Rare & Crazy Panzer Projekts.

Karbine · 07-16-2005, 07:25 AM

Thanks intresting stuff

CharlesBronson · 07-16-2005, 10:12 AM

The heavy self propelled assault gun sturmpanzer Bär ( bear)

Early May of 1942, a new design of Sturmpanzer, was proposed. On March 4th of 1943, Krupp proposed development of new Sturmgun armed with 305mm L/16 mortar and first drawings were ready in May. It was to be armed with a 305mm gun mounted in the superstructure, based on the modified chassis of the then new Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger (Tiger I) heavy tank utilized some Panther components with new suspension developed by Krupp. The new vehicle was to weight 120 tons.

This new Sturmpanzer was to be powered by a 12-cylinder Maybach HL 230 P 30 engine producing 700hp. This would have al-lowed the vehicle to travel at a maximum speed of approximately 20km/h [12 mph]. Bär was to be armed with a rigidly-mounted 305mm KwK L/16 gun installed in an armored superstructure in the back of the hull. The main gun could only be elevated from 0 to 70 degrees and had a range of 10,500 meters [11,400 yards]. Each 305mm round weighed 350kg [770 pounds] and carried a 50kg [110 pound] charge. The interior storage space allowed for only 10 rounds.

Another weapon proposed was the 210mm L/21 wich this panzer should be contain 22 proyectiles.

It was to be 8.2 meters [26.7 feet] long, 4.1 meters [13.65 feet] wide and 3.5 meters [11.4 feet] high. Armor was sloped and protection ranged from 80mm on the sides to 130mm at the front. Sturmpanzer Bär was to be operated by a crew of six - commander, gunner, two loaders, driver and radio-operator. The project never left the drawing board, but was a step in the development of the Sturmtiger.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 07-17-2005, 06:51 AM

The Entwicklung E-50 seems a lot more practacle than the other prototypes.

plan_D · 07-17-2005, 09:58 AM

Developing it was pointless though, they already had the Brummbar and SturmTiger which did the exact same job.

CharlesBronson · 07-17-2005, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

The Entwicklung E-50 seems a lot more practacle than the other prototypes.

And very good looking too. Check the new 6 faced turret.

plan_D · 07-17-2005, 06:53 PM

I don't actually know much about the E-50 - it was basically an evolution of the Panther. It was set to replace the Panther I and Panther II - but never saw anything beyond the paper.

There is actually a Panther II in Fort Knox, U.S. It has a Panther G turret though instead of the destined Schmal Turm 605 which was going to go on the Panther F, Panther II and E-50.

You have to love the looks of the E-50, that Schmal Turm was a beautiful piece of machinery.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 07-18-2005, 01:05 PM

Agreed and yes I do agree that they should have just put emphasis on the existing tanks rather than develop newer less practacle ones.

CharlesBronson · 07-19-2005, 08:11 PM

Quote:

There is actually a Panther II in Fort Knox, U.S. It has a Panther G turret though instead of the destined Schmal Turm 605 which was going to go on the Panther F, Panther II and E-50.

I think that the "small turret" in the Panther II probably would cause some trouble with the larger 88mm L/71

plan_D · 07-20-2005, 04:02 AM

What do you mean? With the turret ring? The reason the Panther II has a Panther G turret is because they were testing the chassis. I assume they would have fitted the 605 later on.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 07-20-2005, 01:56 PM

I think the only problem with the smaller turret is that it would be a smaller fit for the crew.

plan_D · 07-20-2005, 02:02 PM

It had a larger 8.8cm cannon as well - in one of the designs. Maybe it would have required a strengthened turret ring but I don't know. If it could take the high velocity 75 mm - then it could take a 88 mm.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 07-20-2005, 02:25 PM

I guess like I said I am very weak in armor.

CharlesBronson · 07-21-2005, 07:20 PM

Quote:

The reason the Panther II has a Panther G turret is because they were testing the chassis. I assume they would have fitted the 605 later on.

Probably. I try to found a pic of this turret but I failed

Another cliche is is said about the Panther F and E-50 is that the Schmalturm could fit the L/100 75mm gun.
Not completely true . This compact turret would need some counterwight to handle this very very long gun.

Panther F

At list one prototipe of the crazy L/100 was made and it probe to increase the muzzle velocity from 1000 m/s to 1210 meters per second with the standar Steel-core armour piercing explosive, Panzergranate 39.
However the barrel wear was enormous.

I may ad to this that is very likely to the L/100 had troubles with the accuracy at long ranges, due the significant whip effect in this long and thin cannon.

plan_D · 07-21-2005, 07:31 PM

I have a picture of the Panther Ausf F and the turret - unfortunately it's in a book and I haven't got a scanner. I've heard of the plans laid down to fit a 88 mm KwK in the Schmal Turm but never a higher velocity 75 mm cannon.

The one written down for the Panther Ausf F is the KwK42/1 L/70 75 mm which is an improved model (but the same model) as the one on the original Panthers.

Have you got more, detailed, information on the L/100?

The 75 mm KwK42 L/70 was 925 m/s by the way. The 75 mm StuK42 L/70 was 1,120 m/s.

CharlesBronson · 07-21-2005, 07:49 PM

Nop, no more data, I ve posted all I got.

Quote:

The 75 mm KwK42 L/70 was 925 m/s by the way. The 75 mm StuK42 L/70 was 1,120 m/s.

The Kwk 42 and the Stuk 42 was almost the same gun, the designation change only to Stuk when it was mounted in some Jagdpanzers like the Jagdpanzer IV, with minor changes.
Very often the muzzle brake in the Stuk was deleted.

Checking in the Bryan Perret book about the Panzer V, it gives me 935 m/s for the 6.8kg Pzgr 39/42 Steel core AP-HET, and 1120m/s for the 4.75kg tugsten core APCR-T Pzgr 40/42.