Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

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


EnsignExpendable

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, DogDodger said:

As we discussed previously, the design itself was poor because it was known that the available materials were not up to the task. Spielberger says that a higher-strength steel was intended for the gears, but after this was "unexpectedly" replaced no alterations in the design were made (and depending on when this replacement occurred, alterations may have been impossible).

I wouldn't call it a bad design. Rather no other choice. I agree that from an engineering point of view the vehicle was not very suitable for the situation in 1944-45. That is, imo, the principal criticism of a panther.

 

Choosing the "right" type of vehicle would inevitably mean operating with inferior vehicles. The choice was therefore between larger share of vehicles stuck out of action due to repairs and larger share destroyed in combat. Both versions decrease battle performance and ultimately result in an undesired situation. I can't say to what extent. From a (German) military point of view, the former is imo preferable. It is much harder to replace good crews. Those can compensate for numbers as well as equipment attrition. Weaker vehicles require greater numbers, greater numbers consume more fuel and potentially more spare parts.

 

The question is then, whether Daimler Benz prototype wouldn't decrease performance as much. It could be a plausible choice for 1944, if it could compensate for a lack of artillery and air support on the battlefield. So this is my opinion, design was not a problem. Evaluating German choices, one comes faster to the conclusion that war shouldn't continue beyond 1943, than to a design change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, delete013 said:

I wouldn't call it a bad design. Rather no other choice. I agree that from an engineering point of view the vehicle was not very suitable for the situation in 1944-45. That is, imo, the principal criticism of a panther.

 

Choosing the "right" type of vehicle would inevitably mean operating with inferior vehicles. The choice was therefore between larger share of vehicles stuck out of action due to repairs and larger share destroyed in combat. Both versions decrease battle performance and ultimately result in an undesired situation. I can't say to what extent. From a (German) military point of view, the former is imo preferable. It is much harder to replace good crews. Those can compensate for numbers as well as equipment attrition. Weaker vehicles require greater numbers, greater numbers consume more fuel and potentially more spare parts.

 

The question is then, whether Daimler Benz prototype wouldn't decrease performance as much. It could be a plausible choice for 1944, if it could compensate for a lack of artillery and air support on the battlefield. So this is my opinion, design was not a problem. Evaluating German choices, one comes faster to the conclusion that war shouldn't continue beyond 1943, than to a design change.

 

Literally no one here cares what you would call it.

 

It was a bad design.

 

(Don't think I didn't notice the horrendous false dichotomy you threw in there - "it was a choice between being reliable and being combat effective". Bullshit that does not deserve to be addressed, like 80% of everything you say.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:

And for reference, here is Noak's commentary from the later period. Final drive and track failures come back with a vengeance (yes, I'm suuure all of your final drives, the tiny targets that they are were miraculously hit by enemy artillery and that is why they failed).

 

 

SdK1dIi.png

It is even stated! Perhaps not all but clearly enough to be exposed as a reason. Why would he lie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

Literally no one here cares what you would call it.

If you don't care, why do you respond?

7 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

(Don't think I didn't notice the horrendous false dichotomy you threw in there - "it was a choice between being reliable and being combat effective". Bullshit that does not deserve to be addressed, like 80% of everything you say.)

Oh why? Because reliability of Allied tanks killed so many panzers in ww2?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, delete013 said:

If you don't care, why do you respond?

Oh why? Because reliability of Allied tanks killed so many panzers in ww2?

More like killed a bunch of Germans. And encircled German armies. And darkened German skies with long-range aircraft. Reliability and availability (ie: numbers at the fight, on the move, pressing the advantage) are more or less the sina quo non of industrial warfare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, delete013 said:

Where is the logic here? Germans have no pathological need to prove themselves and their tools better than everyone else. Have you even met a German in your life?

I think "Yes, Minister" had the pithiest answer to this conundrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, delete013 said:

Where is the logic here? Germans have no pathological need to prove themselves and their tools better than everyone else. Have you even met a German in your life?

 

This is also humble Nazi reporting... On 29th April 1945 Karl Körner from SS S.Pz.Abt 503 was awarded a Knight's cross for destruction of over 100 tanks in the past week including an encounter in which he claimed destruction of 39 tanks in  matter of several minutes (that was supposed to be part of an encounter in which his platoon of three Königstigers allegedly destroyed 11 IS-2 and 120-150 T-34 at once, i.e. roughly 3 brigades destroyed with 3 tanks). 

 

Not John Rambo, not even Topper Harley could do this. With all seriousness the only person ever walking this Earth capable of something like that is Chuck Norris and he's the only one. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, delete013 said:

Where is the logic here? Germans have no pathological need to prove themselves and their tools better than everyone else. Have you even met a German in your life?


This is quite telling. We’re talking about Nazi’s, which are most definitely different from Germans. I would know, my Jewish great grandparents left Germany in the 30s to get away from them... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lord_James said:


This is quite telling. We’re talking about Nazi’s, which are most definitely different from Germans. I would know, my Jewish great grandparents left Germany in the 30s to get away from them... 

 

He knows full well he generalized to "Germans" to avoid confronting the fact that the Nazis were perhaps the most mendacious nation to have ever blighted the face of planet earth.

 

What's most amusing is that he sees this as some deft maneuver which he performed on us, instead of an amateur mistake that we're going to absolutely gobble him up for.

 

When we finally do drive him off the forum with his little rat tail between his legs, he'll tell himself he chose to leave because he got bored, but lying to himself won't help then, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Beer said:

 

This is also humble Nazi reporting... On 29th April 1945 Karl Körner from SS S.Pz.Abt 503 was awarded a Knight's cross for destruction of over 100 tanks in the past week including an encounter in which he claimed destruction of 39 tanks in  matter of several minutes (that was supposed to be part of an encounter in which his platoon of three Königstigers allegedly destroyed 11 IS-2 and 120-150 T-34 at once, i.e. roughly 3 brigades destroyed with 3 tanks). 

 

Not John Rambo, not even Topper Harley could do this. With all seriousness the only person ever walking this Earth capable of something like that is Chuck Norris and he's the only one. 

 

 

I also think these numbers are extreme. I'm not sure historians are clear on what happened there. To my info Körner encountered dozens of tanks rearming and refueling in a counter attack. There he could have begged many. I would never choose such unclear case to prove some point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, delete013 said:

I also think these numbers are extreme. I'm not sure historians are clear on what happened there. To my info Körner encountered dozens of tanks rearming and refueling in a counter attack. There he could have begged many. I would never choose such unclear case to prove some point.

 

It's not unclear case. It's complete nonsense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Lord_James said:


This is quite telling. We’re talking about Nazi’s, which are most definitely different from Germans. I would know, my Jewish great grandparents left Germany in the 30s to get away from them... 

..and those Nazis suddenly changed profile with the new state? This breaks some established sociological theories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sturgeon said:

Yes, they killed most of them that were ever built.

Wait, where are accusations of horrible reliability? Weren't half blown up by their crews or captured in workshops?

 

Allied tactics tell me that what they destroyed was mostly artillery, air support or tank destroyers...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, delete013 said:

Wait, where are accusations of horrible reliability? Weren't half blown up by their crews or captured in workshops?

 

Allied tactics tell me that what they destroyed was mostly artillery, air support or tank destroyers...

 

Do have dementia? Be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

he'll tell himself he chose to leave because he got bored, but lying to himself won't help then, either.

You may ask nicely for me to stay away from ww2 topics and let you and your minions use them for entertainment. That was partially their intent, was it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...