German Tank Development

I respectfully disagree with point one.

In early 1942 Germany produced the 38t (nearly useless), Pz III (limited value) and Pz IV all at the same time.

Germany produced the Stug III, which was perfectly acceptable in the role, yet saw fit to produce over 1,100 Stug IV's with limited performance improvement and both produced at the same time. Added to this we must count 38 Sturmpanzer I's, 12 Sturmpanzer II's, 300 Sturmpanzer IV's, 18 Sturmtigers. same task no commonality.

The 90 Ferdinand/Elephant's were a waste of resources, and something of a deathtrap when first deployed.

Germany produced 170 Marder I's, 700 Marder II's, 1,700 Marder III's, 500 Hornisse/Nashorn's No commonality yet the same fuction.

3,000 Hetzer, 1,800 Jagdpanzer IV's, 90 Elephants, 400 Jagdpanthers, 80 Jagdtigers same task, no commanality

The 500 Tiger II's were at best only a slight improvement over the Tiger I's

While the Allies had variants as well, they had the excess production capacity to pursue such products, Germany did not.

 

Looking at it again I can see the reasons for keeping to one medium tank, after all the Allies kept faith with the Sherman for all its faults and the Russians kept there T-34s in production (being up gunned with a new turret) maybe it makes good sence to just keep the Pz Mk IV as your main medium tank, at least you know that spares and replacement vehicles could be maintained, another thing also the factories in Czechoslovakia could keep you well provided with tank chassis for SPGs and that would not complecate things on the German production lines, keeping on producing Pz Mk IIIs and the bigger Panthers and Tigers I & II plus all the other must have been a great strain on the German war machine, and thats before they got bombed to hell.

 

IMO the German wartime production was standardized on a limited number of vehicles, basically they had in production only seven turretted tanks over six years as the Pz 35(t) and Pz I were already out of production at war start
Let's do a comparaison, not that easy as some "evolutionary" changes within the same model are more significant than official "new" models.

- Germany [7 Models over 6 years], No more than 3 were in production at the same time.
--- Two "Heavy" Tiger I, Tiger II
--- Three "Mediums" Pz III, Pz IV, Pz V
--- Two "lights" Pz 38(t), Pz II

- USA [5 Models over 4 years]
--- One "heavy" M26
--- Two "Mediums" M3 and M4
--- Two "lights" M3 and M5 Light (not different enough to qualify as different models), Chafee.

- USSR [8 Models over 6 years], But if you look at the 1941-45 period you are left with just four
--- Two "Heavy" KV-1 and JSII (but thje transition from KV to JS was nearly an evolution)
--- Two "Mediums" T28, T34
--- Four "Lights" BT-7, T26, T60 and T70 lights

[UK/Commowealth 10 Models over 6 years]
--- Three "Infantry" Matilda II, Valentine and Churchill (Matilda I was out of production and the major redesign of the Churchill still qualifies as "evolutionary"
--- Five "Cruisers" A9, A10, A13, Covenanter and Crusader (the later is basically a partly debugged Covenanter), Cromwell and Comet (too similar to qualify as different models and the Challenger was limited production), RAM
--- one "light" MK VI.

Italy [3 Models over 3 years]
Two "Mediums" M-13/40 and M-15/42 (the M-14/41 was just a partly debugged M-13)
One "Light" L-6

IIRC Japan produced only one "Medium" and a couple of lights in any sort of quantity.

Possibly the Luchs qualifies as well but as it was a very specialized vehicle with a limited production run, for the same reason I leave out the Locust and Tetrarch.
Very late arrivals like the Centurion and JS III or Italian P-40 are also left out.

I was in doubt about the "TD" chassis (M-10 / M-36 and Hellcat) but decided they were really very specialized variants.

The Elephants were a decent use of 90 pre-production chassis for a refused model, looking at the number of T-34s claimed by them they were far from a waste though possibly not as cost effective as an similar number of Tiger I (or even much more economcal Nashorns) would have been.

The main "peculiarity" of German production is that obsolescent and obsolete chassis production lines were not closed but dedicated to other vehicles (assault and SP guns), the allies usually had enough "modern" chassis not to to that though there were exceptions like the Archer and SU-76.

 

Nice breakdown, apart from the Pz Mk I did the Germans keep producing Pz Mk II chassis for Wesp and Marders, or were they stopped.

 

About early 1942,the question should be :why were the Germans still producing the 38 t and the PzIII?Maybe because the production of the Pz IV still was to low ?
38 t(in 1942): january :59
:february :61
:march : 28
:april : 0
:may :21
:june : 26
Pz III(same months):
:159
:216
:244
:246
:246
:228
Pz IV :
59
58
8
80
85
72
Thus for the first half of 1942,we have
Pz 38 :195
Pz III:1340
Pz IV :362 .
Total :1897
If the production of the Pz 38 and the Pz III was stopped,the total production only would be :362,unless,there are proofs that by stopping Pz 38 and the Pz III,more Pz IV (and how much more?) could be produced .I think this is very improbable.My guess is that the Germans were continuing the Pz 38 (till the end of june) and the Pz III,because the Pz IV production was to low .
Would that not be the same for other armies ?
Ex:when the (British) infantry Mark III production started,would the production of the infantry Mark II be stopped ?

 

I believe the PzKw II line was shutdown to make room for the Panzer III production. Existing PzKw II tanks were converted to other platforms rather than new hulls produced. The Mark II, like the Mark I, was always intended as a training tank only, the Panzer III and IV being the "real deal" in the eyes of the OKW staff. They had some success in the Spanish Civil War mainly because the Republican forces were poorly equipped in every department of 20th century combat, but that didn't give the leadership of the Wehrmacht much comfort as to the Panzer II's utility when up against a first-class European army. Remember that several OKW staff officer specialists in panzerwaffe theory had trained in Russia and had seen the direction tank development was headed, i.e. away from the lightly armed and armored cavalry tank (the Panzer II was the only German-made tank which fitted this largely British AFV concept) and towards something more along the lines of a main battle tank. The fact that Panzer IIs were used in Poland was just another example of the unpreparedness of the Wehrmacht in 1939, which Hitler ignored when he ordered the invasion.

BTW, only the Marder II used a PzKw II hull. The Marder I was a conversion of a French artillery tractor, and the Marder III used the Skoda-built 38(t) as its basis.

 

AFAIK the Pz 11 was designed to supplement the Pz 1 by providing a weapon which could fire either armour piercing or high explosive rounds it was issued to cmpany platoon leaders and company commanders, They were later relagated to a reconnaissance role in the West. In 1942 these vehicles were withdrawn from tank companies, But remaind in service with various panzer regiments on secondary fronts until the end of the War

 

AFAIK the Pz III was also initially designated a zugfuhrerwagen (platoon leader tank) but I suspect this was a deception, the Pz IV was designated battallionfuhrerwagen which would make you suppose there would only be a half dozen per division. Initially, because of very low initial production the Pz III were spread very thin, even in the French campaign some panzer divisions had no Pz III. AFAIK the Pz II was always intended as a recon and training tank but was put in mass production when it became obvious that Pz III output could not fully equip the units before 1941 at best.
Putting both III and IV in production was a lucky choice, even if apparently it sacrificed standardisation, (the British 3" armed CS variiants had a similar role to the IV without needing a different chassis). But while the III was intended to equip 3/4 of the tank force it's production lagged behind initially so the IV production helped give the Panzer divisions at least some true mediums in the intial campaigns, I very much doubt Krupp would have been better than Daimler Benz at producing it's competitor's vehicle though they did pretty well with their own Pz IV.
AFAIK the Pz IV production was cut back in late 1940 as sufficient numbers were available to equip all existing units.
When it was discovered that the III could not take a big enough gun to take on the Soviet tanks the roles were switched and the last Pz III produced where equipped with the 75/L24 of the original Pz IV.

 

663 Pz 111 ausf N's were produced from June 1942 to August 1943 plus 37 converted from rebuilt Pz 111's carrying the 7.5 cm L/24 gun

 

In 1939,743 Pz were built (not including befPz)
In 1940:1515 +184 StuG
In 1941:3114 +548 StuG
In 1942:4276 +823 StuG
In 1943:5663 +3312 StuG
In 1944:7975 +6208 StuG

What also is important is the weight:
German Armoured Vehicles Production in tonnes
1940:37235
1941:83188
1942:140454
1943:369416
1944:622322

 

Tos makes some excellent points in his post, but I respectfully disagree on some points. The Ferdinand/Elephant represent both the best and worst aspects of German AFV production. Turning the 90 chassis's into Jagdpanzers seems reasonable at first glance, but had to be taken due to the arrogance of designer who started production before a prototype design was chosen. It would have not been so bad had they not been sent into battle with inferior close in defences. How you could make this kind of mistake after 3 years at war, 2 of them in Russia, shows a disturbing lack of quality control in design. While placing a 88mm gun in a heavily armord mobile (more or less) chassis would certainly demand the respect of any opponent, but would not the same number of guns in a towed configuration get pretty much the same number of kills, plus destroyed/damaged aircraft, at a fraction of the cost to build, maintain and operate?

Much of Germany's tank production show similar aspects.

Pzkw 38t.

When Germany took over the Skoda works, completing the units under production for the Czech army made sense. Keeping it in production until the invasion of France made sense, up to a point, But after the 1940 summer campaign it was completely clear that the 38t had reached the end of its usefull life as a frontline unit. Production should have stopped, with the plant retooling for ideally the Pzkw IV. Fewer tanks in the short term, better tanks in the long run.

Pzkw III.

By December 1941 the Pz III was showing its limitations yet remained in production for over a year and 2,000 units. It too should have been phased out sooner and plants retooled for Stug III's or Pz IV's

Stug III.

With the long 75mm gun deployed in 1942, the various other Stug's, PanzerJagers, Jagdpanzers really did not offer much of an improvement for the cost. They should have stuck with Stug IIIF/G.

 

The 38t was a Czech invention. Germany took over the production after invasion. Not sure it should apply as a " German tank development". They used it well and was a capable tank for it's time.

 

There were some advantages to phasing out the StuG III, and replacing it with the StuG IV:
1) Leaf spring suspension was quicker and cheaper to build than the torsion bar suspension used in the PzKw III and its derivatives
2) Leaf spring suspension allowed more internal space for ammo
3) One factory could be used to produce both StuG IVs and PzKw IVs, whereas only StuG IIIs could be built on one assembly line,* the PzKw III being obsolete

I agree that continued production of the PzKw 38(t) was ill-advised, however the Hetzer was a highly successful vehicle. Mechanically simple and reliable, and well-liked by its crews the Hetzer offered all the advantages of a towed anti-tank gun in a protected self-propelled package. It's gun wasn't nearly as hard-hitting as the PaK 43, but the targets and fighting ranges on the Western Front didn't require that kind of power to be effective. Shutting down Skoda to re-tool for PzKw IV production would be a hard call, and a lot of field commanders would likely protest.

One problem faced by German planners (geez, one problem out of millions) is the limitations of the StuG as a weapons platform. The KwK 40 L/48 was the most powerful gun that could be mounted on a StuG and yet remain a practical weapon. This was all that was required on the Western Front, in the East, however, AFVs like the SU-100 and the JS-II that were generally immune to that gun, were beginning to appear. What was called for was a self-propelled carriage for the Pak 43, namely the Jagdpanther (a superior home for that gun IMAO, the King Tiger being so costly to produce). The panzerwaffe staff had to prepare for coming threats as well as meet the current threat. Seen from this perspective it would be very hard to put all of Germany's eggs in the StuG III basket.

Lately I've used a lot of words making the case for reducing the diversity of AFV types in the German army in favor of greatly increased Panzer IV production, and here I am arguing that Skoda (a very efficient manufacturer) should not have been re-tooled for PzKw/StuG IV production. It just goes to show that we armchair generals, who tend to be so much more decisive than our shooting war counterparts, can be inconsistent as well. Dr. Johnson once remarked that a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. I think he was just being obstreperous, but perhaps he was on to something.

*I use the term assembly line in a less than rigorous manner. The Germans never got the hang of American style mass-production, even after Speer took over the ministry.

 

Ahem...CPL , surely obstreperous might be overstating a tad. I'd go with fractious. Perhaps intractable. Indocile even... But please, let's not incite the natives.

 

Thus I refute Poppy! (CPL Punishment kicks Poppy in the head)

 

About the Ferdinand-Elephant :The German Author K.H.Frieser gives a more nuanced picture.
The ferdinand was in fact an improvisationorsche had lost the battle with Henschel for the development of a heavy tank:the army selected the Tiger .The 90 available chassis were used to build a transition Jagdpanzer(the production of the Jagdpanther was delayed).As gun was used the 8.8 cm PAK 43/2 L/71(later also used for the Jagdpanther and Tiger II,in modified form).This gun was the best in WWII.
The problem was logistic :there were not enough spare parts .
That the engagement of the Ferdinand at Kursk was a failure,was due,not to the construction of the Ferdinand ,but,to its use .The Ferdinand was essentially a defensive weapon,but was committed to the leading attack units.He succeeded to go far,but,no other German units could follow him ,and,without protection from the infantry,the Ferdinand was very vulnerable .
But,when he was used as a Jagdpanzer(in a defensive function),he was very effective .

 

Didnt the Pz Mk III N/M end up it the early Tiger formations as an Infantry Support Tank and the Pz Mk II end up it Artillery Regimental HQs.

 

I've never encountered that information before, though it seems likely to me since the PzKw III ausf. N carried the 75mm Kwk 37, a gun specifically designed for infantry support. Swapping roles between the Panzer III and the Panzer IV seems an ironic reversal of pre-war planning, but it would be a practical use of available resources since the turret ring of the PzKw III prevented acceptance of a gun as powerful as the KwK 40 L/43, the minimum for anti-tank fighting after 1941. Unless the Panzer III was adapted to infantry support, there would have been nothing to do except re-manufacturer them into StuGs or miscellaneous "carriers," or scrap them altogether. As early model Panzer IV's were upgraded to G or H standard, there would have been hundreds of Kwk 37's lying around and available to be given new homes in Panzer IIIs.

The M model Panzer III as a support tank in a heavy tank battalion makes little sense to me, however, since that version carried the Kwk 39 L/60, a high-velocity 50mm gun designed to fire solid shot.

 

Panzer IIs were used well into 1942 or longer.

When Germans invaded Russia in 1941 there were still hundreds of Panzer IIs in service.

 

The Germans attacked in june 1941 with 746 PzII.In the 3th quarter of 1941,the PzII production was 71,in the 4th quarter 113.The Pz II was produced till 31 july 1942:for 1942 :276.