Panzer Mark IV: The Workhorse?

[Nickdfresh]

I know we all love the super gigundus panzers that drew so much resources and were often unreliable, and unwieldy, in actual sustained combat conditions. So how about the real German workhorse of WWII, the Panzer MkIV (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/pz3.htm)? Was this not the one of the most effective combat tanks of all World War Two? and was it not the mainstay of Wehrmacht armored formations?

The Panzer MkIV proved itself to be a very adaptable platform capable of numerous upgrades that kept the tank effective against even its betters, such as the ubiquotous Soviet T-34, and it was certainly more than a match for the Sherman.

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/croatia/Cro-ustase_p3Pkwf%20IV.jpg
Croat armored corp members stand in front of the "long-barreled 75mm gun" version.

But alas, even with "applique armor," and various enhancements, the Panzer was not able to stave off defeat for the Axis Powers:

http://www.warfoto.com/bh0014%20copy.jpg

Some more pretty panzer pics from Aberdeen Proving Grounds I believe: :)

http://www.peachmountain.com/5star/US_Army_Ordnance_Museum_Panzer_IV_tank.aspx

Cheers: http://www.fozard.net/img/beer-smiley.gif

[Panzerknacker]

Well, answering to your question , dont think so.

The pz III was the workhorse between 1939-41, in those years the Panzer IV had the task to support the infantry with his short 75mm gun.

The best years of the Pz IV were 1942-43 but by 1944 were completely shadowed by the Panther and other more capable gun plataforms like the Sturmanzersand Panzerjagers.

[Panzerknacker]

Panzer IV ausf E, 1941, note the mounting for AA MG 34, relatively rare in this early stage of the war.


http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/7613/pzivui1.jpg

[alephh]

Pz III is truly rarely mentioned, considering how many of them were produced before/during WWII.

Any pictures of Tauchpanzer III?


_

[Panzerknacker]

I got some. but probably we need to open another topic.


The Pz III outnumbered the Pz IV in the battlefield until july 1943. The pz III was manufactued until August 1943.

[Splinter54]

Panzerknacker posted a nice one side view of an Panzer IV with Schmalturm and Thoma Schürzen - here:
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3292&page=14

Anyone got further informations about those Thoma Schürzen? :D

[Panzerknacker]

The thoma screen was introduced in late 1944 because it was more easy to manufacture that the rolled 5mm plates and less prone to get loose in the rough terrain. it was efficient against the bazooka and PIAT but completely useless against the russian 14,5mm antitank rifles, the plate schurzen at list help to deflect the energy of those shots a bit.

Panzer IV Ausf J

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/5262/j3rn.jpg

[Panzerknacker]

Another ausf. J with the mesh wire screen, note the "ambush" cammo pattern.


http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/1617/dibujoii3.jpg

[Panzerknacker]

Panzer IV ausf F2 and G battling in Tunisia

http://www.wochenschau-archiv.de/kontrollklfenster.php?&PHPSESSID=&dmguid=08E92C0055BA58DF030103009D21A8C06D06000000&inf=675400&outf=823920&funktion=play250k

[Panzerknacker]

The Panzer IV is not the Tiger, the denomination of the Tiger is Panzer VI ausf H

Is interesting to know that many allied tankers did the same mistake :mrgreen:

[Willie]

Is interesting to know that many allied tankers did the same mistake :mrgreen:

Wasn't there a 'condition' in the Normandy campaign called 'Tiger Fever'. Where most German tanks that were spotted be the Allies were assumed to be Tigers?

Really I can see how easy that would be. If someone was to catch just a glance of a Mk IV on the other side of the hedge row, I can see how it could be mistaken for a Tiger. Especially if I was excited and scared.

[Panzerknacker]

It was.

And not only the "occidental" allies, after Kursk radio Moscow announced that the russian defences destroyed 230 "tigers"... actually only 32 Panzer VI were lost :rolleyes:

[Firefly]

I think it was the real workhorse of the Panzers too. Even in 1945 its gun could defeat any Allied Tank (except maybe the JS-3 and as it saw no action doesnt count).

Of course the REAL workhorse of the German Army was the Stug.

[Panzerknacker]

In my opinion it was the Panzer III, at list until the battle of Kursk.

[Panzerknacker]

Panzer IV with long gun effectivenes:

An extract from of a combat report in Eastern front:

'At ranges up to 1,200 metres, the T-34 is cleanly penetrated at every angle that it is hit by the Pzgr.39 fired from the 7.5 cm Kw.K.40 L/43. No experience is available on the KW-I with reinforced armour.
Engagements were aggravated by the frequent occurrence of shell casings failing to eject from
the gun. Usually they could be cleared only by knocking the shell casing back out from the front with cleaning rods. This greatly restricted the firepower.
'The T-34 that was far superior to the German Panzers until the beginning of the spring of 1942 is now inferior to the German long 5 cm Kw.K. L/60 and 7.5 cm Kw.K.40 L/43 tank guns.

After the Russians received heavy losses in several battles by attacking German Panzer forces with the T-34, they withdrew or employed the Russian tank types KW-I and KW-I with
reinforced armour instead. Because these heavy tanks were never or seldom led as a unit, their destruction was usually ensured.'

http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/2255/dibujoua7.jpg

(Osprey New Vanguard 039 Pz IV ausf G ,H & J)

[Sickles]

The panzer IV was no doubt the workhorse of the Wehrmacht during WWII for the simple reason that it served for the entire war. It had a great gun and was very adaptable and took place in every battle in every theater the Germans were involved in.

[Panzerknacker]

Development of the long gun Panzer IV:

When development of the Pz.Kpfw.IV began in October 1935, theGerman army considered mounting a long 7.5 cm gun in a medium tank. They knew that the French had planned to produce 1,000 tanks
with 40 mm-thick armour by the end of 1935, so German plan intended to install the 7.5 cm Kanone L/24 in the Begleitwagen (B.W).
Firing a 7.5 cm Panzergranate (armour-piercing shell) with a muzzle velocity of 430 m/s, it was calculated that 43 mm of armour plate at 30 degrees could be cleanly penetrated at a range of 700 Meters, therefore this short gun seemed adequate to penetrate the newest French tanks.

Pz IV engaging enemy with the L24 short barrelled gun.

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/6011/5gsj4.jpg[/LEFT]

1) Kw.K. = tank gun and L/24, L/43 or L748 = the barrel length
divided by calibre, i.e. 3,233 mm divided by 75 mm = L/43.


However, German army intelligence estimated that the armour on the heaviest French tanks, Char 2C, 3C, and D, was much thicker than 40 mm, and engineers calculated that the muzzle velocity of the 7.5 cm
Kanone would have to be increased to 650 m/s in order to penetrate these heavy French tanks. They thought that the tank would have to be completely redesigned in order to mount such a powerful gun. It was estimated that this new tank would weigh at least 30 tons with armour only 20 mm thick (which wasn't even proof against 2 cm Pzgr.).

This conceptual design was not pursued, since the general in command of the army had recently spoken out against such a heavy tank.
During the invasion of France in 1940, the 7.5 cm Kw.K. L/24 proved effective in penetrating the armour of the Renault, Hotchkiss and Somua tanks, but failed against the French Char Bl bis and the British Matilda tanks.

Then, during December 1940 and January 1941, a single battalion of 50 Matildas enabled a weaker British force to defeat the Italian army at Sidi Barrani, Bardia and Tobruk. The Germans now became concerned about their ability to penetrate the 78 mm armour ofthe Matildas.

On 19 February 1941, on Hitler's orders, the long 5 cm Kanone was immediately mounted in a Pz.Kpfw.III and a Pz.Kpfw.IV to give these tanks a much stronger armour-penetrating ability.

In early March 1941 Krupp began to design a 5 cm Kw.K. L/60 with interior dimensions that matched the Rheinmetall 5 cm Pak 38 L/60. A 5 cm Kw.K. L/60 was mounted in the turret of the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D Fgst.Nr.80668 (chassis number) for a demonstration for Hitler's birthday on 20 April 1941. Plans to produce 80 Pz.Kpfw.IV with 5 cm Kw.K. L/60 at the Nibelungenwerk from August 1941 were subsequently cancelled.
In March 1941 Krupp began to consider other high-performance guns for the Pz.Kpfw.IV.

Krupp had already designed a 7.5 cm Kanone L/40 for uparming the Sturmgeschutz (mobile assault gun used for infantry support), which could penetrate 70 mm of armour at 30 degrees at a range of 400 metres.

To prevent tank guns from being damaged bystriking obstacles, the Waffenamt had specified that the gun length was not to extend beyond the forward edge of the tank. Therefore this gun had to be shortened from 3,023 mm to 2,470 mm (equal to L/33. i.e. 33 calibre lengths), which reduced the penetrating ability of a normal 6.8 kg APCBC-HE (armour-piercing shell capped with ballistic cap and high explosive filler) to 59 mm of armour at 30 degrees at a
range of 400 metres. A Triebspiegelgeschoss HK discarding sabot round with tungsten carbide core) was also to be developed that could penetrate 86 mm of armour at 30 degrees at a range of 400 metres. One 7.5 cm Kw.K. L/34.5 was completed by December 1941. and in April 1942 Krupp decided to mount this gun in Turm Nr. 80979 (Ausf.E)
(turret number) on Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.F Fgst.Nr. 82091.

( to be continued)

[Panzerknacker]

Development of the long gun Panzer IV (II):

Meanwhile, Germany had invaded Russia on 22 J u n e 1941 and soon
encountered the heavy 75-105-mm thick armour on the KV-1, and the
well-sloped 45 mm-thick armour on the T-34 tanks. A special
Panzerkommission was sent to Russia in November 1941 to acquire a
first-hand impression of the problems encountered by the front line
troops when tackling the heavy Russian tanks.

The Panzerkommission advised improving available tank types by installing a new gun able to penetrate Russian tank armour at a range beyond the retaliatory capabilities of the Russian tank gun.
Under no circumstances would production interruptions be allowed in the current series of tanks.
They understood that substantial improvements in the armour and suspension could not be initiated immediately. However, it was decided that the troops would accept this if the requirement for a new gun wasfulfilled.

On 18 November 1941, Wa Pruf 4 ordered development of a new gun for the Pz.Kpfw.IV with the same capabilities as the Rheinmetall 7.3 cm Pak 44 L/46 (later renamed Pak 40). Originallv known as the 7.3 cm
Kw.K.44, the gun was developed jointly by Krupp in cooperation with Reinhmetall
Rheinmetall dealt with the interior ballistics and Krupp was responsible for the design.

When firing a normal 6.8 kg APCBC-HE-Tracer shell, it was to be capable of penetrating 80 mm of armour plate at 30 degrees at a range of 1,000 metres.
The recoil length of the 7.5 cm Pak 40 (900 mm) was too long fora Pz.Kpfw.IV turret, and at 969 mm the complete round was also too long. The new gun had to be designed with a shorter recoil and shorter
rounds. The unaltered rifled gun tube (2,470.5 mm long) was retained from the 7.5 cm Pak 44 L/46, but a shorter loading chamber was added with a larger diameter, resulting in the 7.5 cm Kw.K.44 L/43.
Shorter, thicker shell casings made loading the gun in the restricted confines of aclosed turret far easier, and also allowed a greater number of rounds to be stowed in ammunition bins inside the tank.

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/2135/tankgerjs8.jpg

Plans had been made to complete the first 30 7.5 cm Kw.K.40 L/43 in
March, followed by 70 in April and 90 in May 1942. In actual fact, 18 were completed in March, 104 in April, and 56 in May 1942. Initially, a singlechamber, ball-shaped muzzle brake with two large side ports was fitted, which provided about 49 per cent of the braking ability of the recoil system.

Adolf Hitler have a closer look of a brand new Panzer IV ausf G ( also called F2) april 1942.

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/6058/dibujoiq8.jpg


Sources:

Panzerkampfwagen IV, Walther J Spielberg.

Osprey N.V 39 Panzerkamfwagen IV ausf G,H & J, 1942-45

www.quarry-nildram.uk (http://www.quarry-nildram.uk)

[Sickles]

Check out that muzzle brake!

[gumalangi]

i guess, german should concentrate on Pz IV, instead of wasting times, resources and efforts to new and more sophisticated but expensive heavier armour, they lost their momentum by putting so much effort on those expensive phanters, tigers etc.

[Panzerknacker]

For the western front the Pz IV enhanced would be okay, but for the east some heavy tank was definately needed.

[Major Walter Schmidt]

Yhea, like the TigerI or E-100.
<Hey, The E100 wasnt even completed!

[gumalangi]

it is understood heavier armours are necessity, panther should actually suffice for the needs, or even tiger. however, in the blitzkrieg speed is the essence, western allies and russian seems much aware in this. Tanks should become a shock force, they move in a fast pace to the rear area of enemy and close a circle, they should NOT become a tank hunter, like germans did during second half of the war. The job of killing tanks, should be let alone to Tank killer unit. Germans got plenty of these.

[Panzerknacker]

Yea, teorically but is a mistake to believe that you deploy a tank for a single purpose in the battlefiled, unles it is some engineer vehicle.
The combat vehicle should be capable of perform two task, just note the heavy troubles experienced in the British military with his purpose designed tanks, like the infantry and smoke screen tanks.

The panzer Iv born actually as infantry support with the howitzer ( even it was capable to shoot AP shells)
The fact is you going to need a armored vehicle able to defeat armor and support the infantry as well.

This is how the enhanced panzer IV would look...if the long gun was not needed.

Henschel VK 30.01.
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/811/vk02jm7.jpg

On September 9 of 1938, Henschel received the permission to continue their work on new medium tank in continuation with DW (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/sw.htm#dw) development. Work on VK3001(H), which was further development of DW II (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/sw.htm#dw), started. Two similar designs were created, lighter (32 tons) VK3001(H) and later on heavier (40 tons) VK3601(H). Both resembled Panzerkampfwagen IV (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/pz3.htm) in their hull design but their running gear was of a new design that consisted of overlapping road wheels. Medium VK3001(H) tank and heavy VK3601(H) tank had many common parts what would make their production and service much more easier.
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/4149/vk01kz8.jpg
Only four VK3001(H) prototypes were produced, two in March of 1941 and other two in October of 1941. All were completed in 1942 by Henschel. In the early 1942, one prototype VK3601(H) was build along with 5 prototype chassis. Originally, it was intended to mount VK3001(H) with a turret armed 75mm L/24 or 105mm L/28 gunm but none of the prototypes were actually fitted with turrets. VK3601(H) was to be armed with 75mm KwK 42 L/70 (Gerat 725), 88mm KwK 36 L/56 (mounted in VK4501(P) (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/tigerp.htm) turret) or 105mm L/20 or L/28 gun, but just as VK3001(H), it was never armed with any weapons.
VK 30.01 turret in defensive emplacement.
http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/8076/vk06bm0.jpg

www.achtungpanzer.com
DW to Tiger I, Jentz/Doyle.

[gumalangi]

It is correct that Tanks should not perform only one task,.. it has to be multi role, they have to able to dominate the battlefiled, but not necessary superior in every aspects. Understood that Pz IVD was for infantry support role and PzIII to fight against another armor.

[Panzerknacker]

Video: Full check for a panzer IV ausf G including repairing the leaf spring bogie with electric arc welding.

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=FvOap-RNS-E

[Eoin666]

few pic's of various Mk IVs and a panzerjaeger

1896

1897

1898

1899

1900

1901

[Nickdfresh]

Bump!

[Major Walter Schmidt]

....And I could have sworn I saw Aly J :mrgreen::mrgreen: