Top 5 Tank Destroyers

The JgPz IV/70 had some serious drawbacks to it. As mentioned, the gun and added frontal armor made the vehicle nose heavy to the point where it effected automotive performance. The front set of road wheels were frequently replaced by resiliant steel ones to cut down on wear. The long overhanging gun was a maneuver problem and limited the slope ability of the vehicle.
It also had some of the same problems plaguing the Hetzer. The Jgpz IV had a dearth of vision devices. The commanded had one in his hatch and a second fixed one to look off to his side of the vehicle. The hatch mounted one gave limited vision forward due to the long flat deck of the fighting compartment. The loader had one periscope on his side of the vehicle too. Of course, he was unlikely to be using it...
The driver had just two vision slits to see out of. He had no hatch for driving the vehicle so he had poor depth perception, no lateral visibility and, relied heavily on direction from the commander. The gunner has just his telescopic sight through the fighting compartment roof for a view. Basically, the vehicle is blind when buttoned up.
Some enterprising crews added a cupola off a Pz IV or Panther to the commander's position to make up for this.
There was no machinegun mount on the roof of the vehicle like many other fixed gun German AFV had. This too is a drawback.

Basically, the Jgpz IV is a quick and sloppy improvisation to get a mobile gun in the field.

 

1. Jagpanther
2. Su-100
3. Jagtiger
4. Elefant
5. Su-85

jagdtiger and elefant are included because of there absolutely massive armor and firepower, and there impressive kill/loss ration (10:1 for the elefant)

 

No unconfirmed kill loss ratios, please. Those aren't exactly reliable unless its operational research/corps level AAR written after a blow by blow reconstruction of the battle was made and even those are not 100% reliable... It's not uncommon for kills inflated tenfold or more in many battles. High adrenaline and braggadocio and all.

 

According to actual reports the Elefant achieved at least a 10:1 kill ratio at Kursk, and this was based on claims from the crews. As for the whole war, no idea.

 

Claim- an assertion of the truth of something, typically one that is disputed or in doubt.

 

from wikipedia:

 

It is just a claim and German kill claims were notoriously inflated.

 

The JadgTiger served in just two abteilung. The 653rd and 512th. Both were used exclusively on the Western Front in Europe with the 653rd operating against the US 3rd and 7th Armies primarily and the 512th against the 9th Army most of the time.

I doubt that between the two units they knocked out a hundred Allied tanks; probably less. The vast majority of JadgTiger were lost due to mechanical problems and destroyed by their crews.

See JadgTiger Operational History by Andrew Devey for example

The Elefant did better being in service far longer even if after Kursk it was primarily only in one Abteilung (653) and one company (614). The Elefant served almost exclusively on the Eastern Front (with one company in Italy for a short period where it achieved essentially nothing). In the East it proved a dangerous vehicle on a tactical level and fought right up to the end of the war with the last couple fighting in the defense of Berlin.

The Su 100 only saw service in the closing days of the war in Poland and Germany where its impact on events was nominal while the SU 85 was rather quickly made obsolesent by the appearance of the T34/85.

 

I dont judge how good vehicles are based on their impact on the war. I judge how good vehicles are based on their specifications, such as armor thickness, top speed, gun penetration. The jagdtiger has a massive1 28mm pak 44 which could rip any allied tank in half (literally) at almost any range. It also has a a colossal 250mm (10 inches) of frontal armor. While its reliability and range were pathetic, It could easily defeat any allied vehicle it encountered, and could probably defeat any post war tank up into the mid 60's (with the introduction of the T-62). The Su-100 is included because it had an amazing gun (better than the 88mm kwk 36 and 75mm Kwk 42, but not as good as the 88mm Kwk 43), it has good armor, and amazing mobility due to it using the t-34 chassis. While it would definitely lose 1 on 1 to a jagdtiger or elefant, it proved to be an amazing vehicle and could destroy most german tanks as very long range.

As for the su-85, ill replace it with the nashorn. Even though it had a high profile and thin armor, it had easily the best anti-tank gun of the war.

 

Stug,m36,su100,jagpanzer,does the hertzer count??

 

Understatement of the thread. When a tank destroyer was that expansive to build in resources and manpower, in a nation that was losing a war of attrition, and proven to have inadequate mobility for operational needs, than it did not matter how good its gun or armor was. It was a bad AFV.

 

On the other hand, the Jadgtiger was mechanically a nightmare. The transmission and final drives were weak and frequently broke down. It took a crew of men with a twenty ton crane or gantry about a week to change one. You had to remove the fighting compartment roof (7 tons), then the gun and shield (22 tons combined), then the driver's compartment roof, then the driver's compartment, then the transmission. Engine changes took several days with several men and a large crane. On an M 18 two men with hand tools and a light hoist for the engine could make an engine change in about an hour.
In fact, most of the time spent by a Jadgtiger was in the shops getting fixed.
In combat it was only marginally effective. Yes, the cannon was tremendously powerful but, the rate of fire low (two piece ammunition for one thing). In most firefights like the one at Neustadt an Wein between three Jadgtiger and a US armor column the Jadgtigers met a literal hail of accurate return fire that forced them to displace rather than continue the fight. In this particular case, two out of the three Jadgtigers broke down when they tried to withdraw and the crews had to abandon them and flee on a sdkfz 251.
Its size and weight made operational moves nearly impossible. Many bridges and roads couldn't support the weight.

 

My vote would go to the M18 as it was fast, reliable and with the right ammo, could penetrate almost any machine on the battlefield. Masses of armour plate and a huge gun are useless if the machine is always broken down.

 

the jagdtiger was horribly un-reliable, but with 250mm of sloped armor and a 128mm high velocity gun it was very effective when used in static defensive positions, just like the elefant.

the m18's gun could only penetrate the tigers and panther armor at very close range, and could not penetrate the tiger II's frontal armor at any range. It was also pathetically armored. In fact, its side armor was so thin that even armor-peircing rifle bullets could penetrate it. It was vulnerable to just about everything on the battlefield. It also has an open top, which meant the crew was extremely vulnerable to grenades, mortars, and fire from above. The jagpanther is superior in almost every way. Its gun was the best AT gun of the war, its frontal armor was immune to the guns of most allied tanks, and it has very good mobility due to it using the panther chassis. It also has a much lower profile.

 

All I can think of is the stug it had exellent speed put very little strain on logitics pak39 was very usefull and knocked out more allied tanks than the heavy armor like mark4s,6and7s. Exellent on attack and defence it was even use full in urban warfare when supported correctly. Low profile harder to hit easy to build and cheap not to mention easy to repair and rearm they use same parts of mark 4.

 

and JagdPanthers were very,very vulnerable to either AP through their road wheels or HE fire to their tracks whereupon an enemy could approach from the side without any fear whatsoever from the limited traverse gun mounting.

 

That is why they were used in static defensive positions, so that that the enemy could not approach from the side. All tanks are vulnerable to AP through their road wheels or HE fire to their tracks, that is not a problem specific to the jagpanther. The only machine that can rival it is the Su-100, but it has inferior armor and a weaker gun. So overall the jagdpanther is by a large margin the most effective tank destroyer of the war, and most people agree with this:

Panzerjager V Jagdpanther Sd. Kfz. 173

Jagdpanther - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

A few questions.

1. What makes you think the enemy will to engage you frontally? What would you do if no one showed up?

2. If you are certain the only avenue of approach to enemy objective is under your control, how are you going to provide force protection when the enemy uses indirect fires and close air support on your position?

3. Instead of making an expansive weapon system that can barely move, would it not make more sense to take out the gun, put it in a bunker, and use the gasoline, chassis and manpower required to operate this weapon else where?

 

Well, I can’t put myself into Mr. Hitler’s thoughts about how to win or end the war from 1944 onwards. Looking at the weapon development, e.g. tanks it came all up to defensive measures. The Wehrmacht couldn’t really attack (swift) with those tonnage monsters anyway.
Somehow Hitler must have believed in the wonder weapons to come and turn the tide, until then gain time by providing defensive systems that would appear or believed to be invulnerable, impregnable.
In regards to a Jagdpanther, it might have made more sense to produce that model instead of a Jagdtiger, same would go for a PantherV instead of a Kingtiger or Maus. However even Hitler understood that a Jagdpanther or PantherV wasn’t invulnerable or impregnable.
And in order to stop 100 allied tanks he would prefer 10 “invulnerable” tanks rather than 40 Jagdpanther or 100 Hetzer. The by far greatest determining issue I believe was the manpower availability, which forbade any attempts towards simple mass produced tanks. If Germany would have produced an additional 40,000 Panzer IV, or 30,000 Panthers I simply do not see the crews to man them. (Probably the ammo would have been missing as well) So an invulnerable Jagdtiger starts to make sense -somehow .
Regards
Kruska

 

1. If your vehicle is pointed at the enemy, they will engage you frontally. And if no one showed up, well then you would just move to a new position

2. You wouldn't. the jagdtigers armor can shrug of strafing runs and heavy artillery.

3. Because bunkers cant move if threatened.