Tiger

For a second, just a second, I thought 'what is this'? Then I read:

"The kill ratio for the TigerI was assest by the American intelligence after ww2 by looking at German Confirmed kills and confirmed losses.... "

Then I smiled. There is no such thing as 'German Confirmed kills and confirmed losses'. Such a document does not exist.
Jentz, not normaly reticent in singing the praises of the Tiger, makes no mention of such a report.
It is not mentioned in any of the 40+ titles I have that are on the Tiger alone.
Nor have I seen it in any of the 100's of titles I have on Panzers in general.
Neither is it in any of the 100's of memiors or unit histories I have.
Again it is not mentioned in any accounts of the tank battles in the West in any book I have read.

The reason I want a page number is so I can access the original.

As for:

"By the way, I'll have nothing of your smart mouth mister. As forum Admin I am supposed to enforce the rules of this board and I will. Present your sources to us before you make more claims,"

I really have no idea what you are asking. I am not making the claims. Other people are and I have told them why I think they are wrong.
Now if someone can come along and say a claim of 5:1/10:1 is proven by figures in 'BOOK B' then we can start checking the primary source. Until then all we have is someone saying what they believe and that is not the same as fact.

Quote:

"please make sure they have some substantial evidence in favour of your statement that the 10:1 average kill ratio of the Tiger is not correct"

OK I explain that there simply was not that number of tanks lost in Normandy (thus showing even 5:1 was not 'the norm') and you still insist you want proof.
The claim was advanced by Lyndon. He provided but 3 sources for his claim.
TIC I/II
'Combat History Of sPzAbt.503'

Having all these I can tell you there is no such claim in either book.
TIC has a one line entry at the end of each section where it simply says 'The total score was X enemy tanks'
There is no note or reference to how this figure was calculated.
Lyndon then adds up how many Tigers Schneider says were 'abandoned and he subtracts this total from the number of Tigers lost.
Then he arrives at his (note, this is Lyndons figure) total and 10:1 ratio.
He could have saved himself the trouble as Ron Klages has gone through TIC I/II and done the same calculations on the loss claims for the Tiger.


Quote:

"By the way, I'll have nothing of your smart mouth mister"

Indeed I am chastised. I ask where a dubious figure can be confirmed and I am told I have to prove a lower total!
I have made my opinion known and it is encumbent on those reading it to make there own minds up on the subject.
I look forward to Lyndon's return.

 

Okay, thank you M.Kenny. It is clear to me now.

Still, why would you focus on the Normandy campaign when it's about Tigers? So few Tigers served there, and it was such horrible tank country, that it makes no representation of the combat value of any tank, let alone the Tiger.

 

I talk about Normandy because that is what I know about. It is obvious to me that German kill claims for Normandy were inflated. Further the number of tanks credited to Wittmann in Normandy is simply not possible. Therefore it is obvious that German checking systems for kill claims is not infallible. They could, and did, get it wrong and it I simply can't understand why some posters simply will not accept this was possible.
Tigers were formidable weapons but not supertanks.
Russian kill claims should be questioned as well. Soviet tank production would not allow these high kill rates either.

 

Oh i thought you were talking about the intire war......... :lol:

certainly sometimes German kill rates should be questioned but even more so should the Russian ones, the Russians seriusly overrate their kill rates.........!!!!

 

I believe the point is that it is impossible to calculate how inflated the claims were. Maybe the Soviets in general inflated their claims more than the Germans, but how are you going to prove it ?

 

As i remember it the kill rate for german tanks in france in general was about 4 or 5:1 ... for tigers this must have been higher..

Regards, KBO

 

"1 T34/85 knocks out 3 KingTiger's" yeah right...........there's no proof other than russian propoganda, and russian propoganda would say the most incredible things.

KBO

 

And what are you talking about now, KBO ?

 

Im just prooving why russian kill ratio tales shouldnt be trusted.... wasnt that what you asked me about...????

Best regards, KBO

 

No kill rate should be trusted.

"As i remember it the kill rate for german tanks in france in general was about 4 or 5:1 ... for tigers this must have been higher"


Well as some 1500+ German AFV's were lost in Normandy that means 6000+ Allied losses!
Fantasy.

 

No, I asked you how you could prove that Soviet claims were more inflated than German ones.

And as we are talking about propaganda; How many times did the German propaganda machinery sink the Ark Royal ?

 

Hey are we talking about losses to enemy tanks or just losses coursed by air, AT guns and infantry ?????

KBO

 

Im talking about german tanks lost to allied tanks and allied tanks lost to german tanks !!!!

KBO

 

Oh you have a method of sorting out different kills! Brilliant. Give me the details.
PS.
did any Allied tanks get mined or knocked out by Infantry and A/T guns as well?

 

What i am saying is alot of german armor was lost both to airpower and infantry, or just because the crew left their tank because it had run out of fuel or had broken down because of low maintanence, this didnt happen as often to allied armor....

Btw sry for my lousy english...

KBO

 

Perhaps, but AFVs are not just tanks. Also, the Allies did lose massive amounts of armour in Normandy, despite total air superiority, which accounted for many of their own kills.

 

Allied tanks lost June-September = 3100
German tanks lost June-September =1845

Which ever way you do the calculations the 5:1 ratio is not in the 'raw' figures.
Really this is a pointless exercise as no one can sort the actual loss of a tank by cause. However I think the real totals may suprise those who repeat these high kill claims.
The Germans fielded a huge number of SP guns v The Allied total of SP's. This would bring the ration down further.

 

Are you aware of how many german AFV's that were actually k'od by allied air power alone....???? thats something that would turn up the ration quite abit...........and ill bet everything that i got that there were a hell of alot more germans leaving there tanks because of either no fuel or brakedowns than there were allies doing the same (many times more)....

Regards, KBO

 

Less than half the Allied losses were caused by A/T guns or tank v tank combat.
German tanks destroyed by air attack was fairly low.

 

Oh the allied airpower had alot to say in france i can tell you, they might not have been the weapon that destroyed the most tanks but, they did their part pretty darn good ("Notice that on alot of pics of german AFV's moving in normandy, the crews are allmost allways scouting the air for allied fighterbombers")

But Still there were "Alot" of german crews just leaving their tanks, and allmost none allies did that... And most german armor was also destroyed by infantry...

KBO