249.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherlahparishh4.jpg)

Afterwar exibition? Note the paintjob and the stashbox which seems to be miss the "stabilisation lines"
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/7900/pantherlahparis2wm1.th.jpg (http://img167.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherlahparis2wm1.jpg)

Note the chicken wire around the main guns barrel :D
http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/8821/pantherlahparis1qz7.th.jpg (http://img442.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherlahparis1qz7.jpg)

Somewhere in Netherland:
http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/742/pantherhollandau8.th.jpg (http://img204.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherhollandau8.jpg)

Wochenschau picture - note the hooks on the side of the Schürzens - i remember that those had been also at the turret but at the Schürzen :neutral:
http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/8853/pantherpreussenschuerzevy3.th.jpg (http://img526.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherpreussenschuerzevy3.jpg)

"Dear Gentlemens - may we have the honor to shoot you with your own tanks?"
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/580/pantherthommieswi9.th.jpg (http://img184.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherthommieswi9.jpg)

Note the Jerrycan on the side of the turret:
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/9563/pantherthommies1us8.th.jpg (http://img184.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherthommies1us8.jpg)

Man, i can imagine how pis*ed the tankers had been when they had not been able to pull their tanks out of the mud - worst case i would say.
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/4035/spzjgabt6541cb4.th.jpg (http://img184.imageshack.us/my.php?image=spzjgabt6541cb4.jpg)

Same scene, just a year later:
http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/4189/spzjgabt6542si7.th.jpg (http://img206.imageshack.us/my.php?image=spzjgabt6542si7.jpg)

In the fabrics courtyard - not the provisory camouflage (parts of trees)!!
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/1562/pantherproduktioncb4.th.jpg (http://img444.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherproduktioncb4.jpg)

That hurts me - infront of the melting hall
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/7895/pantherproduktion1wk8.th.jpg (http://img263.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pantherproduktion1wk8.jpg)

Sickles
01-17-2008, 02:55 PM
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1-04.htm

A link showing how mobile The Tiger 1 actually was. Also shows stats that indicate a greater reliability over the Panther in battlefield readiness

Koen
01-22-2008, 12:38 PM
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/AcoolVW/panzers/PzKpW%20V%20Panther/BergungsPanther/BergungsPanther-1.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/AcoolVW/panzers/PzKpW%20V%20Panther/BergungsPanther/BergungsPanther-2.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/AcoolVW/panzers/PzKpW%20V%20Panther/BergungsPanther/BergungsPanther-3.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/AcoolVW/panzers/PzKpW%20V%20Panther/BergungsPanther/BergungsPanther-4.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/AcoolVW/panzers/PzKpW%20V%20Panther/BergungsPanther/BergungsPanther-5.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/AcoolVW/panzers/PzKpW%20V%20Panther/BergungsPanther/BergungsPanther-6.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/AcoolVW/panzers/PzKpW%20V%20Panther/BergungsPanther/BergungsPanther-7.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/AcoolVW/panzers/PzKpW%20V%20Panther/BergungsPanther/BergungsPanther-8.jpg

feel free to add info/pictures
feel free to correct my post

Panzerknacker
01-22-2008, 04:16 PM
The PaK43 L71 in Erdkampf role - i wonder why it has the Blende of the Jagdpanther and not a normal gunshield?

Weird, :shock: first time ever saw that improvisation, thank you very much Splinter

Nickdfresh
01-22-2008, 05:07 PM
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1-04.htm

A link showing how mobile The Tiger 1 actually was. Also shows stats that indicate a greater reliability over the Panther in battlefield readiness


It seems to be a site of rather Tiger-happy bias...

The later Panther's were much more reliable, although the fact that the German engineers were stuffing transmissions and engines in these tanks, components designed to power vehicles much lighter, is what made both machines as much queens of the garage as much queens of the battlefield...

Also, the numbers of tanks that they knocked out, often times exaggerated, also show that Germany was on the defensive and that these tanks were firing in a static ambush position or conducting local spoiling attacks. Hence, the main reason for these tanks' success as anti-tank weapons was that German was losing the war.

Panzerknacker
01-22-2008, 07:33 PM
Of course, you mean Bergepanther.

Koen
01-22-2008, 11:44 PM
Of course, you mean Bergepanther.

I wasn't sure which was historical correct, thx

Koen
01-23-2008, 09:20 AM
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/AcoolVW/panzers/PzKpW%20V%20Panther/beobachtung/Panzerbeobachtungswagen.jpg

looking for more pictures

Panzerknacker
01-23-2008, 05:00 PM
There is more in here:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4040&page=4

Panzerknacker
01-28-2008, 06:25 PM
Panther in action (III)

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/1636/pantherom6.jpg


http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/5794/dibujolw3.jpg

Osprey Vanguard 21, the Panther Medium Tank

Tanker Mike
01-31-2008, 08:01 PM
looking for more pictures

You won't find many pictures of the Panzerbeobachtungs Panther since it never went into production and only one Versuchsturm (experimental turret) was completed and put on a Ausf. D chassis in the late summer of 1943.

In fact, your picture is the same one used in three different books about Panthers. I kinda doubt any others exist.


Mike

Panzerknacker
02-01-2008, 06:55 AM
That is correct, the panzerbeobachtungswagen III were issued instead.Guderian did not allowed any of his preciated panthers manufactured as artillery observation o recce vehicles.

Dark1995
02-12-2008, 05:49 PM
Tigers ok but i think Panther is better

Nickdfresh
02-12-2008, 08:41 PM
Tigers ok but i think Panther is better

Why do you think so?

awack
02-16-2008, 02:22 AM
I think the panther is better aswell, its faster, more manuverable, has better floatation, better frontal armor, as test using a british 17 pounder (if i remember correctly) showed,

supperior gun for armor penatration
tiger 88 mm gun:
using pzgr 39:at 100m 120mm: 500m 110mm: 1000m 100mm: 1500m 91mm: 2000m 84mm

using pzgr40 at 100 m 170mm: 500m 155mm: 1000m 138mm: 1500m 122mm: 2000m 110mm,

panther 75mm gun:
using pzgr.39 at 100m 138mm: 500m 124mm: 1000m 111mm: 1500m 99mm: 2000m 89mm,

using pzgr 40, at 100m 194mm: 500m 174mm: 1000m 149mm: 1500m 127mm: 2000m 106mm,

the 75 mm had a higher velocity, giving it a flatter trajectory.

The tiger did have thicker side armor and a larger caliber gun which would give it better high explosive and over matching ability.

Splinter54
02-16-2008, 05:43 PM
Most probably that guy fell off the wet tank (see the strains on his coat) :P
Direct Link: http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/3645/pz519jc5.jpg

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/3645/pz519jc5.th.jpg (http://img147.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pz519jc5.jpg)

Kampfgruppe Cottrell
02-19-2008, 06:52 AM
Not sure if you guys have seen this but gives some great insight on the Panther when facing enemy infantry.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-4JQbgccR4Y&feature=related

Enjoy,
Brian

Splinter54
02-20-2008, 01:59 PM
Nice video - german propaganda i think?

I wasn't sure if i should post that in the IR devices thread or here - we'll i am like 99% sure that that's a fake - nevertheless i post it ^^
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9063/ir02ny3.th.jpg (http://img142.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ir02ny3.jpg)

gumalangi
02-26-2008, 12:15 PM
Tiger,.

For allies,. all germans heavy thanks are tigers!

Panzerknacker
02-26-2008, 04:34 PM
Hmmm, the picture is too poor in quality to extract some truth answer, but it could be a way to mask the fake too.

Panzerknacker
06-04-2008, 07:25 PM
On request, profile of the Panther with withewash finish, By the way , in the future if you have questions/ comment about the Panther is better to made them in public, that is in this topic.

Panzerbefehlwagen Panther ausf A, vehicle owned by the Oberst Wlly Langkeit, Panther ace in the eastern Front.

http://i30.tinypic.com/ea15ih.jpg

Ausf D, for russian July 1943.

http://i32.tinypic.com/lxjdv.jpg

tskross
06-06-2008, 12:42 PM
Great, thanks for the pics. Will post in the forums next time

Panzerknacker
06-06-2008, 05:08 PM
No worries, I have more snow cammo profiles in other book wich Ill try to post soon.

tskross
06-06-2008, 09:09 PM
fantastic, I look forward to them

Splinter54
06-07-2008, 01:48 AM
Good morning.

Very early Panther Ausf. D

http://i31.tinypic.com/2zqyk2r.jpg

http://i30.tinypic.com/2ufrszd.jpg

The well known Peiper-Panthers.
http://i25.tinypic.com/2uikeqe.jpg

That one was hit - perhaps the Americans saw what hit them.
http://i29.tinypic.com/15y691s.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/ve9qid.jpg

http://i27.tinypic.com/2zrewl3.jpg

Backed up right into the wall.
http://i25.tinypic.com/jrejxf.jpg

Interessting camo on a Panther Ausf. D - what are those black tubes at the middle of the chassis?
http://i25.tinypic.com/2ykgqwh.jpg

A french ... emmm ... Bergepanther Modification :mrgreen:
http://i30.tinypic.com/68xbm9.jpg

Have a nice day ;)

frtychrs
06-09-2008, 01:48 PM
Russian t34 it's numbers were mind boggling and it's easy maintaince and quick assembly put this behomth way ahead true quality was not there so numbers make up for it. I think it used a 60mm gun in which Russians used them in concentraed numbers on one or more targets. I like the Jadgerpanther, low silluette 75, and 88 gun draw back no roating turrent.

Churchill
06-09-2008, 02:49 PM
Plus, it looks cool. Its the type of thing you don't want to run into in a dark alley.

Panzerknacker
06-09-2008, 06:11 PM
french ... emmm ... Bergepanther Modification


Remarkable picture, thanks :)

Panzerknacker
06-11-2008, 06:44 PM
Interessting camo on a Panther Ausf. D - what are those black tubes at the middle of the chassis?

I dont see tubes, but it look like a ladder made from "L" profile laminated iron emplaced in horizontal position.


Another profile of Panther in winter cammo finish , this one is a command tank of the SS fighting In Poland 1944. ( Scan of "Panther variants in Color" v Waldemar Trojka.)

PANZERCOMMANDER
06-12-2008, 12:06 AM
..............

tskross
06-12-2008, 10:30 AM
Thanks for that post, it is exactly the type of image I've been looking for!

Panzerknacker
06-12-2008, 05:28 PM
Thanks for that post, it is exactly the type of image I've been looking for!


You were smart enough to ask for the picture to the exact type of member too ;)

Nickdfresh
06-12-2008, 09:33 PM
http://i30.tinypic.com/68xbm9.jpg

Well, I guess they beat the "sword" into "plowshares." :)

A great post splinter, excellent pics of Panthers in American service...

Major Walter Schmidt
06-12-2008, 11:45 PM
actualy I think thats a Nazy panther used in "Operation Grief (Griffon)" a fake M10 used by Skorzeny.

Cobra6
06-17-2008, 07:33 AM
Thank you for using my work as a refference here. Next time please give some credit ;)

here are some renders with the finished camo:
http://cobra6.deviantart.com/art/2-Panthers-with-splinter-camo-54326494

http://cobra6.deviantart.com/art/Almost-cracked-the-can-77121385

Cobra 6




The green (base), yellow,brown striped Panther Ausf. G is a 1945 finished tank by MAN.

The red (base), yellow, green striped Panther saw action at the Oderfront.


http://ic1.deviantart.com/files/f/2007/120/5/8/2_Panthers_with_splinter_camo_by_Cobra6.jpg

http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs11/f/2007/118/0/5/Panther_Splinter_camo_v1_by_Cobra6.jpg

Another pattern:

http://ic3.deviantart.com/fs13/f/2007/056/6/3/Panther_WIP5_by_Cobra6.jpg

http://ic3.deviantart.com/fs15/f/2007/076/0/1/Panther_WIP6_by_Cobra6.jpg

artmiser
06-20-2008, 03:46 PM
I vote the panther, for many of the reasons listed. Also if anyone would like to see a very nice restoration in progress just type "Littlefield Panther" into your search engine and enjoy all the pics out there.


Also something to note on the breakdown problems, from what the guys say who work at littlefield, they find that some german equipment had been sabotaged most likely by the people they had making them. Bolts hand tight, debri in transmissions. What they get for using slave labor in some of there factories.

artmiser
06-20-2008, 05:22 PM
Added some photo's to my album of the panther and other vehicles.

Panzerknacker
06-22-2008, 08:45 PM
Panther knocked out in Poland. 2 shots of 85mm didnt penetrate the frontal plate but a 122 mm shot did go trough.

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/5015/pantherglacisscoopshu1.jpg

No the side turret Panzerfaust probably emplaced for the crew easy reach when they need to bail out the tank. After being hit with that heavy caliber it seems the german crew have no chances to use it.

BearMgk
06-24-2008, 01:13 PM
Hi.

Afaik is this the only existing picture of the Daimler-Benz VK 3002, taken post-war:

http://www.ww2technik.de/Bilderchen/sonstiges/daimler_panther.jpg


I have some problems with the Panzer V as there are rumors that the US light M5 was able to penetrate the side armour on up to 500 m with its 37 mm gun.....

So my vote for the Panzer VI E.

Yours

tom! ;)


These pic is from Berlin after the Capitulation.

christophe1992
07-15-2008, 05:41 PM
for armor- no doubt the kingtiger because its very thick and its sloped that makes it double effectif

-mobility and relyability- the sherman with wet munition protection.

Speed- t34 and the first panther( later models are a bit slower, they changed speed for relyability.

-terror tiger (1) and the panther (king tiger where to few in numbers and were unreliable, mostly the airforce took em out.

handy- sertanly the sherman because there where more models of them and each has it jobs.

-power 1) tigers and js1-3 series
2) panther,sherman firefly capable of killing a tiger on 1000 meter with regular ammo an 2000m with special ip rounds.
- t34 85 mm gun a bit weaker then the firefly butt still a very effectif weapon.

SS Ouche-Vittes
07-15-2008, 06:03 PM
Germany should of made a fast tank/car with a powerful gun, not saying it has to be the 88mm and it should of been very light with a small profile. I think i once saw a variation of the kubelwagen with a big gun on it.

Hysteria__
07-15-2008, 08:24 PM
Fantastic writing about the turrets used as pillboxes, I'd heard of this but only ever seen a single picture before.

christophe1992
07-17-2008, 04:08 PM
Germany should of made a fast tank/car with a powerful gun, not saying it has to be the 88mm and it should of been very light with a small profile. I think i once saw a variation of the kubelwagen with a big gun on it.


kubelwagen with a large gun ? never seen it howerver germany had the puma i gues id had ah 50 mm gun on it

SS Ouche-Vittes
07-17-2008, 08:08 PM
The Puma is awesome! I want pics of the puma and accounts of it's performance in combat! I want to build a real puma some day! I have a pic of a kubelwagen, i think its a 50 mm gun on it, it was used in Africa Campaign.

Splinter54
07-26-2008, 11:59 AM
Hello ;)

Kampfgruppe Peiper Panthers

http://i36.tinypic.com/2nl5m4x.jpg

http://i35.tinypic.com/zlszs5.jpg

Sincerly

Splinter54

PANZERCOMMANDER
07-27-2008, 12:24 AM
Here are a few shots..

jimb1940
08-05-2008, 12:43 PM
Thanks for the excellent info on great tanks.

But can any of you gentlemen post pictures that reveal the damage done to these tanks when destroyed? Post #98 shows what appears to be a hit. Are there other close up pics of damage?

What actually happens when a tank is hit in battle and the occupants are killed or wounded? I often imagine a small hole where the projectile enters the tank and then explodes inside. Is that the right picture? Confined to such a small space, are most of the men inside killed?

I ask for personal reasons for since my days in the Marine Corps and having to endure a ride in a halftrack ( I think that was the vehicle capable of forking deeps steams with several marines inside), and being 6 feet 6 inches tall, nothing in my experience gave me such a scare. I felt trapped and unable to move and thought of what it must be like for men in battle tanks actually in a battle.

Thanks, jimb

dist
08-08-2008, 07:29 AM
Hi! - it's my first post on this forum


That is pretty impressive,never had heard of them before.I did a google search and found this
http://www.orasoft.net.pl/~leszek.ch/e_pt4.jpg

http://www.orasoft.net.pl/~leszek.ch/e_pt1.jpg

http://www.orasoft.net.pl/~leszek.ch/e_pt3.jpg

http://www.orasoft.net.pl/~leszek.ch/e_pt2.jpg
I also noticed on the map they provided it was near a bridge next to a river,looks like a pretty good defensive position.


Just as a point of interest. The above pictures were taken in the area of Szczecin bridgehead (west bank of Oder river). The Turm was dug in to what was and is now a railroad embankment. And this is not a Pantherturm, but a specially designed defensive Turm armed with a PzKpfw IV H/J gun.

For those who are interested:
http://www.pomorze.zp.pl/index.php?strona=2&id=2&sort=&rodzaj=1&l=0&rodzaj2=4

http://www.pomorze.zp.pl/index.php?strona=2&id=3&sort=&rodzaj=1&l=0&rodzaj2=3

http://www.pomorze.zp.pl/index.php?strona=2&id=4&sort=&rodzaj=1&l=0&rodzaj2=4



I like this shot from the Italian Campaign:

http://www.panzernet.net/panzernet/fotky/tanky/pz5/169.jpg



I strongly believe you are not right with this one dear Sir - this is one of the series of pictures of Panzer Lehr troops in Normandy

http://images4.fotosik.pl/300/9396539620d9e57dmed.jpg
http://images14.fotosik.pl/62/97886f1012b9321cmed.jpg
http://images14.fotosik.pl/63/5a6abdc0c86dea15med.jpg
http://images4.fotosik.pl/300/f53310752f00b8c1med.jpg
http://images14.fotosik.pl/63/0c144d756518eb45med.jpg
http://images12.fotosik.pl/24/545e1dfa5ab1551c.jpg
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8762/109nl8.jpg

The the farm from the pictures - present day

http://images14.fotosik.pl/63/0b53df40eb19459fmed.jpg
http://images14.fotosik.pl/63/d67142049478dcb7med.jpg

Lehr Panther from Panzermuseum Munster
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/5554/foty144ys4.jpg

Regards,
dist

Panzerknacker
08-08-2008, 09:02 AM
It is the Panzer Lehr definately, beautiful pictures, thank you.:cool:

Kent
08-24-2008, 06:56 PM
Here I am with a reply on page 17 of this topic. Better late than never(?) It is a very good question and I'm sure it has been asked countless times. The question appears simple and straightforward, but it is actually very open ended. The answer depends on what criteria you are judging the answer by. Different criterias generate different answers.

Standard criteria (SC); firepower, mobility, and armor: Panther, hands down.

However, if we start with the standard criteria then, introduce other critical factors using the hindsight advantage we are privileged to have, the answer changes. That said, it might be more relavent to rank the tanks (Hey, I'm a poet!) in order of the significance of their effectiveness, in addtion to their technical merits. Technical merits aside, it's who ultimately wins that really matters.

1. T-34; Technically, it met the SC better than any other tank when it was introduced in 1940, and held that position until 1943. Plus, it was very reliable. Its shortcomings were primarily tactical in nature. Mainly, the lack of radio communications, and poorly manned and led in comparison to its adversaries. However, in terms of shear numbers, it had no equal ie: it was a very good tank on its own SC merits, and there was always a lot more of them than anything they faced.

2. Panzer IV; even if it was only third or fourth best in terms of overall SC, it was close to the T-34, and superior to many of its comtemporaries, and very reliable while quite capable of defeating all its opponents. If Germany had concentrtated on, and improved on the Panzer IV, and its Jagdpanzer IV derivative, it would have had the numbers it needed, and coupled with superior crews and tactics the Panzers would have been much more formidable than they actually were, and they were very, very formidable.

3. M4 Sherman; The US began the war with the Sherman and stuck with it. It had the poorest SC, but it was reliable and there were a lot of them. Although it was poorly matched in tank vs. tank encounters, superior numbers and supporting tactics did much to address the imbalance. Besides, tank vs. tank engagements are only a portion of what tanks do. When not fighting other tanks, tanks are supporting infantry, the biggest factor in any battle, all things kept in perspective. I think most WW2 generals would probably agree, infantry can survive without tanks, but tanks cannot survive without infantry.

4. Panther; The best tank of WW2, as far as SC is concerned. Technically superior in that it incorporated all the lessons learned to that point, but they were sent into battle before enough of the bugs were worked out, and their reliability suffered accordingly. Regardless, there were too few of them, too late in the war to really affect the eventual outcome.

5. Tiger; With isolated exceptions, In tank vs. tank engagements it had no equal. But it was relatively immobile, and unreliable. And like the Panther, too few and too late. Plus, the designing, development, testing, and production interruptions attributed to the Tiger, and Panther only justified the war of attrition the Allies were waging against them. (See 1. & 3.) They might have had an overall 10:1 kill ratio, but they faced 20:1 odds.

Panzerknacker
08-24-2008, 09:00 PM
2. Panzer IV; even if it was only third or fourth best in terms of overall SC, it was close to the T-34, and superior to many of its comtemporaries, and very reliable while quite capable of defeating all its opponents. If Germany had concentrtated on, and improved on the Panzer IV, and its Jagdpanzer IV derivative, it would have had the numbers it needed, and coupled with superior crews and tactics the Panzers would have been much more formidable than they actually were, and they were very, very formidable

Hardly could Germany concentrate in the Panzer IV when the USSR continued to improve his armor day by day, The Panzer IV was okay for fighting the the Desert and Other western scenarios but for the East you need some with heavier punch and much better armored, for example the side armor of the Panzer IV could not be improved, the 30 mm figure was in 1944 the same as in 1939, not good, It could be penetrated by antitank rifles and rifle grenades.

The mobility was not so good, the leaf springs were simple and manteinance free but gaves a hard ride. Ground pressure was high, the track were widened in 1942 but still have the same ground pressure as the panther wich weights 19 tons more.

I agree on the rest of you post by the way.

Kent
08-25-2008, 06:46 AM
My assumption about Panzer IV was: given the prowess of the German tank designers, if they had concentrated their efforts on the IV, they would have evolved it to a much higher degree, staying with and improving what was working well, and replacing what wasn't. Eventually, which would have been sooner rather than later, the IV would have had little resemblance to the original IV, and more in common with the V in terms of capability, given the necessity of responding to the T-34. Evolution is almost always more expedient than revolution. More results for less effort, sooner. And there is ample evidence that the Germans were very adept at modifying their equipment at something less than at depot level. Meanwhile, the production rate could have continued on at a much higher pace. You may not have the absolutely best tank one could have, but you have something that is very capable of meeting your immediate needs, and many more of them with little time lost compared to designing and introducing a totally new type. The majority of Panthers that went into battle could be classified as pre-production prototypes.

I should also add that the development of new armor piercing projectiles in 1944/45 was fast out-pacing the development of new, or more, armor. Cheap and plentiful man-portable weapons that were capable of defeating heavy tanks were becoming commonplace, and older light field artillery could launch new projectiles that were far more lethal than their bore size would suggest. So, when it came to armor, more was becoming less in terms of lost mobility (Tiger), in a hurry. This was borne out in post-war tank designs that put a premium on mobility and firepower, with armor last. Today, the armor technology has caught up somewhat with projectile technology, for now, but it took several decades for that to happen. (Isn't hindsight great?)

Footnote: It's been my observation that German designers more often than not opt for the latest and greatest, and generally over-design (my choice of words) in order to acheive it. We call it, "New Paint Fever" in the US. Yes, they come up with very impressive designs, and you get the newest thing out there that no one else has, but you also get a boatload of new problems no one else has, too. That may be an acceptable trade-off for consumer items in peacetime, but it can be a real loser for military items you are currently using to fight a war. 'Like we say, "There's no free lunch".

Sickles
08-25-2008, 05:35 PM
I'd rather be in a Panther than a '34 during a battle.... Rather be in a Tiger1 than a Panther! Anyway the T-34 was a war winning Tank the Panther was not. Logistically if you were a commander you'd want a division of T34s than Panthers simply because the T34 can go more places where a Panther can't. Sure in open space the Panther was great but rarely did optimal conditons prevail in wartime.

A Panther had a great gun and frontal armour, but what good was it confined to roads or worse, in the repair shop or abandoned?

Kent
08-26-2008, 07:40 AM
Sickles,

You hit the nail on the head. The so-called fog of war, which is more the norm of unforeseen circumstances, dictates what works best, at a given time and place, which is seldom optimal for either side. The T-34 worked better at more times, and in more places, than any of the other tanks it faced. The law of averages usually determines the eventual outcome.

Perhaps, there should be (at least) four questions about WW2 tanks:
1) Which had the best combination of firepower, mobility, & armor? Answer: Panther
2) Which was the most reliable? Answer: Sherman
3) Which had the best combination of firepower and armor? Answer: Tiger
4) Which was the most dominant? Answer: T-34
I'm sure there are several more pertinent questions I didn't ask.

Comrade Commisar
08-26-2008, 02:25 PM
I actually made a thread about the Panther check it out.

kamehouse
08-26-2008, 05:55 PM
One question: I know a lot of Panzer Aces but they were all commaders of Tiger I.Does any of you guys know some Panther's aces ?

flamethrowerguy
08-26-2008, 06:43 PM
One question: I know a lot of Panzer Aces but they were all commaders of Tiger I.Does any of you guys know some Panther's aces ?

How 'bout SS-Oberscharführer Ernst Barkmann of 2nd SS-Panzer-Division "Das Reich"?
http://www.achtungpanzer.com/gen5.htm

Panzerknacker
08-26-2008, 07:15 PM
Oberst Willy Langkeit from the Gross Deutschland is other.

http://i35.tinypic.com/2a0dbfm.jpg