EnsignExpendable

StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)

972 posts in this topic

Now, we are all in agreement that the best tank the Germans built was the StuG III.

 

u09XK5o.gif

 

But did you know that the Germans had other vehicles? It's true! You should talk about them here.

 

Links you should click:

Our Problem Child: Rossmum on the Panther tank

Germany's White Elephant, a look at the Tiger tank in theory and practice

Tiger II: A Royal Pain

An overview of Germany's armour quality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the Jagdpanther fixed the final drive issues of the Panther is it still a bad tank?

I know the Jagdpanther had an improved final drive but is there good evidence that it was completely "fixed?"  I think there is a british report on a captured Jagdpanther that showed that they had issues with the final drive.  But I may have remembered that incorrectly.  Anyone remember that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the Jagdpanther had an improved final drive but is there good evidence that it was completely "fixed?"  I think there is a british report on a captured Jagdpanther that showed that they had issues with the final drive.  But I may have remembered that incorrectly.  Anyone remember that?

 

I've read that since the Jagdpanther used the final drive from the Panther II the problems with them were fixed. I may be misremembering so feel free to correct me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read that since the Jagdpanther used the final drive from the Panther II the problems with them were fixed. I may be misremembering so feel free to correct me.

 

 

I think you are misremembering.

 

A lot of the changes made to the panther Ausf G were in order to rationalize jagdpanther production.  For instance, the hull sides of the panther Ausf G are less sloped, but thicker than the hull sides on the Ausf D and Ausf A.  This was because the hull sponson sides were too sloped on those to blend into a hull casemate like the jagdpanther's.

 

I presume, therefore, that the improved final drives in the jagdpanther were the same as the improved final drives in the panther Ausf G; which is to say, the housings for the final drives were beefed up so they flexed less.  I believe that the drives themselves were more or less the same.

 

Panther II was supposed to have tiger/tiger II drivetrain components, possibly including the final drives, I'm not sure.  Panther II was substantially different from a regular panther.  The one in the Patton museum is dimensioned differently enough that most standard panther components won't fit, or so I've read.  Also, the suspension is different, much more like a tiger II's with single rather than double torsion bars and only two layers of road wheels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh.

 

Walter had come up with a theory that the rangefinder setup in the M47/T42 was based on the panther F or the late-war tiger II with a similar arrangement.

 

Any sources that say yea or nay?  It seems plausible to me, and would mark one of the few design features of the panther that anyone copied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh.

 

Walter had come up with a theory that the rangefinder setup in the M47/T42 was based on the panther F or the late-war tiger II with a similar arrangement.

 

Any sources that say yea or nay?  It seems plausible to me, and would mark one of the few design features of the panther that anyone copied.

Not sure I ever said that the American system was based on the system found in Panther F.  I might have said the Germans were the first to come up with a system of that style.  I have no idea if the American designers copied the system from the Germans.  However, it is plausible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope someone with actual sense buys it or see it donated to some museum. 

 

But, knowing that it is a Tiger, I know some lunatic is probably going to buy it in order to summon the ghost of Rommel. 

 

 

Yeah, that's just crazy. I wonder where he got it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's just crazy. I wonder where he got it?

It probably was forgotten about in some shack after the war after being immobilized or destroyed. 

 

Also do you all think the vehicle being described is the Jagdpanzer 38(t)? The paper is from summer of '44. 

Fcvjh7A.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It probably was forgotten about in some shack after the war after being immobilized or destroyed. 

 

Also do you all think the vehicle being described is the Jagdpanzer 38(t)? The paper is from summer of '44. 

Fcvjh7A.png

 

Heavy, squat and pretentious looking? Seems like the average poster on the Off topic section.

EnsignExpendable likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Err, why are you thinking Jagd 38T instead of nashorn?

 

Heavy, squat and pretentious looking? Seems like the average poster on the Off topic section.

The Nashorn doesn't come off as squat and pretentious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Nashorn doesn't come off as squat and pretentious. 

 

Have you ever been to a Nashorn's book party or had to stand behind one at Starbuck's when it is ordering a coffee? Let me tell you where that tank destroyer can stick its Panzerabwehrkanone 43/1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever been to a Nashorn's book party or had to stand behind one at Starbuck's when it is ordering a coffee? Let me tell you where that tank destroyer can stick its Panzerabwehrkanone 43/1

I personally have never been invited to a Nashorn book party nor ever been to Starbucks. However I know that the Jagdpanzer IV is pretty squat and could very well be pretentious enough to be the "rhinoceros". I'm starting to think the Hetzer is too light. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there is a handy dandy means of determining which is the case, that being that words have meanings, and rhinocerous and nashorn refer to the same animal. Other than that it's tall boxy and grey which is the height of pretension, especially when it doesn't have the armor to be a box tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there is a handy dandy means of determining which is the case, that being that words have meanings, and rhinocerous and nashorn refer to the same animal. Other than that it's tall boxy and grey which is the height of pretension, especially when it doesn't have the armor to be a box tank.

Tall is usually not a synonym for squat though, which is why I doubt it is talking about the Nashorn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now