Jump to content


T29 versus Tiger I


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
47 replies to this topic

Turboclicker #21 Posted 23 November 2016 - 11:53 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 22110 battles
  • 34,726
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostPanzer lV, on 22 November 2016 - 08:48 PM, said:

Tiger E 8.8cm L/56, was more then capable of defeating the Pershing or T29's front hull, as was the Panther 7.5cm L/70. The Tiger B 8.8cm L/71 also had no problem defeating the front hull of either, @ over 1000ms.

 

Regards, John Waters

 

Can you provide some evidence of this?



Panzer lV #22 Posted 24 November 2016 - 04:02 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 19463 battles
  • 1,121
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

View PostTurboclicker, on 23 November 2016 - 06:53 AM, said:

 

Can you provide some evidence of this?

 

ie, 8.8cm KwK.36 L/56 fireing 10.2kg PzGr.39 APCBC: vs Pershing/T29 102mm front hull armor:.

 

100m- 162mm

500m- 151mm

1000m- 138mm

 

T29 armor strength was its turret front. Hull front armor was vulnerable to all German tank guns.

 

Regards, John Waters


-Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

-People who can smile when things go wrong, have found someone else to blame.

WidowMaker1711 #23 Posted 24 November 2016 - 06:08 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 11837 battles
  • 10,002
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostPanzer lV, on 24 November 2016 - 04:02 AM, said:

 

ie, 8.8cm KwK.36 L/56 fireing 10.2kg PzGr.39 APCBC: vs Pershing/T29 102mm front hull armor:.

 

100m- 162mm

500m- 151mm

1000m- 138mm

 

T29 armor strength was its turret front. Hull front armor was vulnerable to all German tank guns.

 

Regards, John Waters

 

Please say you arent using the Wehrmacht data for this?? If you wake MATTHEW_JE5U5 up there will be a reckoning.


For Russ and the Allfather

 

 


Panzer lV #24 Posted 24 November 2016 - 06:19 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 19463 battles
  • 1,121
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

View PostWidowMaker1711, on 24 November 2016 - 01:08 AM, said:

 

Please say you arent using the Wehrmacht data for this?? If you wake MATTHEW_JE5U5 up there will be a reckoning.

 

Whats wrong with wakeing up Matthew?. Besides US/UK test data vs 240BHN plate shows higher penetration by over 10% then WaPruf data for the 8.8cm KwK 36 L/56 etc.

 

Regards, John Waters.

 


-Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

-People who can smile when things go wrong, have found someone else to blame.

WidowMaker1711 #25 Posted 24 November 2016 - 02:50 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 11837 battles
  • 10,002
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostPanzer lV, on 24 November 2016 - 06:19 AM, said:

 

Whats wrong with wakeing up Matthew?. Besides US/UK test data vs 240BHN plate shows higher penetration by over 10% then WaPruf data for the 8.8cm KwK 36 L/56 etc.

 

Regards, John Waters.

 

 

Dont wake him up. Please. 


For Russ and the Allfather

 

 


JAG THE GEMINI #26 Posted 24 November 2016 - 04:15 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 65282 battles
  • 2,428
  • [FAUST]
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014

View PostTurboclicker, on 17 October 2016 - 08:39 PM, said:

 

Yeah, the IS-2, IS-3, T-44, T-54 tanks really were trash.

 

I'm obviously being sarcastic. The Soviets were putting out better tanks than Germany ever did post 1941+.

 

​The last sentence is not what I think

 

 

My youtube channel:https://www.youtube....w_as=subscriber


Turboclicker #27 Posted 24 November 2016 - 07:36 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 22110 battles
  • 34,726
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostJAG THE GEMINI, on 24 November 2016 - 11:15 AM, said:

 

​The last sentence is not what I think

 

The Germans put out things like the Tiger, which was a travesty. It did well enough, but was like paying $500 for a $50 piece of equipment. It was entirely inefficient and cost them. The tank itself was also primitive, not advanced like most think. It's a flat box with an old gun that needed a lot of help to make work. 

 

The King Tiger is more of the same except far worse in every negative qualityand not much improvement at all on the positive side.

 

The Panther was more advanced than the Tiger but was still an overweight fatty. It was a 45 ton tank on a 30 ton tank design. The gun was effective and the frontal armor would have been good if it was of quality steel. It was a nice attempt but a failed one.

 

 



JAG THE GEMINI #28 Posted 24 November 2016 - 10:38 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 65282 battles
  • 2,428
  • [FAUST]
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014

View PostTurboclicker, on 24 November 2016 - 08:36 PM, said:

 

The Germans put out things like the Tiger, which was a travesty. It did well enough, but was like paying $500 for a $50 piece of equipment. It was entirely inefficient and cost them. The tank itself was also primitive, not advanced like most think. It's a flat box with an old gun that needed a lot of help to make work. 

 

The King Tiger is more of the same except far worse in every negative qualityand not much improvement at all on the positive side.

 

The Panther was more advanced than the Tiger but was still an overweight fatty. It was a 45 ton tank on a 30 ton tank design. The gun was effective and the frontal armor would have been good if it was of quality steel. It was a nice attempt but a failed one.

 

 

 

I used to think the Tiger 1 was a "travesty" too but I changed my mind after reading many articles, gathering infos about armored warfare since WW1 ect. It is certainly overhyped, but it´s influence on the battle realy justified it´s existence. Even if history reports did not mention how superior that tank was in most combat scenarios, it´s psychological influence helped the Whermacht A LOT on the western front. Yes it was overengineered and difficult to maintain, but the gun was certainly NOT outdated and the box shape was actually not that bad(outdated yes), but it gave the crew more internal space to manage a more comfortable layout inside the tank to improve it´s performance in battle... Which is often OVERLOOKED by people who do not know how it is to be in such a steal machine

 

The Tiger2... Yes i agree. Too much too late... Should have done what an original plan suggested giving the Tiger 1 an angled 100mm front plate and should call it a day, ´cause the 88/L56 mm gun was capable of destroying any tank it would aim at in those days.

 

The Panther is a hit and miss project to me... Absolute awesome tank on paper and design wise, but in practice it had too many flaws because it was RUSHED into service. But they couldn´t delay it... Should have spend all those Tiger 2 resources and man power into the production of the panther instead imo.

 

Regarding the time after WW1...

Leopard 1 inferior to T54/T62 might be real though... That armor difference...

 

But I´d like to say that the Leopard 2 was superior to the T72 or T 80 at the time it came out. Even today, it would be capable of fighting against russian T80´s and T90´s but it´s the ammunition that is outdated of our german forces. I read mutliple articles about this, have a friend who was long in production of Leo2 parts and techs, so I am not out of insider infos either.

 

 


Edited by JAG THE GEMINI, 25 November 2016 - 09:21 PM.

 

 

My youtube channel:https://www.youtube....w_as=subscriber


Panzer lV #29 Posted 24 November 2016 - 10:47 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 19463 battles
  • 1,121
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

View PostWidowMaker1711, on 24 November 2016 - 09:50 AM, said:

 

Dont wake him up. Please. 

 

LOL. I realy dont understand this. Anyway its notging Matthew has not already seen before back in the beta days and IIRC he never objected to it.

 

Regards, John Waters


-Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

-People who can smile when things go wrong, have found someone else to blame.

Panzer lV #30 Posted 24 November 2016 - 11:01 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 19463 battles
  • 1,121
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013

The armor on the Panther worked fine. Most photographs of Panther cracked glacis are the reults of US/UK/USSR Live fire tests ie, Isgny etc. Where the glacis cracked open after repeated his from dozens of rounds from difering calibre tank guns and ammo types being fired at it. Ie, in Soviet live fire tests vs an Panther ausf A an 122mm round cracked the glacis in one hit @ 700ms. After 45mm, 57mm, 85mm tests etc.

 

German armor degraded in quality due the lack of nickel etc as the war progressed and territory that provided materials was lost.

 

Regards, John Waters


-Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

-People who can smile when things go wrong, have found someone else to blame.

DamnGunner #31 Posted 24 November 2016 - 11:29 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 22795 battles
  • 6,042
  • Member since:
    08-09-2013

View Postkiller etzi0, on 16 August 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

 

I just bookmarked this site.

Thanks!



WidowMaker1711 #32 Posted 25 November 2016 - 03:05 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 11837 battles
  • 10,002
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostPanzer lV, on 24 November 2016 - 10:47 PM, said:

 

LOL. I realy dont understand this. Anyway its notging Matthew has not already seen before back in the beta days and IIRC he never objected to it.

 

Regards, John Waters

 

Its not that. IIRC Matthew always backs his claims up with sources and links. However, that documentation is the proverbial can of worms  As soon as it appears so do the Wehraboos claiming its just propaganda. 


For Russ and the Allfather

 

 


MudRaker227 #33 Posted 12 December 2016 - 09:07 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15326 battles
  • 302
  • Member since:
    06-29-2014
Let's not forget a few things that would have been extremely important deciding factors in real tank engagements: German targeting optics and command center comms were proven to handily surpass similar Allied equipment in practically all cases. Those factors alone can decide an engagement even before a first shot is ever fired. All things aside though, most military experts would agree that the war really hinged upon numbers and training, not whose latest equipment was better, since everything (in the right hands) was pretty much capable of killing everything else towards the end.

bmick85 #34 Posted 14 December 2016 - 09:22 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 27392 battles
  • 2,482
  • [MCWLF]
  • Member since:
    12-14-2013

let's not forget, the German war machine relied on civilians that had trade skills(what Germany has always been proud of) due to he RAF and 8th Air Force decimating the civilian population(mostly RAF/Harris/Arnold Dresden), fuel making capabilities therefore Albert Speer relied on POW's and enslaved Jews to continue the war making effort.

I have read several memoirs about how these "enslaved" workers in manufacturing would purposely sabotage a gear cog, munitions, barrels, bearings, etc so that it would eventually break in the field.

Had Germany maintained a skilled work force and not over reached their boundaries, the War may have very well turned out differently..sad to say but thank God Hitler ruined it all with his unrealistic/wild ambitions.  

His true defeat was his mission to carry out the Holocaust, I am currently researching and writing a book on how the Reich could have extended the war without using the millions of gallons of fuel, steel, food/rations, and resources in general to wipe out a culture of people. 

It is really mind blowing how much reserves of fuel and quality steel would have been put into the war effort had the Holocaust not occurred. Right now, I have researched how many miles outside the pre-war railraod network was versus 1945. It is something close to 6,000 miles of railroad which is about 3.9 million tons..the Empire state building used 60,000 tons, enough steel for 650 Empire State buildings, or a tank for that matter. Tiger roughly weighed 54 tons, enough steel for 72,000 Tigers!! YIKES!!  

 



Navyman8390 #35 Posted 16 December 2016 - 06:36 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14186 battles
  • 1,314
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

I've often believed Germany could have dominated the Eurasian region had it not pursued the Final Solution.

1.  It was one of the most heinous crimes ever committed.

2.  It was a horrible waste of manpower, talent, and resources

3.  Evil committed always turns back on the culprit.  Karma, the law of recriprocity, it's real.



Uranprojekt #36 Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:32 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 8338 battles
  • 3,437
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013

View PostNavyman8390, on 16 December 2016 - 06:36 PM, said:

I've often believed Germany could have dominated the Eurasian region had it not pursued the Final Solution.

1.  It was one of the most heinous crimes ever committed.

2.  It was a horrible waste of manpower, talent, and resources

3.  Evil committed always turns back on the culprit.  Karma, the law of recriprocity, it's real.

 

Germany wouldn't have held any territory for long, not with the men in charge being who they were.

War does not determine who is right, only who is left - Bertrand Russell

 

I write things, things which can be found in Historical Discussions. Things like this article on the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945 and this article on the Spanish Civil War.

 

To those of you who don't molest the English language, I salute you. For everyone else, there's this handy link; http://www.reverso.n...elling-grammar/


Navyman8390 #37 Posted 20 December 2016 - 02:49 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14186 battles
  • 1,314
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View PostUranprojekt, on 17 December 2016 - 01:32 PM, said:

 

Germany wouldn't have held any territory for long, not with the men in charge being who they were.

True that.  In any other national paradigm other than Depression era Germany most of the ranking nazies would have been criminals, convicts, or asylum patients.



Greywoolfe64 #38 Posted 04 April 2017 - 03:43 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 16831 battles
  • 2,187
  • [27PZR]
  • Member since:
    02-13-2016

View Posthuricanechuck, on 16 August 2016 - 07:43 PM, said:

 

this^^^^ more specifically it was designed to fight the king tiger or tiger 2 ,if you will ,,as was the pershing. BTW the only known battle between the pershing and king tiger ,,the pershing destroyed it in one hit.

 

The only Pershing variant that scored a kill on a Tiger II was a Super Pershing- the only one of its' type at that time, which was rushed out to Germany specifically to see if it could kill a Tiger II, as the standard Pershing was unable to penetrate the Tiger II's armour. There were a few sporadic fights between Pershings and Tiger I's at the end of the war, and both were fairly evenly matched. The Super Pershing kill was made when the first shot bounced off the Tiger's upper glacis, the second penetrated the turret, killing the loader and injuring the commander, and as the Tiger continued its' approach, it hit a pile of rubble and reared up, exposing its' underbelly, which was when the Super Pershing penetrated the Tiger's underbelly and blew the ammo racks and transmission, setting it on fire. It took three shots to knock the tank out, only two of which that did actual damage.

"Some say that he dines on lower glacis, and that he once spent three weeks hiding in a thick French bush. All we know is, he's called the Stug!"

Current garage (MOE's marked with star*) -click spoiler.

Spoiler

 


Metalrodent #39 Posted 05 April 2017 - 04:35 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 10186 battles
  • 14,433
  • [KMD]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014
Actually the Pershing never saw combat with the Tiger II, a Pershing was knocked out by a Tiger I but was repaired and made usable again.

<a data-cke-saved-href='http://i.imgur.com/sCeAbYa.gif' href='http://i.imgur.com/sCeAbYa.gif' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/sCeAbYa.gif</a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s...sCeAbYa.gif</a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s...bYa.gif</a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s...gif</a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'>http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>

There’s a mask upon my face
I can’t live without
So you won’t recognize me
When I am in the crowd


Greywoolfe64 #40 Posted 05 April 2017 - 07:10 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 16831 battles
  • 2,187
  • [27PZR]
  • Member since:
    02-13-2016
I was talking about a T26 E4 Super Pershing.

"Some say that he dines on lower glacis, and that he once spent three weeks hiding in a thick French bush. All we know is, he's called the Stug!"

Current garage (MOE's marked with star*) -click spoiler.

Spoiler

 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users