Interesring link about T-34 - NOT the best tank in the war?

[Wesserubung]

So much bullshit guys....

While this is a fun debate -its not very factual. What you should look at, is not only technicalities such as engine, gun and armor power, but also training and motivation. But more importantly is the production cost AND the tanks kill ratio. On the latter - the German Wehrmacht is a mean killing machine, kicking everyones arse. In 1941 ,the Wehrmacht destroyed 20.000 Soviet tanks including 2.000 T-34s - The Wehrmacht lost appor.x 2.800 tanks in 1941 - a kill ratio of 7.1 - the average loss-kill ratio for the USSR on a T-34s is 2,5 - The USSR lost 2,5 T-34 for every destroyed German Panzer

About the speed of the German Panzers.. so much bullshit is said about the Konigstiger

Speed
Tiger II - Maximum Speed = 41.5 km/h, Road Speed = 38 km/h, Cross Country Speed = 15-20 km/h
Panther - Maximum Speed = 46 km/h, Road Speed = 30-35 km/h, Cross Country Speed = 20 km/h
Pz.IV - Maximum Speed = 38-42 km/h, Road Speed = 25 km/h, Cross Country Speed = 20 km/h
StuG - Maximum Speed = 40 km/h, Road Speed = 20 km/h, Cross Country Speed = 12-15km/h

For comparison, the top speeds of the main Allied medium tanks were:
T-34 - 53.5 km/h
Sherman - 38-46 km/h (dependent on the variant)
And their heavy tanks:
IS-2 - 37 km/h
M26 Pershing - 40 km/h, 8.4 km/h (off-road)

Fuel consumption
The Pershing had about the same fuel consumption as the Tiger II (Konigstiger) - 4.9 liter/km and 4.3 liter/km

Cost production - NO doubt - the German Panzers where more expensive to build than their allied counterparts - however have a look at the kill ratios

Kills
There is so much evidence of the german superiorty....
So many of the German Schwere Panzer-Abteilungs had MASSIVE kill ratios - most noticably is the 502 but also Grossdeutschland 13th Panzer with a kill ratio of 16:1. The 502 with a kill ratio of 13:1 from 1942-1945 even better than that of SS Schwere Abteilung 103 that had only 12:1 - during the war 502 lost 102 tanks whilst destroying 1.400 enemy tanks AND more than 2.000 enemy AT-guns!!!!!!!!!

On the east-front the Soviets where butchered by the Wehrmacht - but obviosly these figures are NOT ment to be a directed Panzer versus Panzers comparison, but it does give you an idea of the differences. The German folded in 1945 but still remained to be the better tank

A little warstory from France 1944
Schwere Panzer 504:
"Twenty-three American Sherman tanks had been put out of action by the Rohrig platoon: of these, twelve had been destroyed by fire from the Tiger's 8.8 cm cannon and the rest had been abandoned in panic by their crews--proof of the demoralizing effect that the appearance of Tiger tanks had on American tank crews". (Tiger, The History of a Legendary Weapon, page 198)


The "Hell on wheels" Sherman tank was a better than the T-34 but still was crap
The US 3rd. Armor - During the European Campaign, the Division had some 648 Sherman tanks completely destroyed in combat and had another 700 knocked out, repaired and put back into operation. This was a loss rate of 580 percent ( https://medium.com/war-is-boring/th...eels-and-a-death-trap-502b0d99e744#.29aklq5uk )

The allies did most certain NOT win the war due to their tanks - but on the contrary to their tanks.


Sources


(5) T. Bean, W. Fowler, Russian Tanks of WWII-Stalin’s Armoured Might, Ian Allan Publishing, London, 2002, appendix, p170. Also, S. J. Zaloga, L.S. Ness, Red Army Handbook 1939-1945, Sutton Publishing, Stroud, UK, 1998, p. 181, table 6.3. 20 500 Soviet tanks lost vs. 2 758 German tanks lost in 1941.
(6) Refer Part III 3. 9) d. ‘Relative Overall Combat Proficiency (ROCP): the ROCP of Soviet and Axis Forces from 1941-1945 - Axis and Soviet Relative Overall Combat Proficiency (ROCP) in 1941 - Weapon Density (WD) Effects on the 1941 German-Soviet ROCP - Fully Tracked AFVs (Tanks, Assault Guns, Tank Destroyers, Armoured Self Propelled Artillery): WD Effects on the 1941 German-Soviet ROCP’. German losses include 248 losses from Germany’s allies in 1941. 20 500 Soviet tanks lost vs. 3 087 Axis fully tracked AFVs lost in 1941. (7) G.F. Krivosheev , et al, Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses in the Twentieth Century, Edited by Colonel General G.F. Krivosheev, Greenhill Books, London, 1997. p. 252, table 95. Schneider, Wolfgang. Tigers in Combat. Vol. 1&2. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole, 2004.
Zaloga, Steven. "Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Batallions in World War II (review)." The Journal of Military History 68.4 (2004): 1283-284.
3:Coox, Alvin D., and L. Van L. Naisawald. Survey of Allied Tank Casualties in World War II. ORO-T-117. Washington: Operational Research Office, 1951.

http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...German-Tiger-II-Tank-(Warning-Pic-Heavy-Post)

http://www.wehrmachtbericht.com/page11.php

 

[fredgiblet]

In 1941 the Soviet losses were largely obsolete pre-war designs, and a significant number were also lost due to horrific tactical decisions (The Soviets at that time tended to throw units forward with little thought to supply or survival). It's hardly surprising that the Germans took out thousands of tanks in that situation. As for the American and later Soviet results a large number of those losses were likely due to AT guns and StuGs, MUCH easier to use on the defensive.

Comparing the Sherman to the Tiger is popular, but deeply flawed as the Tiger was very uncommon and a heavy tank, while the Sherman was quite common and a medium. It's akin to saying that German cars are better because a Porsche is faster than an F-150. Comparing the Sherman to the Panther and Panzer 4 is more appropriate.

The following video deals with some of the claims made in the War is Boring link:

 

[Opanashc]

So much bullshit guys....
While this is a fun debate -its not very factual. What you should look at, is not only technicalities such as engine, gun and armor power, but also training and motivation. But more importantly is the production cost AND the tanks kill ratio. On the latter - the German Wehrmacht is a mean killing machine, kicking everyones arse. In 1941 ,the Wehrmacht destroyed 20.000 Soviet tanks including 2.000 T-34s - The Wehrmacht lost appor.x 2.800 tanks in 1941 - a kill ratio of 7.1 - the average loss-kill ratio for the USSR on a T-34s is 2,5 - The USSR lost 2,5 T-34 for every destroyed German Panzer

I agree. So much bullshit.
Wehrmacht didn't destroy 20.000 Soviet tanks in 1941. Red Army lost 20.000 tanks. There is a difference. Does a tank, that breaks down/runs out of fuel during retreat, and is blown up by its own crew count as destroyed by Wehrmacht? How many knoсked out tanks did Wehrmacht repair in 1941, vs how many Red Army did? According to Guderian, 80% of "lost" German tanks got repaired within 2 weeks. Thus, number of "lost" German tanks should be increased five-fold, to have similar comparison to Red Army. Loss numbers all of a sudden go from 2800:20000 to 14000:20000. Factor in Soviet tanks that were nonoperational before the war, and loss ratio is suddenly close to even.

 

[Shatterfury]

I agree. So much bullshit.
Wehrmacht didn't destroy 20.000 Soviet tanks in 1941. Red Army lost 20.000 tanks. There is a difference. Does a tank, that breaks down/runs out of fuel during retreat, and is blown up by its own crew count as destroyed by Wehrmacht? How many knoсked out tanks did Wehrmacht repair in 1941, vs how many Red Army did? According to Guderian, 80% of "lost" German tanks got repaired within 2 weeks. Thus, number of "lost" German tanks should be increased five-fold, to have similar comparison to Red Army. Loss numbers all of a sudden go from 2800:20000 to 14000:20000. Factor in Soviet tanks that were nonoperational before the war, and loss ratio is suddenly close to even.

True, true.

I mean what could stand up to the mighty Panzer II or Panzer III ?

No pathetic Soviet tank, that is for sure.

 

[Opanashc]

True, true.
I mean what could stand up to the mighty Panzer II or Panzer III ?
No pathetic Soviet tank, that is for sure.

T-18M, whose production was discontinued in 1931. BT-2, that started production in 1932. T-40, with its 12.7 mm main gun (Pz-II had a 20 mm).
Should we count all the French and British trophy tanks Wehrmacht used against Red Army? They were numerous. Overall, Wehrmacht used ~10,000 tanks and SpGs in Barbarossa.

 

[Shatterfury]

T-18M, whose production was discontinued in 1931. BT-2, that started production in 1932. T-40, with its 12.7 mm main gun (Pz-II had a 20 mm).
Should we count all the French and British trophy tanks Wehrmacht used against Red Army? They were numerous. Overall, Wehrmacht used ~10,000 tanks and SpGs in Barbarossa.

All of them in millions and far superior to what the Soviets could ever dream of building.

 

[Opanashc]

All of them in millions and far superior to what the Soviets could ever dream of building.

Some 2000+ French and British tanks, captured during battle of France. Not wunderwaffe, but on par with everything Germans had. Somehow, they are not counted among the tanks Germany used in 1941 against SU, even though there are numerous photographic evidence of them. But hey, that will skew the statistics, that Germans were always outnumbered by the "soviet hordes".

 

[D Inqu]

Kills
So many of the German Schwere Panzer-Abteilungs had MASSIVE kill ratios

I'm sure they did. It's not hard to claim huge numbers of enemies destroyed, especially when on the retreat, and needing morale boost.

most noticably is the 502

And when you add all those claims together, you get number far exceeeding what their enemies even had on the front.

View attachment 163502

Brilliant! I too love some comedy. Oh, you are actually taking these numbers at face value.
Let's do one simple example:
In 1943 the Germans produced 12,000 new armored vehicles, and rebuilt another 2,500. Their armor inventory was certainly not going up. Africa and Italy in 1943 did not see massive tank battles. If only 6,362 tanks were lost, where are the other 8,000 or so? Hilarious, giving an impression of "accuracy to the nearest tank", and failing to address the obvious numbers nut adding up.

A little warstory from France 1944
Schwere Panzer 504:

Stories are fun. Like the story of Ernst Barkmann, who got lost on the battlefield, went drinking instead, and then made up some story about killing lots of Shermans in an area where none were present. If there was something German "aces" were good at, it's making stories.

 

[D Inqu]

Some 2000+ French and British tanks, captured during battle of France. Not wunderwaffe, but on par with everything Germans had. Somehow, they are not counted among the tanks Germany used in 1941 against SU, even though there are numerous photographic evidence of them. But hey, that will skew the statistics, that Germans were always outnumbered by the "soviet hordes".

Well, yes. Of course! The T-27, a Soviet derivative of the Carden Loyd tankette, built in the early 30-s has to be included in the Soviet tank count, being the mighty tank it is.

By contrast, the Renault UE Chenillette is completely different! It's a French derivative of the Carden Loyd tankette, built in the early 30-s, so of course it should not included in tanks! In fact, good luck finding any reference to it in most OOBs, even though more than 5,000 were built, and 3,000 captured units used by the Germans.

 

[Opanashc]

I'm sure they did. It's not hard to claim huge numbers of enemies destroyed, especially when on the retreat, and needing morale boost.

Ever heard of how Luftwaffe aces would shoot down a dozen enemy planes in one mission? Compare their claims, against Soviet ones, which require the serial number from the engine of enemy plane to be counted.
Or how panzer aces courageously destroyed an enemy battalion alone, without the enemy realizing where the shots coming from. Omitting, that the enemy was represented by wooden models, specifically designed to trick the them.

 

[Loke]

Ever heard of how Luftwaffe aces would shoot down a dozen enemy planes in one mission? Compare their claims, against Soviet ones, which require the serial number from the engine of enemy plane to be counted.
Or how panzer aces courageously destroyed an enemy battalion alone, without the enemy realizing where the shots coming from. Omitting, that the enemy was represented by wooden models, specifically designed to trick the them.

More than the top 100 fighter pilot aces come from Germany, most victories in the east...

2nd Finland, 3rd Japan...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_flying_aces

 

[panzerzombie]

Oh boy, another thread descended into banana weaving and chest thumping....

 

[Gethsemani]

More than the top 100 fighter pilot aces come from Germany, most victories in the east...

2nd Finland, 3rd Japan...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_flying_aces

Yeah, that was Opanashc point... That German soldiers and authorities had a tendency to grossly over-estimate (or in some cases, like Barkmann, just flat out make-up) the number of enemies they killed. This has been repeatedly proven by several historians, who have found that German kill claims for particular battles often exceed the number of tanks or aircraft that their enemy had in their OOB. Simply put: Whenever any military makes grand claims about how many enemies they have killed, you should be skeptical, especially if it is the Wehrmacht, which was the undisputed master of creative accounting to minimize own losses and maximize enemy losses, no doubt owing to being the war machine of a dictatorship incredibly interested in getting propaganda material.

 

[Loke]

Yeah, that was Opanashc point... That German soldiers and authorities had a tendency to grossly over-estimate (or in some cases, like Barkmann, just flat out make-up) the number of enemies they killed. This has been repeatedly proven by several historians, who have found that German kill claims for particular battles often exceed the number of tanks or aircraft that their enemy had in their OOB. Simply put: Whenever any military makes grand claims about how many enemies they have killed, you should be skeptical, especially if it is the Wehrmacht, which was the undisputed master of creative accounting to minimize own losses and maximize enemy losses, no doubt owing to being the war machine of a dictatorship incredibly interested in getting propaganda material.

Well if its not a correct top fighter pilot list you can always change it...

 

[Opanashc]

More than the top 100 fighter pilot aces come from Germany, most victories in the east...

Hartman once had a big celebration after shooting down 3 enemy planes... Using 120 rounds.
Once, he claimed 17 combat flights... In one day.
As a aircraft mechanic (helicopters, but still), I KNOW such claims are lies.

 

[Loke]

Hartman once had a big celebration after shooting down 3 enemy planes... Using 120 rounds.
Once, he claimed 17 combat flights... In one day.
As a aircraft mechanic (helicopters, but still), I KNOW such claims are lies.

Again, if you have a more accurate list, youre free to change this...

 

[D Inqu]

Well if its not a correct top fighter pilot list you can always change it...

It's not a "top fighter pilot" list. It's a "top pilot by kill claims" list. Since in many of these cases (for example in most engagements with numerous planes/tanks on both sides), it's simply not possible to be certain, which pilot shot what, and who lied. You simply get a number of kill claims on one side, and loss statistics from the other side (usually with a 3-4 fold difference).

Only in completely ridiculous fabrications, like Barkmann, is it possible to confirm the lie. And even then, numerous websites, (including Achtungpanzer, the 2 google search result for Barkmann), still list the fantasy tale engagement in his biography, and even wikipedia updated the page mere weeks ago.

 

[Loke]

It's not a "top fighter pilot" list. It's a "top pilot by kill claims" list. Since in many of these cases (for example in most engagements with numerous planes/tanks on both sides), it's simply not possible to be certain, which pilot shot what, and who lied. You simply get a number of kill claims on one side, and loss statistics from the other side (usually with a 3-4 fold difference).

Only in completely ridiculous fabrications, like Barkmann, is it possible to confirm the lie. And even then, numerous websites, (including Achtungpanzer, the 2 google search result for Barkmann), still list the fantasy tale engagement in his biography, and even wikipedia updated the page mere weeks ago.

If its not a correct list, go alter it then...

 

[Shatterfury]

It's not a "top fighter pilot" list. It's a "top pilot by kill claims" list. Since in many of these cases (for example in most engagements with numerous planes/tanks on both sides), it's simply not possible to be certain, which pilot shot what, and who lied. You simply get a number of kill claims on one side, and loss statistics from the other side (usually with a 3-4 fold difference).

Only in completely ridiculous fabrications, like Barkmann, is it possible to confirm the lie. And even then, numerous websites, (including Achtungpanzer, the 2 google search result for Barkmann), still list the fantasy tale engagement in his biography, and even wikipedia updated the page mere weeks ago.

The kills are verified.

 

[Opanashc]

If its not a correct list, go alter it then...

Why? If people wish to believe that Russians don't know how to wage war - I say let them. They will have a nasty surprise waiting for them.
After all, even top NATO generals agree, that if Russia gets into a war with NATO, Europe will be under Moscow occupation in fairly short order.