Rare Crazy Panzer Projekts.

[Soren]

That's what I said Soren!

Thinking about it though, German ammo wasn't that good;

Care to prove it ? Wait, don't bother, cause you can't. Why ? Cause its untrue! British and German AP projectile were the best throughout WW2.

The Jumbo was almost impervious to frontal attack, equal or even better than the KingTiger!! - though like the Churchill, lacking in offensive power.

What ???!!!!! You surely can't be serious about that ?! Have you completely lost your sense of reality ?!

The Tiger Ausf.B's glacis is 150mm thick and sloped at 50 degrees from vertical, the Jumbo's glacis is 100mm thick and sloped at 47 degrees from vertical ! So as you can see the Tiger Ausf.B is enormously better protected from the front than the Jumbo, you can't even compare the two !

And since the Jumbo had a pea-shooter of a gun it was a Cow on the battlefield, no match for the KingTiger which could knock it out at distances exceeding 2km. Heck even the Tiger Ausf.E could take out the Jumbo frontally at a distance of 1km, just by aiming at the turret. The Panther could do the same at a 1.5km distance. Truth is, against the AT and tank-guns of the time, the Jumbo was anything BUT impervious to AT fire.

 

[Soren]

Just to show you how powerful AT and tank guns had become by 1944, I'll show you these pictures of Wittmann's Tiger Ausf.E which was hit by a AP round from a firefly's 17pdr tank gun, one of most powerful tank guns of WW2.

 

[Erich]

Soren I believe several rounds hit Wittmann's Panzer as well as the other 3 Tiger 1's ? outside of Cintheux. Frankly I still cannot see why Wittmann ordered up and approved this death ride out in that field... those chaps were sitting ducks

 

[Soren]

Soren I believe several rounds hit Wittmann's Panzer as well as the other 3 Tiger 1's ? outside of Cintheux.

As far as I know it was just one well placed shot, and the 17pdr could easily do this kind damage with just one shot. IIRC the round penetrated the front turret and set off the ammunition in the turret, blowing off the turret away from the chassis. The 17pdr certainly was a very effective AT gun, on par with nearly any German AT gun in effectiveness against armor, very few exceeded it.

Frankly I still cannot see why Wittmann ordered up and approved this death ride out in that field... those chaps were sitting ducks

I agree, it was very unlike him to do such a thing, however since he had become such a propaganda figure over the past years leading up to his time of death, maybe he began feeling abit invincible, a big mistake on the battlefield.

 

[schwarzpanzer]

Soren:

Care to prove it ? Wait, don't bother, cause you can't. Why ? Cause its untrue! British and German AP projectile were the best throughout WW2.

Especially that produced by Oskar Schindler.

The Tiger Ausf.B's glacis is 150mm thick and sloped at 50 degrees from vertical, the Jumbo's glacis is 100mm thick and sloped at 47 degrees from vertical ! So as you can see the Tiger Ausf.B is enormously better protected from the front than the Jumbo, you can't even compare the two !

Yes, that was silly of me. - Though the Jumbo had 140mm @ the front in places and 114mm minimum.

And since the Jumbo had a pea-shooter of a gun it was a Cow on the battlefield

You don't read what I write?? - That's exactly what I said!

Heck even the Tiger Ausf.E could take out the Jumbo frontally at a distance of 1km, just by aiming at the turret.

The Jumbo's turrett was 152mm all round. 178mm on the Mantlet.

Just to show you how powerful AT and tank guns had become by 1944, I'll show you these pictures of Wittmann's Tiger Ausf.E which was hit by a AP round from a firefly's 17pdr tank gun, one of most powerful tank guns of WW2.

The ammo brewing up caused the damage, not the Sabot!

Agree with points on the 17pdr. 8)

I agree, it was very unlike him to do such a thing, however since he had become such a propaganda figure over the past years leading up to his time of death, maybe he began feeling abit invincible, a big mistake on the battlefield.

Yes, that's what I thought. I heard a Typhoon may have immobilized his tank 1st, allowing the Firefly to finish him off - don't think it's true.

 

[plan_D]

I don't think it was because of his status that Wittman thought he was invincible. It was the status of the Tiger, for many years Tiger crews had gone through battle knowing that the enemy would not be able to destroy them. Many forgot the basic principles of armoured warfare, and when 1944 rolled around this caused a lot of loss in the Tiger ranks because the Soviets and Allies had developed weapons that could destroy the Tiger.

I cannot remember where I read that, but I'm sure it's somewhere out there. And it seems reasonable to me. Since August 1942 the Tiger had been untouchable and I imagine if I were in such a machine, I wouldn't take into consideration the basic tactics of warfare. Why hide your tank when the enemy can't destroy it anyway?

 

[Soren]

Especially that produced by Oskar Schindler.

Oh so Oscar Schindler was the only supplier for Germany's armed forces, I didn't know that.

Besides, Schindlers goal was to produce as little as possible, not to sabotage anything, cause if he had done that it would eventually have been discovered and his firm would've been shut down, and his workers shot. And THAT was not what he was looking for !

With that having been said, yes, some places German ammunition was sabotaged but not by making the projectiles inferior in quality, but by placing objects inside the cartridge causing it to explode on firing. However these sabotage attempts were few and far between, and covered less than 0.1% of all German ammunition and supplies made.

Yes, that was silly of me. - Though the Jumbo had 140mm @ the front in places and 114mm minimum.

The Jumbo's glacis was 100mm thick.

The Jumbo's turrett was 152mm all round. 178mm on the Mantlet.

The 88mm Kwk36 could penetrate 179mm of vertical armor at 1000m.

The ammo brewing up caused the damage, not the Sabot!

Like I said, the 17pdr's AP round caused those rounds to explode Schwarzpanzer ! What did you think, that they magically exploded by themselves ?

 

[Soren]

I don't think it was because of his status that Wittman thought he was invincible. It was the status of the Tiger, for many years Tiger crews had gone through battle knowing that the enemy would not be able to destroy them. Many forgot the basic principles of armoured warfare, and when 1944 rolled around this caused a lot of loss in the Tiger ranks because the Soviets and Allies had developed weapons that could destroy the Tiger.

I cannot remember where I read that, but I'm sure it's somewhere out there. And it seems reasonable to me. Since August 1942 the Tiger had been untouchable and I imagine if I were in such a machine, I wouldn't take into consideration the basic tactics of warfare. Why hide your tank when the enemy can't destroy it anyway?

Thats a good theory as-well.

 

[CharlesBronson]

Just to show you how powerful AT and tank guns had become by 1944, I'll show you these pictures of Wittmann's Tiger Ausf.E which was hit by a AP round from a firefly's 17pdr tank gun, one of most powerful tank guns of WW2.

Wittman had a damn bad luck , I see a lot of Panther, Tiger I and II being shooted several times in pics and videos, some set in fire and burn some not, but NONE of them had the horrific internal explosion that blew the turret in that SS Tiger 1.

 

[Soren]

Wittman had a damn bad luck , I see a lot of Panther, Tiger I and II being shooted several times in pics and videos, some set in fire and burn some not, but NONE of them had the horrific internal explosion that blew the turret in that SS Tiger 1.

He certainly had bad luck that day, or maybe not so bad, as the tactics he used that day were pretty foolish. Driving out in the middle of an open field isn't exactly a good idea

It is true that German tanks were hard nuts to crack, the hardest infact, and also carried the deadliest main armament. But the 17pdr was the Allies most effecient AT gun of the whole war, the equal of the German 75mm Kwk42, and it would have very little problem turning a Tiger Ausf.E inside out if the round hit the right place.(Which it did in Wittmann's case)

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I don't think it was because of his status that Wittman thought he was invincible. It was the status of the Tiger, for many years Tiger crews had gone through battle knowing that the enemy would not be able to destroy them. Many forgot the basic principles of armoured warfare, and when 1944 rolled around this caused a lot of loss in the Tiger ranks because the Soviets and Allies had developed weapons that could destroy the Tiger.

I cannot remember where I read that, but I'm sure it's somewhere out there. And it seems reasonable to me. Since August 1942 the Tiger had been untouchable and I imagine if I were in such a machine, I wouldn't take into consideration the basic tactics of warfare. Why hide your tank when the enemy can't destroy it anyway?

I can agree with that.

 

[CharlesBronson]

I put togheter the info abot the mouse.


Panzerkampfwagen VIII Maus
Porsche Typ 205

The Panzerkampfwagen VIII Maus (Sd.Kfz 205) is the heaviest tank with completed working prototypes built during World War II. The basic design known as the VK70001/Porsche Type 2005 was suggested by Ferdinand Porsche to Adolf Hitler in June of 1942, who subsequently approved it. The design up to then had been the culmination of work done by Porsche who had won the contract for the heavy tank that March. Work on the design began in earnest and the first prototype would be ready in 1943 and was initially received the name Mammut (Mammoth). This was reportedly changed to Mäuschen (Mousie) in December of 1942 and finally Maus (Mouse) in February of 1943.




The development of super heavy tank started as early as 1941, when Krupp started the studies of superheavy Soviet tanks. In early 1942, Krupp produced designs of Tiger-Maus (VK7001) and PzKpfw VII Lowe (VK7201), but on March 5/6th of 1942, order for heavier tank was placed. Lowe never reached the prototype stage but paved the way for their successor's development. On March 21/22nd of 1942, Porsche received the contract for new 100-ton Panzer - VK10001 / Porsche Typ 205. On April 14/15th, it specified that new 100-ton tank must carry at least 100 rounds of ammunition. VK10001 was to be developed by Professor Ferdinand Porsche and Dr.Muller (Krupp) at the personal demand of Adolf Hitler made in May of 1942. He demanded 120-ton "indestructible" super-heavy tank armed with high performance L/60 or L/72 gun.

The task of producing hulls, turrets and armament was given to Krupp, while Alkett was responsible for the assembly. First specifications demanded that armament should consist of 150mm L/40 gun and 20mm MG151/20 heavy machine gun, while usage of 128mm L/50 was under consideration. It was stated that prototype should be operational before the Spring of 1943. On June 23rd of 1942, Porsche provided their design for improved VK10001 armed with turret mounted 150mm L/37 and 105mm L/70 guns. Porsche promised that first prototype will be ready in May of 1943. In December of 1942, new armaments such as 150mm gun, 127mm naval gun, 128mm Flak and the longest version of 128mm were considered. Also in the same month, it was restated that first vehicle was to be ready in Summer of 1943, followed by the production 5 per month. First official names VK10001 and Porsche Typ 205 ("Mammoth") were used in April of 1942, followed by Maeuschen (Mousy) in December of 1942 and Maus (Mouse) in February of 1943. In January of 1943, Hitler decided that the Maeuschen was to be fitted with turret mounted with 128mm and 75mm guns, while turret mounted with 150mm KwK 44 L/38 or 170mm KwK 44 gun was to be designed for future use. Specification for ammunition storage space were never met and decreased by further modifications.

From the designs emerged 188 tonnes heavy monster. On May 1st of 1943, wooden mockup of the Maus was presented to Adolf Hitler, who agreed on production and ordered series of 150 to be produced. On November 4 of 1943, development of Maus was to be ceased and only one was to be completed for evaluation. In October of 1943, original order placed by Hitler for 150 vehicles was cancelled.

Maus turret.

On December 24th of 1943, first turretless prototype was completed by Alkett and was put to the extensive tests. During the tests, the Maus could hardly move due to its enormous weight and power/weight ratio. First prototype V1 (Maus I), was powered by modified Daimler-Benz MB 509 (developed from DB 603 aircraft engine), which could not provide planned speed of 20km/h but only 13km/h in ideal conditions. Also problems arouse with suspension system which had to be modified in order to take the weight of the vehicle. Another problem that emerged from its weight, was that simply there were no bridges able to take the its weight. To overcome this problem Maus had to be provided with a "snorkel" arrangement which allowed it to submerse to the maximum depth of 8 meters. In December of 1943, V1 was fitted with (Belastungsgewicht) simulated turret (representing the weight of the turret) and was tested. Maus I was applied with camouflage paint and marked with red star and hammer and sickle disguised as a captured Russian vehicle.

Fording equipment

In March of 1944, second prototype V2 (Maus II) which differed in numerous details from V1 was produced. V2 lacked the powerplant, which was fitted in mid 1944. On April 9th of 1944, Krupp produced the turret, which in June of 1944, was delivered and then mounted on V2 and tested. Krupp produced a turret mounted with 128mm KwK 44 L/55 gun with coaxial 75mm KwK 44 L/36.5 gun and 7.92mm MG34, providing the Maus with an enormous firepower. Maus' main gun could penetrate front, side and rear armor (at 30 degrees from vertical) of Sherman, Cromwell, Churchill, T-34/85 and JS-2 tanks at ranges of 3500+ meters. Turret included mounts for rangefinder (by Zeiss), but was not fully finished and some of the missing components were shipped later on.

Maus I was to be fitted with Krupp's second turret but it was never delivered and it remained fitted with simulated turret. On July 25th of 1944, Krupp reported that two hulls will be available soon and two more later on. On July 27th of 1944, Krupp was ordered to scrap those four hulls. On August 19th of 1944, Krupp informed Porsche that it was order to stop further work on Maus. In September of 1944, second prototype started its tests. It was installed with Daimler-Benz MB 517 diesel engine that made little difference in comparison with previously used engine. Advanced electric steering system was used to steer the vehicle. Its running gear designed by Skoda, consisted of double-wheeled trucks supported by twelve return rollers with 1100mm wide tracks. The crew had to be provided with oxygen supplied by built-on fans/ventilators when all the hatches were closed.

V1 and V2 inside bunker.

In order to transport the Maus, special 14-axle railroad transport car (Verladewagon) was produced by Graz-Simmering-Pauker Works in Vienna. From mid January to early October of 1944, trials took place at armored vehicle proving grounds in Kummersdorf (near Berlin) and then at Porsche proving grounds at Boblingen. Tests were long, delayed by engine failures and production delays caused by Allied bomber attacks on German factories. During tests, it was determined that in case of any failure each Maus would have to be towed by two other Maus tanks. It is also reported that Germans worked on Flakzwilling 8.8cm auf Maus, which was to be Maus mounted with a modified turret housing two 88mm Flak 43 guns and used as heavy Flakpanzer.



Some sources state that according to Porsche, Hitler's aim for the Maus was to plug holes in the Atlantic coastal defenses on the Western Front, where it's limited range and mobility wouldn't have been too much of a hindrance. The popular version states that V2 prototype was blown up by the personnel at proving grounds in Kummersdorf, while some sources state that actually V2 saw combat while defending the facility at Kummersdorf. When war ended, almost finished V1 turret and third hull were found at Krupp facilities in Essen.

Overall, Maus was an interesting design but it would be of limited combat value because of its poor mobility and heavy weight making it more of a mobile fortification rather than a super tank. One fully assembled example (V2 turret mounted on V1 hull) was tested at Kubinka in 1951/52 and can be seen today in the Museum of Armored Forces in Kubinka (near Moscow) in Russia

Length: 10.09 m
Width: 3.67 m
Height: 3.63 m
Weight: 188 ton
Speed: 13 km/h on road
Range: 160 on roads, 62 off road.
Primary armament: 128 mm KwK44 L/5
Secondary armament: co-axial 75mm KwK 44 L/36.5
7.92mm MG34
Armor (V2) Front lower hull (Glacis plate approximately 200 mm (8 in), sloped at 35 degrees to the vertical.

Side hull: 180mm (7 in)
Rear hull: 160mm (6.3 in)
Turret front: 240mm (9.5 in)
Turret sides: 200mm (8 in)
Turret roof: 60mm (2.3 in)


Ground Pressure 140 kPa (20 psi)
Production 1 complete (V2)

1 complete but with dummy turret (V1)
9 total at various levels of completion. (at Essen and Kummersdorf)

Power plant: 1080 hp MB509 gasoline (V1)
1200 hp MB517 Diesel (V2)
Crew: 6

 

[CharlesBronson]

10.5cm K18 auf Panzer Selbstfahrlafette IVa
"Dickermax"

In September of 1939, German High Command ordered Krupp to design a heavy panzerjager armed with 105 or 128mm gun that would be able to destroy enemy tanks and heavily fortified positions (such as pillboxes). In early/mid 1941, Krupp-Gruson produced two prototypes of such a vehicle and on March 31st of 1941, first was presented to Adolf Hitler. The Fuhrer ordered further development of heavy panzerjagers armed with either 105mm or 128mm guns. He also ordered that the production of Selbstfahrlafette 10.5cm must start in the Spring of 1942, but it was later on cancelled in favour of other vehicles.

Selbstfahrlafette 10.5cm was armed with Krupp's 105mm K 18 L/52 gun with limited traverse of 8 degrees (left and right) and based on modified Panzer IV Ausf A's chassis. The gun itself was developed by Krupp and Rheinmetall from 105mm sK 18 L/52 heavy field gun and was mounted with a muzzle break. The gun was capable of penetrating 111mm of 30 degrees sloped armor plate at 2000 meters. It was mounted in lightly armored (armor protection ranged from 10mm to 50mm), open at rear superstructure and for local defense machine gun (7.92mm MG34) was carried inside as well. Vehicle was powered by Maybach HL 120 TRM engine with total power of 300 horsepower (same as Panzer IV) allowing it to travel at the speed of 40km/h.

Originally, two prototypes were assigned to Panzerjager Abteilung 521 in preparations for upcoming attack on Gibraltar. At the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, both were assigned to 3rd Panzer Division and were troop tested. One of them was lost when its ammunition exploded (as reported it was then captured the Soviets) and the second one was brought back to the factory in October of 1941. The further fate of the surviving vehicle is unknown. Both prototypes proved to be very effective against Soviet KV-I, KV-II and T-34 tanks. Serial production did not take place, while even limited numbers would prove to be very useful to the front line troops faced with superior Soviet armor in 1941/42.

Weight: 25000kg

Crew: 5 men

Engine: Maybach HL 120 TRM / 12-cylinder / 300hp

Speed: 40km/h

Range: Road: 200km

Lenght: 7.52m

Width: 2.84m

Height: 3.25m

Armament: 105mm K 18 L/52 7.92mm MG34
(1 x MG34 - carried inside)

Ammo: 105mm - 20-25 rounds

7.92mm - 600 rounds

Armor (mm/angle): Front Hull: 50/12
Front Superstructure: 50/10
Front Turret: 30/14
Gun Mantlet: 50/10
Side Hull: 20/0
Side Superstructure: 20/0
Side Turret: 20/14
Rear Hull: 20/10
Rear Superstructure: 20/10
Rear Turret: 20/20
Hull Top / Bottom: 10/90
Superstructure Top / Bottom: 12/90
Turret Top: open

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Good info. I like the pic with the 100% Original on it.

 

[schwarzpanzer]

Have you seen the "Stubborn Emil" CharlesBronson? - Very similar to the "Dickermax" only 128mm.

Wittman had a damn bad luck , I see a lot of Panther, Tiger I and II being shooted several times in pics and videos, some set in fire and burn some not, but NONE of them had the horrific internal explosion that blew the turret in that SS Tiger 1.

I suggest you look at:

http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=204&Itemid=105〈=en

But the 17pdr was the Allies most effecient AT gun of the whole war, the equal of the German 75mm Kwk42,

It was not the gun so much, more the amunition (APDS/SVDS) though even with APCBC it was still probably the best Allied AT gun! 8)

and it would have very little problem turning a Tiger Ausf.E inside out if the round hit the right place.

With a direct hit, even the glacis (the hardest part of the Tiger) is getting whacked @ 1000m - what a gun!

Though like PlanD said, gave off a lot of smoke and it was obvious and the 1st target for German taks.

Also the Firefly was not used effectively (1 in 5), if only battalions were armed with Fireflies, if only America had made all ShermansFirefly-spec, if only...

I wonder how many Fireflies were made in total?


I believe Wittman underestimated this beast (Although he had already destroyed at least 4 prior)

Also, not to take anything from Wittman, but his claims were twice hat he actually killed and his most numerous victims by far were softskins and Bren carriers etc. Germany's Vasilly Zaitsev?

I think the tank blew up like that because, due to his favourite targets, he carried mainly HE rounds. That would explain the huge explosion.

 

[CharlesBronson]

I suggest you look at:

http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=204&Itemid=105〈=en

well..yeah there is 2 or 3 Panthers blew up in that link, but the Tiger I in there remain relative intact.

Also, not to take anything from Wittman, but his claims were twice hat he actually killed and his most numerous victims by far were softskins and Bren carriers etc. Germany's Vasilly Zaitsev?

A Bren Carrier is a armored vehicle, small yes but armored probably it count in the final Wittman score of 138.

Wittman was not the major scorer of the war but Kurt knispel, his achievements were concealed a little because he was not a high rank or very disciplinate soldier and only managed to command a tank in the late stages of the war, most of this score was on the gunner role.

1. Kurt Knispel (s.Pz.Abt 503) -- 162 victoires
2. Otto Carius (s.Pz.Abt 502)-- 150 victoires
3. Johannes Hans Bolter (s.Pz.Abt 502)-- 139 victoires

Kurt Knispel

 

[CharlesBronson]

Have you seen the "Stubborn Emil" CharlesBronson? - Very similar to the "Dickermax" only 128mm

...And the Sturer Emil.

12.8cm Selbstfahrlafette L/61
(Panzerselbstfahrlafette V)
"Sturer Emil / Stubborn Emil"

Design of Selbstfahrlafette 12.8cm was based on Henschel's prototype of Panzer IV' successor - VK3001(H). In March of 1941, two VK3001(H) were ready to be converted into heavy anti-tank gun carriers - Panzerjagers. Rheinmetall-Borsig provided the 128mm PaK 40 L/61 gun for the main armament, which was developed in 1939, from 128mm Flak gun. Both chassis had to be modified in order to mount heavy 128mm gun. Major modifications consisted of the enlargement of the chassis (addition of one road-wheel, extension of the hull) and addition of the heavily armored open-top compartment mounted over the engine compartment.

Fighting compartment was mounted in the rear of the vehicle and housed powerful 128mm anti-tank gun with limited traverse of 7 degrees to the left and to the right. Space inside the fighting compartment operated by the crew of five, allowed storage for only 15 to 18 rounds. One 7.92mm MG34 was mounted in the hull for local defence.

From August of 1941 to March of 1942, Rheinmetall-Borsig and Henschel produced two prototypes, which were troop tested in Russia in mid 1942. Both prototypes performed successfully but the development of this project was cancelled in favour of Tiger I. One of Selbstfahrlafette 12.8cm (pictured above) saw service with 521st schwere Panzerjaeger Abteilung and second one with 2nd Panzer Division as late as July of 1942. One of two prototypes (from 2nd Panzer Division) was destroyed in combat, while other one (from 521st sPzJagAbt with 22 kills rings painted on the gun barrel) was captured intact in January of 1943 in Stalingrad area. It was shown at the captured equipment exhibitions in Moscow's Gorky Park in 1943 and 1944.It can be seen today in the Museum of Armored Forces in Kubinka.

The "normal" panzergranate 39 in this caliber (128mm) could penetrate more than 150mm of rolled homogeneus armor at 1000 meters distance.

 

[Henk]

You done it again and showed that you are the master. I would feel unsafe in a open top tank destroyer.

Henk

 

[schwarzpanzer]

CharlesBronson:

well..yeah there is 2 or 3 Panthers blew up in that link, but the Tiger I in there remain relative intact.

Yeah, there is a KingTiger there though with it's turret blown clean off it's ring! Not necesssarily ammo going off though, as the Zvierboy could do that with it's humongous 152mm gun. 8)

A Bren Carrier is a armored vehicle, small yes but armored probably it count in the final Wittman score of 138.

Yes it is, but it can be destroyed by HE (Particularly something as big as 88mm). The pictures/footage of the Bocage Bren carriers that Wittman destroyed were clearly the work of HE shells.

In fact HE is more effective than an AP or HEAT shell against a Bren carrier... (I'll explain below)

Incidentally, the Cromwells and Shermans could also be destroyed by HE (easily from the rear).

Just a theory, but I reckon HE shells were his main loadout - explaining the huge explosion. When AP ammo cooks off, sometimes the penetrator merely pops off the charge - no explosion at all.

HE on the other hand explodes, along with it's charge making an immense chain-explosion.


I'll have to read about Kurt knispel, though I probably already have!

An interesting book (forgot the title) was on the exploits of an obviously insane Panzer Skoda 38t commander who used to charge down KV1's to kissing range and shoot down their barrels!!


Wittman's gunner, Bobby Woll (correct spelling? Said as sounds - German accent - umlaut probably over the o) was also a gunner like Knipsel and won the Iron Cross and was a colleague of Wittman.

I would feel unsafe in a open top tank destroyer.

Funnily enough, as I mentioned above, sometimes it was better. The spall from HEAT or HESH rounds or KE-penetrator/spall of an AP shot/shell could fly out the open top vehicle. Also HEAT creates little or no overpressure in an open-topped vehicle.

PlanD and myself listed the many vulnerabilities a while ago.

 

[Henk]

Yes, correct, but then your biggest enemy will be infantry. Yes it also reduce your weight.

Henk