![]() |
| |||||||
| WW2 General Every WW2 related discussion besides aviation. |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #16 | |||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I see how you think now, but I usually prefer heavier stuff. Except for the Stuart, of course! Quote:
The pic I'm meaning was destroyed in combat. Quote:
The Elefants not a bad choice P38, but had very bad mobility. Maybe the GMC M12 155mm wasn't so bad?
__________________ Like WW2 tanks? Then please visit the Panzer Front: http://p208.ezboard.com/bthepanzerfront | |||||
| | |
| | #17 |
| Senior Member | I know, I know! But the Elefant was very good when it came down to destroying a Russian T-34.
__________________ ![]() Its better to have an Army of deer being led by a lion, rather an Army of Lions being led by a deer... |
| | |
| | #18 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: South of the Border
Posts: 111
| Hi, I really enjoy the Jagdpanther. That 88m gun was something very impressive! Douglas. |
| | |
| | #19 |
| Senior Member | No, I mean the StuK40 F/8 - it was no longer an assault gun. It had a SturmKanone (StuK). Look it up. If the Kubinka King Tiger was destroyed in World War II, why is it still in one piece. Until you find this picture of a destroyed King Tiger with frontal penertration, frankly I'm not going to believe you. I've seen pictures of a King Tiger's front plate being penertrated, it was used as a target as I described. P-38 is a patriotic American - he'd go with the U.S M36 rather than the British improvement of it.
__________________ "When you go home tomorrow, don't expect anyone to know what you have been through. Even if they did know, most people probably wouldn't care anyway. Some of you may get the medals you deserve, many more of you will not. But remember this, all of you are now members of the front-line club, and that is the most exclusive club in the world." - Lt. Col. Matthew Maer CO 1st Battalion, the Princess of Wale's Royal Regiment. Camp Abu Naji, Oct. 2004 |
| | |
| | #20 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Queensland
Posts: 1,249
| I think the Germans designed some magnificant heavy tanks as well as tank-destroyers. The US ones were a bit too light on in terms of armour. |
| | |
| | #21 | |||||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| PlanD: Quote:
SturmKanone means Assault Cannon BTW. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
HealzDevo: Quote:
Quote:
The Russians had it right IMHO.
__________________ Like WW2 tanks? Then please visit the Panzer Front: http://p208.ezboard.com/bthepanzerfront | |||||||
| | |
| | #22 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,116
| The JagdPanther, no doubt. With great mobility and reliability, as-well as excellent armor and firepower, this TD definitely takes the poll. Also there was never to be developed any Soviet or Western Allied equal to this Tank Destroyer during WW2.
__________________ ![]() It was like being pushed by an Angel! - Adolf Galland I'm an educated engineer, so I love being technical and appraising of great inventions. So if you think I am being biased about something: Tell me! Then you'll probably find out that I am not |
| | |
| | #23 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| Quote:
__________________ Like WW2 tanks? Then please visit the Panzer Front: http://p208.ezboard.com/bthepanzerfront | |
| | |
| | #24 | ||
| Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,116
| Quote:
I assume you know that though.
__________________ ![]() It was like being pushed by an Angel! - Adolf Galland I'm an educated engineer, so I love being technical and appraising of great inventions. So if you think I am being biased about something: Tell me! Then you'll probably find out that I am not | ||
| | |
| | #25 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| It's actually superior in almost every respect, except for gun performance.
__________________ Like WW2 tanks? Then please visit the Panzer Front: http://p208.ezboard.com/bthepanzerfront |
| | |
| | #26 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,116
| Quote:
The JagdPanther is both much better armed and armored, and is faster as-well. Both have good reliability, so they're even there, only in the SU-100's ease of production is it superior.
__________________ ![]() It was like being pushed by an Angel! - Adolf Galland I'm an educated engineer, so I love being technical and appraising of great inventions. So if you think I am being biased about something: Tell me! Then you'll probably find out that I am not | |
| | |
| | #27 | |||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| Soren: Quote:
Quote:
The SU 100 gave away 5mm to the JagdPanther on the front glacis yes, but the SU 100's armour was better sloped. The front hull was 15mm short of the JgdPanthers, @ the same angle (but was a smaller target). The mantlet was 25mm shy, but wouldn't likely be penetrated. The side/rear armour of the SU 100 was actually 5mm thicker and better sloped (except for the superstructure). There was little between the top armour as well (16-25mm JgdPanther, 20mm SU 100) The cupola on the SU100 could be vulnerable though. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The crew quality and numbers would be what it'd boil down to in the end...
__________________ Like WW2 tanks? Then please visit the Panzer Front: http://p208.ezboard.com/bthepanzerfront | |||||
| | |
| | #28 | ||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,116
| Quote:
The 88mm Kwk43 was inherently more accurate than the SU-100's 100mm D-10S gun, as-well as having much better optics and penetration power. Quote:
The JagdPanther's front upper hull was 82mm thick and sloped 55 degree's from vertical, while the SU-100's front upper hull was 75mm thick and sloped 50 degree's from vertical. Front lower hull: JagdPanther = 60mm/55. SU-100 = 45mm/55. Side upper hull/Superstructure: JagdPanther = 50mm/30. SU-100 = 45mm/20. Side lower hull: JagdPanther = 40mm/0. SU-100 = 45mm/0. Rear upper hull/Superstructure: JagdPanther = 40mm/35. SU-100 = 45mm/48. Rear lower hull: JagdPanther = 40mm/25. SU-100 = 45mm/45. So the only places where the SU-100 is better armored is on the side lower hull, and the rear, both places which are rarely hit. In every important place the Jagdpanther is better armored, making overall better armored. Quote:
And no, the SU-100 would not out-accelerate the JagdPanther, the JagdPanther would out-accelerate the SU-100, as the Maybach HL230 P30 engine has alot more torque pr weight unit than the W-2 engine. (I can't believe we're actually discussing which tank accelerates the fastest ! Quote:
As to the Panther's Maybach engine, it was much superior to the W-2 diesel of the SU-100 !
__________________ ![]() It was like being pushed by an Angel! - Adolf Galland I'm an educated engineer, so I love being technical and appraising of great inventions. So if you think I am being biased about something: Tell me! Then you'll probably find out that I am not | ||||
| | |
| | #29 | ||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| I wouldn't say the D10 was very far behind the Pak43. The RoF and ammo sizes though... Well I never! The glacis/superstructure of the JagdPanther is actually 5 degrees steeper than that of the SU100! Still, only 5 degrees and 5mm seperates them, though that could be decisive... The upper-side superstructure I knew (and said) was better protected. As you said, both places most likely to take a hit. Quote:
The (Jgd)Panthers road wheels were protective of the side lower hull, as was the T34's to a much lesser extent. The gap between the sponson and the top of the tracks was a vulnerable spot for the (Jgd)Panther as it was on the other German heavies. Both sometimes fitted Schurzen, though the SU100 also often carried Tankovy-Desant - very effective against Panzer-Shrecks/Fausts. The point I made, as did you was that they were almost identical in combat performance, but the SSU100 was a lot better logistically (cheaper and sturdier, yes it was! Quote:
With this in mind the 'soft specs' such as the ride quality and ergonomics might be an issue? Also the Henschel suspension made for a better gun platform, and wasn't overloaded (though it was prone to clogging & freezing solid and just as difficult to maintain) The ground pressure for the SU100 was nearly 2psi better too (11psi vs 12.9) so it was probably better cross country? Quote:
I wouldn't think a V12 diesel powering just over 31 and a half tons (with lower ground pressure) would be out-dragged by a V12 Petrol weighing 45 and a half tons? Anyway the V2 was an aluminium Diesel, which should easily beat the torque/weight figure of the Maybach? You sure you aren't talking about bhp figures? - I have been looking for torque figures for ages! Could you please provide a source? - I'd be very interested! The V2 was more reliable than the Maybach and had an advantage in range/flammability. Quote:
__________________ Like WW2 tanks? Then please visit the Panzer Front: http://p208.ezboard.com/bthepanzerfront | ||||
| | |
| | #30 | ||||||||||||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,116
| Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The JagdPanther was much more effective in combat than the SU-100, being both better armed and armored than the SU-100 ! Hence the Jagdpanther's excellent combat record. In reliability they were equal. Only logistically does the SU-100 have an advantage over the JagdPanther, being simpler and more easily mass produced, as-well as being more fuel efficient. Quote:
Quote:
And no, the SU-100 was not better cross country, the JagdPanther clearly holds the advantage there with a superior capability for overcoming steeper and larger obstacles, as-well as having a deeper max fording depth. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
23L HL230 P30 V12 gasoline, 700hp and 1400lbs/ft. 38.88L W-2 V12 Diesel, 500hp and 1600lbs/ft. So it looks like the SU-100 might win this little Drag-race However something which is of considerable importance is the fuel consumption of the engine, and here the SU-100's W-2 Diesel engine holds a clear advantage over the Maybach petrol engine. This also strenghtens the SU-100's logistical advantage. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________ ![]() It was like being pushed by an Angel! - Adolf Galland I'm an educated engineer, so I love being technical and appraising of great inventions. So if you think I am being biased about something: Tell me! Then you'll probably find out that I am not | ||||||||||||||
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |