The best tank killer of WWII

Some time ago I would have said the Hetzer was the best tank killer in the cost-efficiency domain, but now I take in account the very well documented informations provided here by TAG (IIRC) showing the Hetzer was very difficult to operate efficiently because of conception flaws.

 

Could not have said it better!

 

"Towed anti-tank guns often can be forgotten in discussions about tank killers.

Found this on Achtungpanzer.com...

Otto Carius: "The destruction of an anti-tank gun can cost a couple of tanks, because they are small, well-covered and waiting for the tanks in ambush. Usually it takes [just] the first shot. If the gunners are skilled, they can knock out the Tiger. If they did not destroy your tank with the first shot-you will have no more time to react before you receive the second shell."

Michael Wittmann: "The anti-tank gun is more difficult to find than the tank. The gun can fire several shots before I find it"


Elsewhere I read a long post by a fellow who had examined details of armored vehical losses on all fronts & all types. He estimated the largest grossing single model weapon was the German towed AT 37mm gun. Because the Wehrmacht kept it in action alongside its other wepons untill it fell apart it had more opportuniites to get kills than any other. From 1939, including all tanks, assualt guns, armored cars, SP artillery, halftracks & other tracked armored carriers he estimated this little weapon destroyed more than double the AFV than the next closest competitor.

 

Hard to believe the poor Door-Knocker had such a record without seeing the actual data, but then the Russians kept the same 45mm calibre as the infantry battalion AT gun throughout the war.

 

It is said to be very maneuverable, fast to operate and accurate when manned with a proper crew.

Maybe in many cases it immobilized heavy armored targets, so they can be dealt with latter, or fled, instead of destroying them, I don't know.

 

I think the score was enlarged by knocking in the doors of all those flimsey Soviet & British light tanks, armored cars, and halftracks. Of course the poor 37mm gun crews probablly had a high loss rate too. I agree the claim seems over the top & one wants to see the data.

Strangely the Wehrmacht found it fairly ineffective vs the French tanks. ???

 

The Yeide´s "tank killers" book data does not give much credit to towed At guns during offensive. The US towed guns destroyed only a couple of German tanks during the European campaign and thus the results were very poor in relation to the hopes that were put on their action.

Thus the towed At gun probably serves much better during defence as we´ve seen for example the German 88.

 

This investigation found 44 destroyed Shermans from 6th June to 10th July 1944.

40 were AP penetrated.
25 were hit once.
11 were hit twice.
2 were hit 3 times.
1 was hit 4 times
1 one hit 8 times.

A further 83 Shermans were found that had been hit but not penetrated.
Note that 60% of Allied losses is not the same as 60% of Allied tanks

German overall losses were 44% of tanks lost to AP penetration


Allied losses in ETO were

US = 51% to AP shot.

UK - 59% to AP shot.

Not much difference in the end.

 

M kenny,


Were those 83 Shermans you mention losses as well? If they were destroyed then the amount would be 40/ ( 44+83 ) for one shot and should be corrected, but unfortunately I don´t have the book of the author so I cannot say anything more.If you mean the "brewing up" part then you are correct that hitting the tank did not cause always the loss of tank, I think.

 

The other 83 Shermans are described as :
'further study of tanks hit but not penetrated and remained in action'.

The full report title is
RGd 24. Report No.12.
Canadian 2nd Army:
Analysis of 75mm Sherman tank casualties between 6th June and 10th July.

 

the sherman, that tank pretty much took one hit and was out, The Hell cat was pretty much one of the best tank killers,



(dont they use the old ww2 tanks as shooting practise, for the M1?)

 

There were a very few left on the target ranges in the 1970s. By the 1980s those few had been shot to pieces & replaced with other junk. I saw everything from cylindrical fuel or oil tanks, LVT5s, truck chassis of every type, a few tanks, plywood silloutes, stacks of worn tires, canvas streatched over a frame, and large masses of steel so battered they could not be identified. I never trained on any of the firing ranges with the automated hit recording systems.

I can recall only one or two WW2 era tanks still on a fring range. Most of the target hulks would disintigrate in just a couple years of direct fire. On the indirect fire artillery ranges they lasted a bit longer, however a direct hit from a 203mm round usually finished the target.

 

The Sherman Tank was a good Medium Tank, and the defining word is Medium, the Sherman was never meant to take on the likes of Tiger and Panther Tanks. What really irks me, is that the US miliyary did not up-gun the M4 till June of 1944, even the British offered to supply the US with their 17 pounder AT gun for the Sherman, and the US military turned them down. How many US tank crewmen lost their lives because there was a pea-shooter of a gun on the M4. In my humble opinion, the best tank/anti-tank vehicle was the Mark 5 Panther. With the combination of fire power mobility and armour, it was perhaps the finest tank of WW2. The Sherman was not even the best medium tank, the T34 was a far better tank than the M4.

 

Not quite what happened though.

Against it's main opponents the 75mm "pea-shooter" was probably as good or better any other weapon of that caliber be it German, British, Soviet, or American.

Don't forget the ability to self immolate and horrible reliabiilty, not to mentio weak flank armor when discussing the Pz-V

On the contrary the M-4 and T34 are very close in capablilty and I'd give the nod to the M-4. For more details do a quick search on this subject as it has been addressed multiple time on this and other WW2 forums.

 

The most effective tank destroyer would be the jagdpanther. However, the best tank destroyer in terms of firepower, armor, mobility, simplicity, ease of production, and all other factors is definitely the stug III Ausf G. It was cheap, had a low silhouette, and its 75mm L/48 gun could penetrate the armor of almost all allied tanks in service. Its frontal armor was also quite thick (80mm), and could deflect hits from the 76mm mounted on the t-34, as well as the 75mm mounted o the sherman. Since it used the panzer III chassis, it was very reliable and easy to maintain, especially when compared to the heavier german vehicles.

 

Yes, Jagdpanther all the way

Regards
Kruska

 

1581 deaths in 'Armor' and 5,135 in 'Cavalry' total 6716

Axis History Forum • View topic - Sherman Tank Losses

I expect that comes as a suprise to those brought up on tales of entire crews being wiped out by super-dooper German 88 shells.
The average was 1 dead crewman for each knocked out tank and around half of all tank crew casualties were incurred OUTSIDE the tank (would that not mean 0.5 deaths per knocked out tank?)

 

Ok, it's can't be an airplane. There goes the Typhoon with 5in rockets.


Hmmm.

USS Texas
USS Nevada
USS Arkansas
HMS Warspite
HMS Ramilles

I guarantee that any armored vehicles they hit at Normandy, was a one shot kill, and return fire was not an issue. ;-)

 

Actually I think several US DD's got more tank kills than the BBs. A cruiser or two might also have ranked up there. Sicily is probably the most important engagment in this regard.

 

Yes, our Brooklyn class cruisers with fifteen 6" guns were instrumental in breaking up German armored attacks at Sicily and Salerno. Among others, German Admiral Friederich Ruge mentioned them specifically in his history of the war.

Treaties be damned, I refuse to call such a ship a "light" cruiser!