Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Pershing v Panther

Discussion in 'Western Europe 1943 - 1945' started by Gromit801, Apr 27, 2011.

  1. Gromit801

    Gromit801 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,247
    Likes Received:
    134
    syscom3 likes this.
  2. Gebirgsjaeger

    Gebirgsjaeger Ace

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,333
    Likes Received:
    289
    Good site, know this since a few months!
     
  3. CPL Punishment

    CPL Punishment Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    44
    Fantastic forensic video work, research, and analysis on Dierk's part, whoever he is. I'm going to email my thanks to Dierk.

    I think the enhanced video shows an MP-40 SMG being held by one hand of the tank commander just outside and against the rim of his cupola. He's got a grip on it but it's not immediately positioned to fire. Perhaps he is worried about an American bazooka gunner appearing suddenly from behind the cover of the surrounding buildings to shoot his tank at close range. To counter this possibility he would need some kind of small arm, and an MP-40 would be much easier to handle from a tank hatch than a KAR-98 rifle or a StG-44 assault rifle.
     
  4. CPL Punishment

    CPL Punishment Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    44
    I have often wondered why a pintle-mounted MG-34, or something similar, wasn't standard equipment on German tanks. The bow gun is nice, but who approaches an enemy tank from the front if he can go around the side? The bow gun on a Panther only could slew about 30 degs horizontally. Given the restricted vision and the cramped field of fire I'm willing to bet that WW2 bow gunners in every army hardly paid their way. The Centurion tank was designed in 1943-1944 and entered production in January 1945. When the first Centurion hit the ground in Belgium in May 1945, it was probably the best tank in the Allied inventory, Russian tanks included. And guess what? No bow gunner. All of them had a coaxial MG (usually an American .30 Browning) and many had a pintle-mounted MG as well (again, usually the old reliable 30 cal).

    German assault guns usually had a pintle-mount MG. But this may be because the StuGs were under the artillery department, so different officers than the panzer leaders were making the decisions about secondary armament on the assault guns. The panzersjagers were under the control of the tank arm of the Wehrmacht, and they lacked effective MGs just like the tanks. In some cases like the Ferdinand, the lack of an MG made the vehicle a total failure.
     
  5. bigdunc

    bigdunc Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    Was the Krummlauf with the 90 degree bend developed to solve this problem?
     
  6. Dcazz7606

    Dcazz7606 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2010
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    In Hunnicutt's Pershing book there is a good honest comparison between the Panther, Tiger I and the Pershing. He states that all three tanks have the ability to kill the other and that all three have certain advantages over the other, he gives the Panther the top rated spot of the three. One interesting advantage the panther had was that the turret was mounted further back on the hull. Any ricochet off the front glacias plate was more likley to miss the turret mantlet and do serious damage. The Tiger I and Pershings turrets were mpounted forward and would sustain some degree of damage with a similar hit.
    Pershing was however much lower in sillouette and harder to hit. Also pershing was 4 tons lighter than Panther and 16 tons lighter than Tiger I. Panthers 75 was a better hole puncher than both the 88 and the 90mm. Ultimatly he rates the tanks in order of Panther, Pershing and TigerI.
     

Share This Page