New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

[FreakyDude]

Are we still talking about tank choice with 10:1 odds? If so, I have a couple.

I'd take ten M10 GMCs* against a Tiger I. Location can be just about anywhere besides a mudflat, although ideally in open, hilly country. Reason for my choice? The M10's 76mm gun was surprisingly good at cracking Tigers. Sure the M10's turret had to be manually cranked around, but the gun depression and the overall speed of the M10 meant that it was rather easy for a small group of them to flank and destroy even the toughest opponents. Besides, you never said which side of the 10:1 odds we had to be on

Alternatively, I'd take a Char B1 bis vs. anything the Germans can throw at me in early 1940. Location: Somewhere in France. Reason for choice? 60mm of armor, a 75mm howitzer, and a 47mm gun. If the Germans are lucky they'll have a few Panzer IIIs and Panzer IVs to throw at me. The Panzer III at the time mounted a 37mm gun in a body clad in 30mm of armor. The Panzer IV had the same armor thickness, but used a 75mm howitzer. But the Germans didn't have that many Panzer IIIs or IVs available during the invasion of France. In all likelihood the only things my bis would run up against would be Panzer IIs, Czech LT vz. 35s, and Czech LT vz 38s.


*Don't give me that crap about it being a Tank Destroyer. It mounts a gun in a fully rotating turret on a tracked chassis. It's a tank, no matter what the people at the time called it.

The only way an M10 does any damage to a Tiger is with an HVAP round and I do believe this needs to be close proximity, you can't cross 3000 meters that quickly. with a thin skin like the M10 you would need 20 to 1 odds unless i drive my Tiger into a trap. With that open turret I would just lob grenades at you. seriosly you would be better off in a tight forest or something, Open ground favours the Tiger too much.

Nuff said about the Char. there was a reason France was over run in what a week?

[panzerschreck]

This ones a bit of a no brainer IF the battle is defensive in nature (as opposed to mobile)

My choice would be Kingtiger

I can penetrate the frontal arc of a Sherman, Cromwell or T34 at 3500m+ (2.2miles)

I can penetrate the frontal arc of a IS-2 at 2600m (approx. 1 3/4 miles)

I have the most accurate gun coupled to the best set of gunnery optics on the planet

I have up to 185mm of armour over my frontal arc, which not even the British 17pdr or Soviet 122mm gun can penetrate (a cold fact, nobody ever killed a Kingtiger from the front)

So to quote a modern rap song "Can`t touch dis "

[mini_bolo]

The only way an M10 does any damage to a Tiger is with an HVAP round and I do believe this needs to be close proximity, you can't cross 3000 meters that quickly. with a thin skin like the M10 you would need 20 to 1 odds unless i drive my Tiger into a trap. With that open turret I would just lob grenades at you. seriosly you would be better off in a tight forest or something, Open ground favours the Tiger too much.

Nuff said about the Char. there was a reason France was over run in what a week?

HVAP from the front, sure. But the standard AP from the M10's 3 inch gun could penetrate the sides and rear of a Tiger just fine. Hilly terrain allows the M10 to use its superior gun depression to fire at the Tiger from hill tops while simultaneously giving the M10s plenty of cover as they relocate. Finally, the 3 inch gun is very accurate. The instant the Tiger traverses the turret to engage a M10, it will expose the weak side armor on the turret to the other M10s. As long as the M10s can get within 500 yards or so, the Tiger is going down.

As for the French question... Yes, there is a reason they were overrun so quickly. And it WASN'T because of their tanks. The problem was that Germany attacked in a completely unexpected way that overwhelmed the French Defenses. Keep in mind that the French and British forces had completely fallen for Germany's feint through Belgium and had advanced to meet the German assault through Belgium. When the Germans struck with their main force through the Ardennes, there was essentially nothing there to blunt their advance. Understand, the German tanks used in the French campaign were crap. The vast majority of the tanks used were Panzer IIs, 35(t)s, 38(t)s. Less than 10% of the German tanks used were Panzer IIIs and IVs. And at that time the Panzer III and IV could be penetrated by anti-tank rifles. The only reason the Germans succeeded was because while the French had their tanks split up into a thousand groups of three, the Germans had concentrated their tanks into three groups of a thousand.


PS: To the guy above me, there is one thing that could penetrate a King Tiger frontally. That thing was, oddly enough, a standard German panzerfaust. Just don't let any troops get near you . Oh, and don't show your sides. 80mm of armor. you'll be penetrated easily.

[Saxondog]

Nice point about the initial German strategy concerning the Invasion of France. Perhaps that would be another interesting post?

What if the French had redeployed and concentrated their armor,what would a mass tank battle look like in 1940? Which side would have the advantage? What types of Armor would other nations contribute? Belgium,UK.Netherlands? Did these nations even have an armored force?

And the aircraft issue is suspended. Strictly armor,who could field what,and how many to the fields of France?

[FreakyDude]

mini-bolo well thought out but there are a few issues.
Firstly to be effective the M10 has to be within 500 yards and I would have to have to be at the bottom of the hill in the open with an exposed side or rear for your attack to be successfull. Any tank commander worth his weight is not going to allow this. My tiger would be sitting at the top of a ridge/hill preferably in some cover. At 3,000 yards I can kill you with one shot and the German tanks had the optics not only to do it once but consistantly. 5 of your 10 are dead by the time you hit 2,000 yards.

As for the France thing my point was that the Char never gave a good account of itself against anything, there by making it a moot point. The French although having modern equipment and fair numbers did not excercise and were stuck in the old thoughts of trench warfare.

Saxondog for the reason above I suggest that if anything is changed as for the German entry point into France I think the Germans take some casualties but it is a forgone conclusion that they take the country and push any allied forces into the sea.
The simple fact that England although spearheading armor in the twenties basically dropped their advantage into the thirties ( look at the naval/airforce efforts though and you see a different picture). France never did any extensive excercises and what is even worse relied on a static line of defence with concrete gun emplacements. I don't think you needed to be a rocket scientist to see that the coming war was going to be different and considerably more mobile than past conflicts. Look at the spanish civil war as an example.

[r32]

Any of the German Tiger/Panther/King Tiger would have been outstandingly safe to be in and pop off Allied tanks as they approached, however, reliability of these German heavyweights has always been one Achilles heel (other being lack of fuel). If the tank can't move, its a pillbox. To me, those Panther turrets mounted onto pillboxes were an unfortunate parody of German armor, weaponry and optics being better than its automotive ability.

However I'm not sure I want to be facing ten to one odds - its not just a numbers game, because one tank has ten targeting it, it becomes the focal point of that localized tactical environment, while each of the ten has only a one in ten chance of being targeted. After all, multi turreted tanks were hardly common beyond a few rare freaks.

I would want to be one of ten Sherman Fireflies going up against a single German heavy of any model. I fancy taking my chances. War is a gamble anyway.

[Tauma]

I love how people tiger always, always go on and on about how the tiger could beat up on all the medium tanks of the day....and a 5.0 leter mustang will crush a stock honda civic in the 1/4 mile, theres some news....after 43, the only real medium tank( with a turret) that germany made was the panzer 4( don't bother calling the 45 ton panther a medium tank). The t34/85 and the 76mm shermans were a fair match for the panzer 4. If you are going to go on about what the tiger compairs to, well the only things out there were the kv1's and later the IS1's and 2's and in 45 there was the m26's. As for the reliability of the kv1's??? All the german heavies with the exception of the maybe panther g's were over stressing thier drivetrains. Even the panthers had to limits their top speed or they would tear up their final drives. Sure the kv1's had a rep for being unrelable...for a soviet tank and that was a lot more reliable than the german tanks. Btw, one of the reasons I posted those armor "blue prints" and the soviet gun chart was so you could see the soviet 85mm could defeat 100mm of armor at 1000 yards, not 200.....also remember slopped armor does mean something. the kv85 also had a 5 man crew like the t34/85.

Your lengthy study sheds light on the complex nature of tank warfare, dispelling prevalent myths. It's intriguing to investigate the technical details and historical context of these legendary devices. Your knowledge of the performance and dependability of various tanks enriches the discussion, emphasizing the significance of taking into account all elements when determining their usefulness on the battlefield. Furthermore, your use of armor blueprints and gun charts adds excellent visual assistance, improving our grasp of combat dynamics. Thank you for sharing your expertise and enthusiasm for military history![https://pmkisanyojanastatus.com/]PM Kisan Status[/url]

[jarndice]

Are we still talking about tank choice with 10:1 odds? If so, I have a couple.

I'd take ten M10 GMCs* against a Tiger I. Location can be just about anywhere besides a mudflat, although ideally in open, hilly country. Reason for my choice? The M10's 76mm gun was surprisingly good at cracking Tigers. Sure the M10's turret had to be manually cranked around, but the gun depression and the overall speed of the M10 meant that it was rather easy for a small group of them to flank and destroy even the toughest opponents. Besides, you never said which side of the 10:1 odds we had to be on

Alternatively, I'd take a Char B1 bis vs. anything the Germans can throw at me in early 1940. Location: Somewhere in France. Reason for choice? 60mm of armor, a 75mm howitzer, and a 47mm gun. If the Germans are lucky they'll have a few Panzer IIIs and Panzer IVs to throw at me. The Panzer III at the time mounted a 37mm gun in a body clad in 30mm of armor. The Panzer IV had the same armor thickness, but used a 75mm howitzer. But the Germans didn't have that many Panzer IIIs or IVs available during the invasion of France. In all likelihood the only things my bis would run up against would be Panzer IIs, Czech LT vz. 35s, and Czech LT vz 38s.


*Don't give me that crap about it being a Tank Destroyer. It mounts a gun in a fully rotating turret on a tracked chassis. It's a tank, no matter what the people at the time called it.

The only way an M10 does any damage to a Tiger is with an HVAP round and I do believe this needs to be close proximity, you can't cross 3000 meters that quickly. with a thin skin like the M10 you would need 20 to 1 odds unless i drive my Tiger into a trap. With that open turret I would just lob grenades at you. seriosly you would be better off in a tight forest or something, Open ground favours the Tiger too much.

Nuff said about the Char. there was a reason France was over run in what a week?

The German army rated the Char B high enough to use it in France during the duration of the occupation.

[MrChef]

Jarndice, Tauma is a spambot.

[Son of a gun-ner]

Jarndice, Tauma is a spambot.

Leave him, he's happy in a little world of his own, replying to a comment made over twelve years ago lol.

As for Tauma, they're happy thinking they are pulling the wool over our eyes, but now they know we know they aren't so smart.