German Weaponology

[Juha]

Köningstiger
Panther was not a bad tank from Ausf. A onwards, but IMHO the first model Ausf D was, it was usually too unreliable. My figures were for Aug 8th, ie when Germans were forced to fast retreat and end result was massive total losses for Panthers. Pz IVs and Tigers managed better. But as I wrote, it was 1943 when war was irreversively lost for Germany and so it was 1943 when Germans would have needed reliable Panthers. And the 263 destroyed tanks is only claim, difficult to verify. And from Germans reports one see that Panther easily burn when hit.

Soren
I gave one expert who didn't agree to your claim on Ta 152, can you name some of those many experts who agree.

On Panther's reliability, why Guderian demanded urgent action to improve Panther's final drive in late summer 44 (source Jentz's Panzertruppen p. 100) and Panzerkomission complained on weak final drive in Jan 45 if Panther was VERY reliable from Ausf D onwards ie from first version onwards?

On Russian snipers, IMHO Finns thought they were dangerous also over 200m distance.

On MG151 and 151/20, I recommended Williams' & Gustin's Flying Guns, look the Appendix 6 Fighter Gun Effectiveness and surprise surprise MK 108 is best but B-20 is second and Hispano V third (efficiency 9.7, 6.8 and 5.7 respectedly) only then MG151/20 and MK 103, both 4.9. Parametres used are ROF, cartridge destructiveness and gun weight.

Juha

[Njaco]

One other factor to consider when comparing is sabotage. Because Germany at many times used foreign and slave labor, the incidents for sabotage were high throughout the military industry. You can have the best whatever on the planet but it ain't gonna go if somebody is gumming up the works.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by Juha

Soren
I gave one expert who didn't agree to your claim on Ta 152, can you name some of those many experts who agree.

What Brown said was that the Ta-152 was better than Allied fighters Juha.

But yes, I can easily name one more; Willi Reschke. Want more ?

You could also ask the experts on this board like Erich ? He's expressed more than once that the Ta-152H was the ultimate prop job of WW2.

On Panther's reliability, why Guderian demanded urgent action to improve Panther's final drive in late summer 44 (source Jentz's Panzertruppen p. 100) and Panzerkomission complained on weak final drive in Jan 45 if Panther was VERY reliable from Ausf D onwards ie from first version onwards?

I actually meant the Ausf.A, but yes most of the teething problems were solved with this version, and the tank proved very reliable considering its working inviroment.

As for Guderians request and the Panzerkomission, well Juha do you have any idea under which conditions these tanks had to work by 44? The maintenance they recieved, availability of spare parts ? And are you aware of the fact that they were often at the mercy of inexperienced drivers ?

Had a Sherman been subjected to the above I'm sure equal requests & complaints would've been sent forth.

On Russian snipers, IMHO Finns thought they were dangerous also over 200m distance.

The Finns used a different rifle based on the Mosin Nagant but with a heavier barrel and other type ammunition. This rifle was the M-39. And btw, the Finnish were accurate with these rifles at pretty long range and with open sights. But still the distances were rarely above 300m, something which the top Finnish Sniper remarked IIRC.

On MG151 and 151/20, I recommended Williams' & Gustin's Flying Guns, look the Appendix 6 Fighter Gun Effectiveness and surprise surprise MK 108 is best but B-20 is second and Hispano V third (efficiency 9.7, 6.8 and 5.7 respectedly) only then MG151/20 and MK 103, both 4.9. Parametres used are ROF, cartridge destructiveness and gun weight.

I strongly disagree.

The thing about the MG151/20 is it fires the HE(M) Minen round, a round which is over TWICE as devastating as those fired by the B-20 & Hispano V. So the MG151/20 was a far more devastating armament Juha.

Take a look here: WORLD WAR 2 FIGHTER GUN EFFECTIVENESS

Note the damage of a single HE(M) round, nevermind the Power of the gun as that is based on Momentum and is rather irrelevant as Tony points out himself.

Another thing about the MG151 & MG151/20 is that they were immune to jamming.

[glen]

Germany was the leader in technology since way before WW2, and continued to be so until the end of WW2 after which it still continued to be the leader in many areas right up till today.

And like we all know the Germans were also waay ahead throughout the war when it came to designing and building tanks, fielding the unrivalled Pzkpfw. VI Ausf.B King Tiger & Pzkpfw. V Panther and their subvariants.

The Ta-152H was faster, more maneuverable, climbed faster and had a MUCH higher service ceiling than ANY of the late war Allied fighters. The Ta-152H is as many experts agree, THE best piston engined fighter of WW2, completely unrivalled.
......

-------Soren

Soren's bias is obvious. I am familiar with all the german weapons raised by him. However, I found that he is quite unconversant with allied weaponology. It will cost us a lot of time in arguing "which weapon is the best" issues. OK, now let's compare german and allied weapons from Ta152H. Since soren said T152H is the best piston fighter in WWII, completely unrivalled! Soren, please tell me why Ta152 is superior to Spitfire MK 21/14 and F4U-4 P51H, P47M/N...

1) Top speed: Spitfire MK21 -----732km/h@7800m

Spitfire Mk 21 Performance Testing

Spitfire MK14----720km/h@7800m

Spitfire Mk XIV Performance Testing

P51H----788km/h 　Note that the first P-51H-1-NA flewn on 3rd Feb.1945. P51H was ready in WWII, but it was no need to put them in battle fields in a hurry.

P47M------761km/h@9760m

P-47 Performance Tests


F4U4 (served in 1945) ----728km/h
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4u/f4u-4.pdf

Ta152H----750-760km/h

Soren said that Ta152H was faster than any of late war Allied fighters...... Is the Ta152H faster than P51H and P47M?

2) max climb

Ta152H ----25m/s
spitfire 14----25m/s
spitfire 21--23m/s
p47m----20m/s
p51h-----25m/s
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...oklet-pg15.jpg
P-47 Performance Tests

Does the Ta152H climb faster than any allied fighter?

3) service seiling:

Ta152H: 48,550 feet
Focke-Wulf Ta 152
Spitfire 21: 42,800 ft (44500feet)
P47m: about 42000 ft somehow managed to reach 47000ft
F4U-3:772km/h@40000feet faster than Ta152H, due to the absence of Japanese high fighters, f4u3 cancelled, only 3 made.

P47m and spitfire outmaneuver Ta152H @ high altitude, note that spitfire14 especially spitfire21 outroll Ta152H.

Supermarine Spitfire - Great Britain

This link said spitfire14's ceiling is 44500 feet. Fighter can fly higher than "norminal service ceiling" as long as they can get enought time, and the climbe rate of allied fighter such as p47m/n and spitfire14/21 is as good as (if not better than) Ta152H.

In 1935, US exported a lot of advanced air-cool piston engines to 3rd Reich.It's United States introduced air-cool piston enginee to germany. German air-cool power never exceeded US.

Late allied piston beasts: Spiteful and Seafang were the fastest piston fighters, one of them even reached 795 km/h!

German piston power is smaller than allied beasts: R2800, saber, and griffon. In 1945, birtish piston power is almost 4000HP!
The Hawker Tempest Page

The smaller power of piston is german tradition,lol, so was WWI.

[Soren]

You're just beyond ridiculous glen, you don't know anything about which you talk and you keep fabricating stuff in your head. Let me ask how old are you glen ?

Anyway for your information the P-51H & Spitfire Mk.21 didn't see service in WW2, something which you unsurprisingly didn't know.

Furthermore the P-47 is a large and heavy fighter glen, it wasn't very maneuverable, and so it always relied on its speed at high alt and its high acceleration in a dives to fight the enemy. The P-47 was dead meat in a dogfight against any of the LW's dedicated fighters.

And as to why the Ta-152H was unrivalled well let me sum it up for you:

Top speed: 760 + km/h (473 + mph) Thats faster than any Allied fighter
Service ceiling: 15.1 km (49,540 ft) Thats way higher than any Allied fighter
Climb rate: ~ 26 m/s (5,100 ft/min) That's faster than any Allied fighter (Except a + 25 lbs/sq.in. boosted Spit IX)
Time to climb 10km: 10.1 min (10.1min to 32,808 ft) Thats faster than the Spit Mk.21

And on top of this the Ta-152H featured better maneuverability than ANY of the late war Allied fighters, being capable of outturning the Spitfire Mk.XIV at all altitudes. The reason behind this excellent agility (Esp. in the horizontal) was the wing, being the most efficient wing put on a fighter during WW2, featuring a very high lift airfoil design whilst AR was very high, increasing lift even further whilst reducing drag, giving the wing an extremely high L/D ratio. And the L/D ratio is one of the most crucial factors to high turn performance. Hence the Ta-152H had no problem outturning any of the fighters you mentioned.

[glen]

Just before WWII, the "allied countries" provided a looot of capital@technology to 3rd Reich.

<WALL STREET AND THE RISE OF HITLER >
WALL STREET AND THE RISE OF HITLER, by Antony C. Sutton

Anyway for your information the P-51H & Spitfire Mk.21 didn't see service in WW2, something which you unsurprisingly didn't know.

You really don't know Spitfire21's story.

The Spitfire F.21 entered service with No 91 Squadron at Manston in January(1945,glen), despite having suffered early handling problems. This Mark had a protracted development, first flying as early as July 1943. The wing was strengthened , and the ailerons extended. The undercarriage legs were also extended, to enable a11ft Rotol 5 blade-prop to be fitted. The modifications to the structure meant that a new name of Victor was considered for a while.

The squadron began operations with modified aircraft from Ludham in March, flying armed reconnaissances and on 16 April, two aircraft strafed a midget submarine they caught on the surface and claimed it as sunk. 91 sqn was the only squadron to operate the Mk.21 during WW2.

The Royal Air Force - History Section

P51H and P80 are ready IN WWII, howver, german troops were at berlin not new york, so US army didn't have to send out their P51H and P80 jet plane in a hurry.

[m kenny]

Originally Posted by Soren

Germany was also the leader in radar & infrared techonology, being the first to deploy infrared equipment .................on AFV's, a good number of Pzkpfw.V Panthers being equipped with this in late 44 on the western front and enjoying amazing success.

Myth. Perhaps a single example of this 'amazing success' could be provided?There was only very limited use of IR during the war. The Germans hesitated to use this equipment because they knew the Allies had their own IR sets available to retaliate with.



from:
Axis History Forum &bull; View topic - What are the Germany's "Wonder Weapons"?


everyone had infrared, even low-tech types like Australia, Russia and Italy. (Australia and Italy had break-the-beam type harbour protection infrared and the Russians had a useable driving system in 1940 called DUDKA).

Only the Germans had infrared image forming equipment (of such quality = range – due to their chemical knowledge making the filters and layering phosphors coatings for receivers, etc) to be able to use it for weapons control for AFV’s. Everyone else had picture forming driving systems suitable for 30 – 50 meters.
The Germans knew the west had IR and specifically forbad its use on the Western front. The west knew the Germans had IR and went specifically looking for it. Had the Germans used IR Panthers on the western front the British alone had thousands of IR detectors ready to hand out.

The British were the first to mount their TABBY system on a Sten gun in June ’44 (Source PRO, dated blue print). Whereas the Germans only saw the need for small arms infrared in October ’44 at which point the VAMPIRE was designed (source: Dr Gaertner, head of WaPruf 8/I Optics, report to American interrogator’s June 1945). Neither of which saw much action. The American M3 Sniperscope was first used on Okinawa to great effect (they claim 30% of all small arms casualties due to it’s use) against the Japanese in 1945. (5 years before Korea).

I always get a laugh from the American code for their infrared, which was NAN or NANCY. The thought of all those Nancy boys blazing away!

The real lead the Germans had in infrared which got the allies hot and bothered after the war (apart from the quality of the picture forming gear) was the industrial sized production of Pb (lead) crystals which have a certain thermal detection window. Very exciting in 1945, less so now.

If you have an interest in Television you may be interested to know the first televised infrared image was by the Scottish inventor John Logie Baird in Leads in 1926. The astonished crowd at the demonstration had to be dispersed by mounted police. That was 10 years before the 1936 AEG infrared tube.

also

Infrared Sniperscope M1, with M3 Carbine

[glen]

And as to why the Ta-152H was unrivalled well let me sum it up for you:

Top speed: 760 + km/h (473 + mph) Thats faster than any Allied fighter
except P47M and P51H and F4U-3
Service ceiling: 15.1 km (49,540 ft) Thats way higher than any Allied fighter
15km is not practical.
Climb rate: ~ 26 m/s (5,100 ft/min) That's faster than any Allied fighter (Except a + 25 lbs/sq.in. boosted Spit IX) P51H near 6000ft/min, spitfire 14 got 5110ft/min @Jan.1944 service and better climb when 21lbs ATA introduced after 1944 fall at the same time Ta152H hadn't come into service.
Time to climb 10km: 10.1 min (10.1min to 32,808 ft) Thats faster than the Spit Mk.21

18lbs spitfire14: Time to 30,000 ft. 8.35 mins. 21lbs is even faster.

And on top of this the Ta-152H featured better maneuverability than ANY of the late war Allied fighters, being capable of outturning the Spitfire Mk.XIV at all altitudes.

Blether.Spitfire Mk.XIV outturns Ta152H at all altitudes.

With regard to jet plane, P80 was as good as Me262.
Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star - USA

The airplane had its origin in June 1943, when Lockheed was requested to design a fighter around the De Havilland turbojet engine developed in England in response to Germany's twin-engine jet fighter, the Messerschmitt Me 262. The XP-80 was designed and built in the amazing period of only 143 days--37 days less than the original schedule. It was flown for the first time on January 8, 1944, and its performance was considered sensational.

"It was a magnificent demonstration," said Clarence Johnson, Lockheed's chief research engineer. "our plane was a success -- such a complete success that it had overcome the temporary advantage the Germans had gained from years of preliminary development on jet planes."

The Army Air Force planned to build the Shooting Star in large numbers. However, only two of the machines arrived in Italy before the end of the war in Europe, and these were never used in operations. Despite the cessation of hostilities, production was continued on a reduced scale.

Acording to Soren， Ta152 can outturn almost every fighter.

The ratio of weight/area of wingspan is critical to a fighter's truning ability, Ta152H's this ratio is not very good for turning.

The German advances in aerodynamics was also the reason why they were the leaders in ballistics research and designs, designing & producing the best projectiles of WW2. German rifles, machineguns etc etc were firing heavy boattailed spitzer projectiles (Designation: FMJ-BT) with very high Ballistic Coefficients, and many other specialized types, while nearly all other countries, including the US, still used flat based Spitzer bullets from the first world war. Spitzer bullets (Sharp pointed bullet) are a German/French design btw and were revolutionary in WW1.

German snipers could because of their better and more accurate projectiles also hit their targets more precisely at longer ranges than Allied snipers, a great tactical advantage on he open battlefield.

Interesting! Let's see how advanced the german aerodynamics is! German MG131 is almost rubbish compared to Browning M2.

And then plz tell me why bismark's skc34 380mm cannon was the worst compared to Italian and French 380mm? Benefit from the best projectiles of WW2? Why did german troops still use horses in WWII? Why couldn't german provide excellent supercharger to Bf109/Fw190?...

[Konigstiger205]

Originally Posted by glen

And then plz tell me why bismark's skc34 380mm cannon was the worst compared to Italian and French 380mm? Benefit from the best projectiles of WW2? Why did german troops still use horses in WWII? Why couldn't german provide excellent supercharger to Bf109/Fw190?...

Well Glen lets think for a second that Germany was at war with the whole world and that it took 6 years for it to be defeated by the greatest super powers back then, that says something.Lets not forget Hitler constant interfering with production and designing.An by 1944 Germany suffered from lack of materials and manpower yet its still managed to hold its ground.Now the Allies had numerical advantage, air domination, if Germany didn't had technological advantages over the Allies how the hell did they manage to hold on so much and so fierce.And by 1944 they got a decisive blow when my country declared war on them making the whole eastern front collapse which shorted the war greatly.

[Juha]

Soren
I quoted Brown's assesment, and IMHO it didn't support your claim that Ta 152H was completely unrivalled.

"But yes, I can easily name one more; Willi Reschke. Want more ?"
Definitely, how many Allied fighters Willi had flown. If we began to count how many P-51 pilots said that P-51 was the best fighter of WWII and how many Spitfire pilots claimed that the Spit was the best and how many Bf 109 pilots thought that their mount was the best we probably got that majority of pilots thought that their plane was the best. Any experts who had flown many times the main contenders to the best piston fighter of WWII title and who claimed that Ta 152 was completely unrivalled?

Now Guderian acknowledged that the reliability of the engine was got better but the final drive was still much too weak, same to Panzerkomission and the French study in 1948. And French used Panthers in peace time. Have you any source for the claim that Panther was VERY reliable.

And was the raports and stories I have read, Soviet snipers could been dangerous well beyond 200 meters.

"Take a look here: WORLD WAR 2 FIGHTER GUN EFFECTIVENESS"
Now that is Tony Williams' site, one of the authors of the book I recommended, if you bother to look the Table 2 on the site and especially the last column of it, you see what I meant. MG 151/20 wasn't the most efficient 20mm cannon according to the link you gave.

"Another thing about the MG151 & MG151/20 is that they were immune to jamming."

Are you kidding, I have read all Finnish AF combat reports from 1944, and I can say that MG151/20 wasn't immune to jamming. What is your source of that claim. Also germans experienced jammings of MG151/20. I don't claim that MG151/20 was exceptionally unreliable but it surely wasn't immune to jamming.

Juha

[plan_D]

As a design the Panther was definately the best to see action during World War II. It's early combat reports do not shine a great light upon the machine, but it's mobility, firepower and armour were the best compromise of the war. The Panther G could match anything the Allies had in a straight shooting match and could be used as a 'cruiser' tank for those vital breakthroughs. If the Germans had managed to introduce the Panther II it would have only increased the reputation of the Panther. If we're talking about what could have been though, I would rank the Centurion very close to the top.

The problem with this argument is that everyone is taking the side of Germany or not Germany. The Germans led in rocket technology. The U.S led in industrial technology. The British led in ASW technology. The Soviet Union led in ... urh...

[Thorlifter]

Originally Posted by plan_D

The Soviet Union led in ... urh...

Feeding their own troops to machine guns......

I love this thread! TONS of information. I hope it stays on the civil side.

[Juha]

Hello Plan D
I’d not say that as a design Panther was definitely the best to see action during WWII because its final drive was a part of its design. But I as an ex-Panther fan agree that on paper it looks like a world beater. But it had it weak points, its side protection was rather weak and it burned easily, bit like Shermans at least before the latter got wet storage. And do you have proof that it was capable for 'cruiser' tank role. Best I can recall was the Ardennes operation, 80 km advance in rather difficult terrain but still far cry from hundreds of kilometres fast advances made by Shermans, Cromwells and T-34s.

And I’m not anti-German, I have high regard on Pz III (after it got 50mm gun) Pz IV, Pz VIE and StuG III; Bf 109E-F and G-10, Fw 190 etc and I have always liked German medium bombers, MG 42 etc

Juha

[plan_D]

The side armour of the Panther G cannot be considered a major weakness in its design; the turret being 45mm at 25 degrees and the hull (upper) being 50mm at 30 degrees. The only two German tanks that were heavier in side protection are the slab-sided 80mm of the Tiger E and 80mm at 30 degrees on the Porsche Tiger B.

I don't know any percentages for Panther units servicability but I know the Panther G was an improvement over the D and A in reliability. The introduction of a gearbox oil cooler improved the life of the drive train, while the installation of 3mm armoured ammo bins decreased the chances of an ammo hit. It'd be foolish to think that the Panther, or any other tank, was without flaws but the Panther provides the best compromise in World War II.

An 80km advance through harsh terrain in the middle of winter is pretty impressive. Nevertheless, the Germans were largely on the retreat when the Panther was introduced so it didn't exactly have the chance to go riding across the Pontic steppes with the Luftwaffe providing full support, plenty of fuel and bucket loads of spares ... all things that the T-34, Sherman and Cromwell had. There's nothing about the Panther G that says it could not have performed any less in a breakthrough than any Allied design. In fact, due to the Panthers ability to actually go head to head with other tanks it probably would have done a lot better. The 6th Coldstream Guards seemed to enjoy a Panthers company... Cuckoo

The Panther was operating in much tougher operational conditions than any Allied machine in 1944 - 1945. And it constantly proved itself to be a deadly weapon of war, and certainly capable in every theatre of operation. No other machine that served in World War II comes close to the true modern MBT - only the Centurion, which did not see action, was close.

[Juha]

Hello Plan D
IMHO especially turret side armour of Panther was on weak side when compared to what some 15 tons lighter Shermans (63mm) or T-34/85 (75mm) had.

And IMHO Soviet tank vanguards travelled "light", one reason why Soviets preferred simple, rugged designs. But I agree that in frontal fight Panther was excellent.
And yes I know the story of Cuckoo, the unit history of 6th Guards Tank Br. was the first British unit history I read and it was a great read! Highly recommended book. As is the history of 11th Armoured Div, published probably soon after the war.

But how good Panther was, I don't know, for example the PzBrigades did rather badly in Lorraine in the autumn 44.

And Centurion, my favourit tank, has also rather bad reliability problems. IMHO only US automotive components made possible to realize its full potential.

Juha