Shermans and Tigers

Yes, Battlefield 1942 (while having pretty good graphics), doesn't even try to be realistic as far a gun penetrations and armor penetration resistance. It simply a "capture the flag" free-for-all with a WWII setting only for effect.

Call of Duty and Brothers in Arms do a better job (still not realistic when it comes to armor, though). The best games I've found are a little old now, the Combat Mission series. Now these guys got absolutely anal about getting the armor penetrations/reloading rates/line-of-sites perfect (love those Brits and their attention to detail). Supposedly a newer redone version is coming where the infantry looks as good as the tanks.

 

Although this is from a computer game, and therefore not exactly good real-world evidance, it does highlight quite well the best method of killing a Tiger I - don't bother with the front (the strongest part), but put a shell through the side or rear, which were (relatively) weak, and which the 75mm could penetrate pretty well.

 

there were few Tigers in North Africa and they don't travel well..

What mostly around the port of Tunis??? (memory)

Total Tiger production 1,500

Sherman production =Tiger X 30


1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 Total
M2A1 6 88 - - - - 94
M3 - 1342 4916 - - - 5258
M4 - - 8017 21231 3504 651 33403
M4 (76) - - - - 7135 3748 10883
M4 (105) - - - - 2286 2394 4680
M10 GMC - - 639 6067 - - 6706
M36 GMC - - - - 1400 924 2324
M7 HMC - - 2028 786 1164 338 4316
M12 GMC - - 60 40 - - 100
M30 CC - - 60 40 - - 100

NOT FROM AN AUTHORATATIVE SOURCE (so sue me)


there almost as many M36 90 mm produced as Tigers..
and YES they saw action only in NW Europe..


30/1 good luck..

You could drive a Sherman from Maine to Florida..

You cound never do that in a Tiger and the Germans had trouble recovering them after breakdown..

Some here claim the Germans ended up destroying more of them than the Allies did..

Mostly they had to be transported by train, which was hindered by bombed bridges & straffed Locomotives..

I prefer the Panther anyway..

Sometimes the 88 went right through the Sherman so...
2/3 'destroyed' Shermans were back fighting in a couple of days.. (memory)

Not so with the Tiger.

Some Shermans , like the EZ8 could take a hit from a Tiger and keep on trucking.. ( at a long range of course)

 

Quite short ranges, too, actually. In some places the E8's armour was thicker than that of the Tiger; it also had a more sophisticated ammunition protection system (as in, it had one, as opposed to the Tiger).

 

The number of maintenance stops for Tigers was about the same as those use in general by the Russian army for armoured divisions.

It is downright wrong that the Germans destroyed more Tigers themselve than the Allies did.

 

what you have to remember is that by the time the germans had the tiger they were retreating on most fronts and had lost air superiority.

As such if your tank threw a track, ran out of fuel or had a cracked engine head, it was still just worthless scrap metal to the crew who would often leave it and hope to come back later to recover it. But that wasn't always possable so they just torched them.

I suppose an attacking and victorious army will always recover more of it's abandend material than one that is running for the next defensive line

FNG

 

Tanks were transported by train over longer distances, Panthers included. It is faster, simpler, poses no mechanical strain on the tanks themselves, and saves fuel.

 

all tanks were shipped by train, the tiger wasn't that difficult to move but had to have it's tracks changed before hand.

An easy job in the grand scheme of things but it was probably a bind to those actually doing it at the depot.

FNG

 

As I wrote somewhere else, it was not always necessary to change to transport tracks beforetransporting Tigers by train. It was possible to drive a Tiger from Russia to Kassel (in the western part of central Germany) with combat tracks.

 

there is a lot of stuff out there about Tigers being unreliable..

We all know of your admiration for the Tiger, but I doubt that you will ever convince me however.

You probably have seen the pages with the factory representives field reports..


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& ... tnG=Search

If not I will go find it..

 

Oh, it's on the Internet - then it must be true...

Perhaps you can provide something better than a complete list of the fate of all the Tigers?

 

I have seen your list and read the many, many posts of those that dispute it..

You are on the internet also aren't you..

Perhaps you would like to post a link to your list again..

 

I would be interested in learning from where you have seen my list, since it isn't mine.

I would also be interested in reading the many, many posts disputing the list. I have seen no such posts.

I would also be very interested in learning where I have linked to it in the first place, since it isn't available on the Internet.

I don't know what you mean by 'You are on the internet also aren't you..'

 

>I would be interested in learning from where you have seen my list, since it isn't mine.

>Perhaps you can provide something better than a complete list of the fate of all the Tigers?


I have seen the work, I am talking about the list you refer to ever so often..


>I would also be interested in reading the many, many posts disputing the list. I have seen no such posts

I cannot think of a polite way to respond in a succint manner and i dont really feel like stalking your tracks on the other forums and here..

But the first time I posted here you brought this up and David gave me the hint about it.


The Tiger has a well known reputation for being unreliable, I learned this at age ten. I am almost fifty..

Maybe we should do a poll here among our members

http://www.fun-online.sk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3669

 

Perhaps you could tell me then, what is wrong with the list?

Just because it has a reputation doesn't make it true. There is no factual evidence to support the reputation, only repeated hearsay. I can't see how making a poll can change factual evidence - the only thing a poll will do is show the general perception. Also see my answer in your poll.

 

yes, that is the gerneral perception..

Shared even by the chief of soviet armaments even and refered to in various books..

008 – abandoned on the road between Stavelot and Trois Ponts 25 December.

105 – knocked out in Stavelot 18 December.

133 – abandoned near Petit Spai 24 December.

204 – abandoned in La Gleize 24 December.

211 – knocked out in La Gleize 22 December.

213 – knocked out in La Gleize 22 December.

222 – knocked out in Stavelot 20 December.

304 - abandoned, location and date unknown

312 – abandoned or knocked out (maybe after 25 December)

332 – captured at Coo-Biester 25 December.

334 – abandoned near La Gleize 24 December.

Unknown turret number but may have been 3. Kompanie – abandoned at bend in road south of La Gleize 24 December.

No turret number but probably 1. Kompanie (may have been 104) – abandoned in La Gleize 24 December.



accurate or not according to your list?

6/13 abandoned

http://ss501panzer.com/Tanks_of_SS501.htm

If you follow American unit reports, the battalion lost more tanks than it started with!

 

I feel that the tiger has a reputation for being unreliable due to the way the war was fought.

By 43 germany was becoming a desperate place, it was a new vehicle and spares were short, when it had been in service for a year everything was short.

The german army was also very busy firefighting a defence on 3 fronts. As such repair units didn't have the time to carry out full servicing, front line units didn't have the time to carry out field servicing.

Even if they had the time to do such things they didn't have the parts. I am sure that I read somewhere that the way the factories were organised meant that priority was given to complete ready units and not servicing and repair parts.

So what you have is a technilogically advanced, highly complex and sensitive tank that is being abused to destruction on the front line by those who are fighting for their lives. So yes, it failed more than the simpler tanks around it but that doesn't make in unrelaible.

I can imagine that modern tanks are even more fussy and sensitive than the simple beasts of WW2 yet they are very reliable given the care the mechanics take over them.

FNG

 

What Stonewall means is probably that the German railway system wasn't exactly a safe way of transporting troops, as it was under near constant bombardment if within reach of any Allied tactical air force, as well as an easy victim to sabotage by partisans and resistance movements. For example, the French resistance destroyed no less than 5000 locomotives during the war.

 

Thanks for clearing up my comments..

I while I get FNGs valid points, I still wonder could the US 4th armored have drive accross France so quickly if it relied on Tigers?

It obvioulsy could have 'blasted' better, I suppose, but could they drive hundreds of KM

I forget the mean time between breakdowns for the Sherman.

In a Soviet account they talk about the rubber on the tracks melting during the summer heat.