Panther Vs T-34 - superior hunter ?

and if you think the russians were caught off guard and by suprise youi are mistaken. Stalin knew that war with Germany was coming and was trying to get the army ready before world war II even started. He might not have expected Germany to invade when it did but he knew well before hand and was preparing accordingly.

 

and there is no info pointing out a ratio of 10:1 which was my point. The average was 5:1 meaning at times it was higher and lower than that. If actual good studys had been conducted you would find that German fighting properly equipped had higher ratios while ones ill equipped had lower ratios. An example of one German kill ratio would be Kurt Knispel who had a ratio of 168-195:1. Of course he was the top ace and would have the largest ratio of any german.

 

Hello Jager,

I will adress all of your posts with this one...

Im afraid the P IV had a few more set backs. The armor on the P IV was thinner than the T-34s nor was it sloped. The tank was slower than the T-34 and it took alonger time to produce and cost more $. The T34 unlike the IV also ran on diesel not gas.

The Russians also fired high explosive shells which the German did not use.

As for radios, all tanks had them, however; only the lead tank had a 2way radio, all others could only listen. By 1943 all Soviet armor had 2way radios.

Your casualties figure is a bit off as well. Total permanent German casualties in the East before the battle for Berlin amounted to just over 10 million the Soviet permanent losses are under 20 million this is not 5:1......
it must also be mentioned that when Germany invaded, she was not alone and recieved had help from a dozen European nations who contributed over a million men. When using those nations casualty figures, the numbers become much closer.

You are correct about Stalins knowledge of eventual combat with Germany. What Stalin did not know and later refused to believe was WHEN the war was coming. He read Mein Kampf and new of Hitlers intensions, he just refused to beileve war would come before Englands demise.

When Germany attacked, Russian soldiers were not permited to return fire. Only after a few hours into the invasion was the order to return fire given and even then soldiers not only at half strenght but lacked a variety of supplies, munitions and even orders of what to do! Hows that for combat readiness?

Katusha was more advanced then anything the Germans had and the Nebelwefer is really not a good comparison. German soldier often wrote about this weapon and all said the same thing, it was TERRIFYING!

 

First off lol. The Panzer IV was of average production costs. Production costs of the Panzer IV did not increase untill the modifications were made on it in which the complexity increase caused a raise in man hours to produce it. This is why the Panther was chosen to replece it as th emain German battle tank. Next the Panzer IV's armor was 50mm while the T-34 of the time was 45mm and sloped. They were about even. Next HE shells are not good against armor. HE are used to fire into infrastructures to clear them. HE shells are made to kill infantry. AP or armor piercing shells are used against tanks to pierce the armor. HE shells do not have penetrating ability and the T-34 had both kinds of ammunition. Next T-34's were not equipped with radios in 1941. The command tank was equipped with a radio for contacting high command. thats it. T-34's commnicated through flag signals. As for the casualty ratio that aws your friends number not mine. He said 5:1 so take taht up with him. As far as im concerned none of those numbers are accurate because they are estimates. You say yours are more like 2:1 he says 5:1. IT doesnt matter fact is the Germans killed at a far greater rate than the russians. As for Russian soldiers not returning fire? I have no knowledge of such an order and i get my information from the third largest military research compound in the world. Next indeed the katyusha was terrifying but if you think it was more advanced than the germans then you should look into german rocketry as it was the best of the time.

 

I think Turret turning speeds are also a factor in Tank v Tank action, I only have limited data on this please see below,
360 degrees
Pz Mk IV = 12 Seconds
Panther = 23 Seconds
Tiger I = 28 Seconds
Tiger II = 34 Seconds
Sherman = 16 Seconds
Churchill = 20 Seconds
Cromwell = 14 Seconds
Sorry I have none for Russia or other nations.
Regards Yan.

 

turret traverse rates usually do affect battles but im wondering where you got the rate for the tiger 1 as its traverse rate was one of its drawbacks in that it took 48 seconds. this problem was initially resolved by tank ace michael wittmann who invented "assisted traverse" in which he would turn the tank while the turret was traversing to hone targets faster. The Tiger 2 had a faster traverse rate than the tiger 1 i believe. but i could always be wrong about that. I guess it could depend on the tiger model as well.

 

Hi Jager, I got the traverse times from a book by Bruce Quarrie.
Regards Yan.

 

Did the book say what model Tiger that was for, by chance?

 

Yes the Tiger 1 (28 seconds)
Yan.

 

I don't think you can have a single figure for the Pz IV traverse, the J model had no power traverse and I expect the short barrelled models to perform differently from the long barreled ones. For the T-34 it gets's even more interesting as it had 3 different turret models and many subvariants, ditto for the M4 with two turrets
I have (source Zaloga) 120 sec for 360 degrees for the KV-1 (Possibly a typo or he meant the KV-2 !!!) and traverse speed for the T-34 Mod 42 at 26 deg/sec so a litttle under 14 seconds.

 

No yan I mean which Tiger I model lol there was the ausf. H, H1, E and so forth.

 

Old soldier I find it hard to believe the KV-1's traverse took 120 seconds as well. Oh well. Traverse could not have meant everything as the Tiger, KV-1 and Panther were all some of the better battle tanks of the war.

 

Sorry Jager it just says Tiger I.

 

If attacking,I'd say the t34.if defending,I'd say panzer mk6,cheers.

 

If attacking or defending I would say a panzer VI which is a tiger not a panther which is a MK V lol

 

Yes,thanks for correcting me jeager.I meant the German mk 5.

 

Well, there are the obvious facts: the Panther had a much longer 75mm to the T-34/85's shorter long-barrel 85mm, the Panther could achieve speeds of 55 km/h (2 km/h faster than the T-34/85), and the sloped armor of the Panther was significantly thicker than that of the T-34. However, bring in the fact that the Panther was unreliably unstable and had serious maintenance issues over time, compared to the impossibly reliability of all T-34s in the battlefield and their overall mechanical simplicity.

I think Panthers would work much more effectively when in defensive operations, not only significantly decreasing the probability of mechanical failures, but the fact that the Panther could penetrate a T-34's frontal armor at roughly 2500m, compared to the T-34's penetration of a Panther's at just 500m. Of course, over 80,000 T-34s were produced throughout it's long production run, compared to barely 5,000 Panthers. In order to maximize the effectiveness of Panthers in defensive actions, they would probably need tank-hunter infantry teams armed with Panzerfausts, AT grenades and probably hidden AT guns and self-propelled guns in supporting roles to prevent the Panthers from being completely overrun by the higher numbers of the T-34.

 

So you think the PZ MK5 was the'hunter',when defending?.

 

I think it's too difficult a question IMO.There are too many variables.Strengths and weakness's of tanks involved in the great patriotic war?.What battles?,what dates?,what other A.F.V's,SU 85's,SU 100's,KV's,SU 122's,SU 152's,STUG,s,JPZ's,to name a few.then there are the PZfaust tank hunting teams,anti-tank gunsAK-75mm,88mm,76mm,57mm.PZ mark6,PZ mk4-75mm and also the artillery!.I'm not going to stick my neck on the block,cheers.p.s sorry about the bad grammar

 

I would take a Panther over a T-34. Not to try to say the T-34 is a bad tank or anything but the Panther IMO is one of the more elite tanks of the war and shouldnt be compared to the T-34. Even though the Panther is listed as a medium tank it was far bigger, heavier, more firepower, and more protection than the T-34. I think a more fair comparison would be the Panzer IV vs. T-34 in which I would probably select the T-34. Both tanks debuted around the same time and both are similar as far as weight, firepower and protection. But of course that is opinion and not fact.