Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+22
Mir
lancelot
Maximmmm
higurashihougi
Walther von Oldenburg
JohninMK
jhelb
Sujoy
kvs
Finty
LMFS
The-thing-next-door
magnumcromagnon
Isos
limb
flamming_python
AlfaT8
Regular
TR1
KomissarBojanchev
GarryB
BTRfan
26 posters

    WW II discussion

    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 2143
    Points : 2147
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    WW II discussion - Page 7 Empty Re: WW II discussion

    Post  Mir Sun Dec 19, 2021 5:00 pm

    pukovnik7 wrote:
    Actually, work on Tiger started in 1937., due to a call for a heavy "breakthrough vehicle". It was then revised and accelerated due to experiences in France with British Matilda II and French Char B1 heavy tanks. Final revision to design - which included replacement of 7,5 cm cannon with 8,8 cm one and a significant further weight increase - was due to T-34 and KV-1, but that does not make Tiger a direct response to KV-1.

    German tanks that were a direct response to Soviet designs were Panther (a response to T-34) and Tiger II (a response to the IS series).

    I think it would be fair to say that German intelligence failed big time. They not only underestimated the total number of Soviet tanks that was available at the start of the war, but they also had no idea that the T-34 and KV-1's even existed despite the fact that they were already being produced.

    At the start of the war German tanks were poorly armed and had terrible armour. The only tank of note was the PzIV but it was produced in small numbers as an infantry support tank.

    kvs and pukovnik7 like this post

    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 13224
    Points : 13371
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Kanada

    WW II discussion - Page 7 Empty Re: WW II discussion

    Post  kvs Sun Dec 19, 2021 6:50 pm

    The initial success of the Nazis was due to the superior organization of the Germans and the inferior organization of their opponents.
    There is a tendency to attribute their success to high tech. An example is the supposed total mechanization when in fact they still
    used horses.

    https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-wwii-german-army-was-80-horse-drawn-business-lessons-from-history/

    ScotchedEarth, Mir and pukovnik7 like this post

    pukovnik7
    pukovnik7


    Posts : 32
    Points : 42
    Join date : 2021-11-21
    Age : 30
    Location : Split, Croatia

    WW II discussion - Page 7 Empty Re: WW II discussion

    Post  pukovnik7 Mon Dec 20, 2021 1:18 am

    kvs wrote:The initial success of the Nazis was due to the superior organization of the Germans and the inferior organization of their opponents.
    There is a tendency to attribute their success to high tech.   An example is the supposed total mechanization when in fact they still
    used horses.

    https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-wwii-german-army-was-80-horse-drawn-business-lessons-from-history/


    I'd say most important piece of equipment in German arsenal early in the war was radio. All German tanks had it, while during Battle for France and early in invasion of USSR, Allied tanks usually had one radio per every 4 to 5 tanks.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 33954
    Points : 34472
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    WW II discussion - Page 7 Empty Re: WW II discussion

    Post  GarryB Mon Dec 20, 2021 4:11 am

    Final revision to design - which included replacement of 7,5 cm cannon with 8,8 cm one and a significant further weight increase - was due to T-34 and KV-1, but that does not make Tiger a direct response to KV-1.

    The reason the Tiger got that last revision was because the 88mm gun was not 100% reliable against the KV-1... there was a situation where a KV-1 stayed behind at an arterial road fork on soft terrain where driving tanks off road was simply not an option. The KV-1 held up the german unit for critical days where they would send in their tanks with 50mm guns and short 76mm guns which didn't do anything, and 88mm guns were destroyed being moved up along with their trucks. They tried satchel charge attacks on the tracks and the gun barrel at night only to be repelled by machine gun fire from the tank. Eventually they managed to distract the KV with an attack by light tanks and were able to set up an 88mm gun and fired 6 rounds to silence the KV. When they approached they found only two of the 88mm rounds even penetrated the tank and the machine guns opened up on them. Apparently a german solider managed to throw hand grenades into an open hatch to eventually defeat the vehicle.

    This was from German records.

    I think it would be fair to say that German intelligence failed big time. They not only underestimated the total number of Soviet tanks that was available at the start of the war, but they also had no idea that the T-34 and KV-1's even existed despite the fact that they were already being produced.

    After WWI the Germans and Soviets secretly cooperated in a range of fields including armour design but that cooperation and assistance ended in 1933 when Hitler seized power.

    There was no cooperation after that.

    The non aggression pact is a non aggression pact... you would not need a non aggression pact with an ally.

    At the start of the war German tanks were poorly armed and had terrible armour. The only tank of note was the PzIV but it was produced in small numbers as an infantry support tank.

    Even with poor armour and not so great guns they were well laid out with the clear roles for each crewman without overloading them with jobs. A gunner just fired the gun, the loader loaded the round the commander told him to load, the driver drove, the commander looked for threats and targets and commanded the vehicle... telling the driver where to go and the gunner what to shoot and the loader what ammo to load.

    The initial success of the Nazis was due to the superior organization of the Germans and the inferior organization of their opponents.

    Coordination of their forces was important... their air force was essentially their tank artillery support, while their actual artillery walked miles behind... the armour rushed ahead and found gaps in fronts and punched through... any powerful position was bypassed and left for infantry and artillery to reduce, while the armour moved forward and took out enemy rear positions and support and supply train...

    The Germans didn't have half tracks till much later in the war and there is a reason no one uses half tracks these days... they are awful.

    I'd say most important piece of equipment in German arsenal early in the war was radio. All German tanks had it, while during Battle for France and early in invasion of USSR, Allied tanks usually had one radio per every 4 to 5 tanks.

    The irony is that the USSR probably had as many radios as Germany did, but they had 10 times as many tanks so one in 9 tanks with a radio... meaning the commanders vehicle had a radio.

    Having radios in vehicles sounds important but actually having better optics and better guns would be more valuable... Aircraft would benefit more from having radios than most tanks would.

    What would you expect them to use the radios for? Look out behind you... there is a German tank... In the dust and smoke of a battle you are not going to know where everyone in your tank unit is.... so how is a radio going to help... apart from letting you hear the screams of crews getting killed?

    Having three man turrets with a gunner and a loader and a commander is much more use than having a radio.
    lancelot
    lancelot


    Posts : 1309
    Points : 1311
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    WW II discussion - Page 7 Empty Re: WW II discussion

    Post  lancelot Mon Dec 20, 2021 8:36 am

    The Germans had a radio operator (do not remember if it was per unit or per tank, I think it was per unit) which had two radios. One in the frequency of the other tanks, and another in the frequency of the air force. So they could call for air strikes directly from the tanks.

    I do think the Tiger was clearly influenced by the KV-1. The fighting in France reinforced the need for a large tank, but it was the KV-1 which set the standard. The original German heavy tank prototype was a lot smaller and had a smaller caliber gun. If you also look at the date of introduction of the Tiger it was clearly after Barbarossa, over a year afterwards. It did not have the redesigned sloped hull like the Panther because they had to rush it into production and there was no time to redesign it. They eventually did it on the Tiger II.

    kvs, Mir and pukovnik7 like this post


    Sponsored content


    WW II discussion - Page 7 Empty Re: WW II discussion

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Aug 20, 2022 4:00 am