Best Tank of WW2??????

There are many classes and types of Tanks and AFVs. Like tankette, armoured reconnaissance, fast tank, cruiser tank, cavalry tank, assault tank, infantry tank, light tank, medium tank, heavy tank, super-heavy tank. Not to mention tank destroyers,self propelled guns,assualt guns which people tend to confuse with tanks. And try to compare all as a whole. Some were good in thier intended roles and some not.

 

Must have been some tough 50km

Was this Bn's breakdown rate typical? I know the Heavy Panzer Battalion usually operate at company strength due to mechanical failures, but I have always thought it was accumulated over several marches.

What a dog!

 

Imagine what logistical support they might have in winter in Poland in the middle of nowhere. Still surprised? Who else was attacking, what movement was this?

Look up the Tiger II "March of the Elephants" in Wach am Rhein...

 

Sir , that's the same tank i was talking about! , But i think you splet the name wrong. It's Panzerjager IV
She carried a very long {L/70} 75mm gun and she was regonized as being a deadley menace to the American's and British Tanks, also cause of her height, she could easy be concealed. Maybe she should of became an ambush Tank?

 

Its not a Tank. It is a tank destroyer.

There are many classes and types of Tanks and AFVs. Like tankette, armoured reconnaissance, fast tank, cruiser tank, cavalry tank, assault tank, infantry tank, light tank, medium tank, heavy tank, super-heavy tank. Not to mention tank destroyers,self propelled guns,assualt guns which people tend to confuse with tanks. And try to compare all as a whole. Some were good in thier intended roles and some not.

 

You could of fouled me, she looks like a miniture Tank. Yes thanks ok , she's a Tank Destoryer. I also think she could of been used as an Ambush Tank Destoryer!

 

"A self-propelled anti-tank gun, or tank destroyer, is a type of armoured fighting vehicle designed specifically to engage enemy armor forces, and not produced for an infantry support role. Most have been traditionally defined and produced as a tank like vehicle with only light armor and capable of a higher transit speed, usually possessing high maneuverability whose main gun is not turret mounted and so cannot rotate horizontally. Aiming in the horizontal plane is achieved by maneuvering the vehicle proper in the turretless models. In theory, tank destroyers are fast in order to maneuver ahead of advancing enemy armor, set an ambush, then sting and move using its superior speed to a new ambush position.[1] Some highly successful models such as the United States' WW-II era M18 Hellcat tank destroyer had both turreted and the cheaper, faster to produce turretless versions.[1]
Tank destroyers are used primarily to provide anti-tank support in combat operations but do not fit all the criteria of a tank. They may mount a high-velocity anti-tank gun but have an open turret, no turret at all or run on wheels instead of tracks. "

Tank destroyer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Sir, i understand you now, it is to help provide Surport against Aroumer Forces and not for Foot troops.

 

The best ww2 Tank is not the T-34 or the Tiger, which i looked up it's the Panzer IV arcording to the research Panzer IV has taken the title "ww2 best Tank"
The Tiger could also take on four or five times of it's own number of tanks.
The T-34 played a major part in the German defeat.

 

With exceptions I would generally say that is right.:grouphug:

 

I've got a colour picture of that Jagdpanzer parked up at Aberdeen - the bizarre paint-job is said to be it's original wartime scheme. Though it's hard to tell from the very faded colours the light splodges appear to be a pale grey (or even silver) colour, it's the one I show other modellers who think a given scheme looks 'odd' - if you put that on a model people'd think it looked ridiculous...

Is this not a 'Tank' then?


Cheers,
Adam.

 

A PzIV? What marque? What period of the war? What research? For instance, a PzIVd would get eaten alive by a T-34 (or a Matilda II for that matter).

 

I believe that is a general response, since the Mk IV was virtually an all round general workhorse that did well, and had many variations, alll good at what they did.

 

Regarding a T-34 taking on a tiger, it depends on a lot of things Tomcat. I don't think you can treat it as simply as you placed it. If I was a t-34 commander and had my tank concealed I'd take a tiger with a flank shot it I could... I don't think we can generalise that much...
And I can understand why the PzIV was considered the best tank of the war... It was there from the beginning to the end and was always a credible threat.


Cheers...

 

It was based in a very broad way, based on a head to head, with no advantages to either side. As I said in a previous post, it depends on the situation, and since every battle is different, every battle needs its own plan. To use your example with surprise, sure take the shot you might get lucky, but if the roles were reversed, well there is no more to say. On a head to head, I wouldn't, even on a two to one ratio I would be hesitant.

After all
"The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other B*****d die for his" General Patton.

How do you compare which tank is better in any regard? Does it depend on the terrain, or who is attacking who? Does it matter with numbers, or who gets the surprise? Basically how do you tell which tank is really better then another?

I believe it to be a head to head with no terrain(flat lands) with no advantage to either one. But of course in battle it doesn't work like that.

 

Unfortunately, it makes no sense since the PzIV was an infantry support tank with a short 75mm artillery piece until about 1942 when it took over the PzIIIs medium tank role with the long 75mm gun and its far superior anti-tank capability. By which time of course the T-34 is being upgunned and uparmoured. In essence, you're saying that the PzIV is the best tank of WWII despite never actually being the best tank in the field.

 

U. R. Evil Of course it's a b***dy tank, even if of the fair gender, ze problem is that it predates the abovegiven definition.

Sir, you are disruption incarnate.

 

And that's why we love you
(in a nice manly way that is)


Cheers...

 

--
Tanks?

So that definition only begins with turreted 'Tanks'?
FT17's contemporary... and even Little Willie had a turret for a while (Still looking for more than the 1 picture I have of that by the way, the shot I've got has a tarp over the turret - If anyone has seen another of it fitted I'd be very interested.).


~A