The Panzer III and Panzer IV

The Panzer IV had a larger gun campared to the 50mm gun of the Panzer III. Why was the Panzer III supposed to be the main battle tank and the Panzer IV the Support tank? You would think that a bigger shell would take care of armor better than a smaller one, or did they want armor peircing over blowing a big hole in the armor? It just confuses me. Also, didn't anyone find a way to make a shell that would explode inside of the tank just a few miliseconds, give or take, so that the enemy would be better dealt with inside? Be a bit of a fear factor for the first side to figure that out. :bang:

 

solid shots, (APDS) will pierc the armor and remain intact
HEAT will project a jet of molten metal
HESH will explot in the outside but in the inside will shater the armor and produce splinters
the last 2 will be deadly to the crew
so you do not need a internal detonation of the shell

 

Your Question

Well like you said, the Panzer 111 was supposed to be the main tank and the Panzer IV to be the backup. Well it could have been at the time the Panzer 111 was the main tank of the German Army and the Panzer IV was being produced, but it may have not been performing well so they may have made the Panzer 111 the main tank at the time. But remember, you don't have to be big to make a lot of damage, a small shell can cause as much damage as a big shell.

Sincerely,
Private Mic von Krate

 

The two vehicles had entirely different roles on the outset of hostilities.

The Pzkw. III had a gun (37mm and a little latter 50mm) that was believed to be sufficient for dealing with the tanks of the day (this would later change of course). This was in the early days of WWII and years even before then. The kwk 50mm L/42 that armed most Pzkw III's from 1940 on had a muzzle velocity significantly higher than the Pzkw IV's kwk 75mm L/24. L/24 indicates that the barrel's length is 24 times the barrel's diameter (75mm*24= a barrel length of 1800mm; in contrast the 50mm L/42 has a barrel length of 2100mm). The Pzkw IV's gun was, as far as I know, envisoned as fulfilling a role similar to that of the assualt gun's. It was destined as a demolisher of enemy strongpoints and structures.

Armour penetration is not only determined by the size of shell, but also by the charge used to propell the round. Bigger charge requires a longer barrel, both of which can greatly increase muzzle velocity. The higher the muzzle velocity the faster the projectile will strike its target and the harder it will hit. With guns of same calibers the affect of a larger cartridge and longer barrel are very noticable; compare the Tiger I's 88mm L/56 to the Tiger II's 88mm L/71.

Small caliber tapered-bore guns like the PzB41 28mm-20mm has more penetrating power than both the 50mm L/42 and the 75mm L/24.

 

FYI: <http://www.panzerworld.net/ammunitiontypes.html>

Standard German ammunition was APCBC-HE (Pzgr.Patr.39), with some APCR (Pzgr.Patr.40). HEAT ammunition for the Pz.Kpfw.IV came relatively late. Noone used HESH during WWII, and there was only limited use of APDS.

 

IIRC (and I think that this is what Christian is saying) the Germans* used an anti-tank shell that had some explosive in it, so it would penetrate armour then explode.


*And just about every nation except the British...

 

the mark III and IV have their design historys going back to the 30's and thus predated the advances made during the war.

The mark I was a training tank though saw considerable active service due to lack of other marks
The mark II was a light tank and again really designed for training and experiental purposes but saw a lot of action due to insufficient numbers of alternatives.
The mark III was the backbone of the panzers. A cruiser/breakthrough tank that was supposed to have been armed with the 50mm but was originally rolled out with the 37mm which was the army standard AT gun at the time.
The mark IV was the assualt/infantry support tank with a low velocity short 75mm gun capable of firing a useful HE round against infantry and fixed defences.

The war changed everything though as by the end of 1940 and the conquest of france the I's and II's were clearly showing their limits. Though I believe some II's saw service in 41 in Russia.

The mark III just couldn't be upgraded enough either it's gun which is generally limited by the size of the turret ring, but also it's armour. It just wasn't designed to be heavy enough when faced with T-34's KV's and Matildas. As such the Mark IV was called in more and more to deal with these heavier targets and thus took over as the main cruiser tank.

Finally the mark iv had it's short barrelled 75mm gun replaced with a long barrelled version. And there is the crux of AT guns, barrel length, which is calliber.

A longer barrel allows a shot to accelorate to a higher velocity. A higher velocity should give a better penetration for a basic solid AT shot

The actual size of the gun is missleading. The best and easiest example of this is that the panthers 75mm gun was better than some of the 88mm guns the germans used.

FNG

 

Not really - the Pz.Kpfw.I and Pz.Kpfw.II were build as a combat tank, with face-hardened steel plates, and coaxial weapons. Training tanks doesn't need these features.

 

when I say "training" I don't mean purely for use in a camp.

Germany at the time had no tanks and very little tank infastructure for training crew, mechanics whilst having limited and unexperienced production facilities as the ruhr had been denied to them for years.

Therefore whilst the german plan was for an army equiped with mark III's and IV's they started production of i's and ii's to build up it's experience and knowledge as they were simpler in design and simpler to build and use.

The Mark I's and II's in their intiial designs were never supposed to have seen anywhere near as much action as they did so while yes they had face hardened steel, germany knew that they would always be of limited combat value and would be a stepping stone to where it really wanted to be.

Thus they were a tank to train germany's armed forces in tank warfare and train germanys industry in tank production.

FNG

 

Thanks guys for that info. I really like the APHE round because you will know if you hit the tank or not when it explodes (the tank).

 

No anti-tank round of WW2 absolutely guaranteed penetration upon impact with any known armour. In fact, that is probably still impossible to achieve. Most penetration tables consider a 2/3 penetration full.