"Tiger Tanks! - Ammo consumption versus long range fire" Topic

The information in the PDF is interesting as a whole but it does not show the real details of what occurs on the battlefield. 75% of the shots penetrating the Panther side is really more about the tactical ability of the Sherman crews. The Sherman could penetrate the side armor of the Tiger out to about 1000m.

Achieving a tactical advantage, exploiting your enemy weakness and getting off the first shot is more important than penetration vs armor values.

The diagrams below do not reflect the weakness of the Panther D and A model curved mantlet bottom. They are fairly generalized and do not account for the armor and compound angle for every armor face but give a pretty fair idea of weakness and vulnerability.

A tank firing at a Panther with the target at a 30 degrees horizontal angle to the shooter and the shot hitting the upper hull side armor with a 40-degree angle will give a compound angle of 65-70 degrees with a very good chance of bouncing a 75mm round. Horizontal angles can make a great deal of difference in penetration.

All tanks have weak spots to be exploited.

Wolfhag

Tiger 133 advances toward the western edge of Stavelot in order to relieve encircled parts of SS-Panzer-Aufklärungs-Abteilung 1. During the second advance, this tank is hit in the turret ring. The driver's hatch is torn off, and the radio operator is killed. The driver, unable to communicate with the commander, turns the tank and backs up. The steering hydraulics lose pressure, and the tank is stuck in the road ditch. It is then abandoned.
So it looks like a lucky hit in the turret ring that could of been off the mantlet or a corner of the turret front at the turret ring. The hull gunner was killed and the tank withdrew the other side of a river where it's oil pressure gave out and was immobilized. The commander didn't know at first why the driver turned around and withdrew. The tank stayed near a bridge covering the road until the gunner went outside the tank for awhile and was killed. Then everybody bailed out.
The American's didn't know they damaged the Tiger as all they saw was 3 rounds bounce off it and it backed away. The American narrator said he had seen 75mm rounds bounce of Panthers before but it wasn't clear that it was a 75mm that was doing the firing.

"All tanks have weak spots to be exploited."

Reminds me of an account I read of a Tiger I being knocked out by a frontal hit from a Soviet 45mm AT gun – tungsten core shot through the MG gunport.

The Golden BB rule. Infinitesimally small chance perhaps, but always "possible"

FWIW.

B

Blutarski,
Yes, IIRC there were some US TD's that ambushed some Panthers in the fog and punched out the hull mg position with their 3" guns from about 100m. There is a reason they didn't use them after WWII.

I model Critical Hits with a 5% chance of happening to cover those situations.

Wolfhag

In France a TII was hit by 3" from M10s one on the hull MG ball and fragments wounded the hull gunner who later died. The crew bailed out. They counted 18 3" hits on the front of the TII. That is 5.55% chance – close enough.

They counted 18 3" hits on the front of the TII. That is 5.55% chance – close enough.

We have accounts from both sides. Tiger 301 of sPz Abt 503

US view:

Our tanks continued to advance by firing all their guns on the enemy's armor, which were soon riddled with impacts none of which penetrate as I will see later. Seriously manhandled we saw the crew evacuate the tank…………..

German view:

…………around noon it was hell, we were harassed by artillery and anti-tank fire under repeated blows. I suppose that a projectile ended up penetrating, because Tiger was on fire, we evacuated immediately but our radioman. Klaus Ricke, seriously injured, was transported to Sailly to the aid station of a cloister (Prioress of Montcient) where he was treated, but it was already too late and Ricke died. Our Panzer had been hit 18 times

This is the Tiger and certainly not 18 hits visible and it is know from photos some of the strikes (the lower nose hits in the 'before' photo) are from earlier encounters.
Note yet again the Tiger was hit and penetrated but the US gunners thought it was able to resists the hits.

earlier pic showing pre-existing strikes.

Wow !!!!

Does anyone know were exactly was it penetrated and was it an ammo or engine/fuel fire? Could spalling from a non-penetrating hit have caused the damage?

Wolfhag

A few notes on the combat example posted by mkenny regarding 25 November 1941.

This wasn't a proper battle, it was the incident where PR8 with accompanying arms ran into the repair shop of 1 Army Tank Brigade. I have written about this here:

link

So allow me a few observations on the use of these combat reports as if they have some actual validity in the way that we today understand what is commonly referred to as 'facts'.

1) The 88s in this instance claimed they used 162 AT rounds to dispatch 16 Mk. II. I make that >10 rounds per non-working tank, in a 'shoot fish in barrel' battle scenario (a combined arms group engaging unsupported infantry tanks in various stages of being heavily damaged).
2) The 88s claim all the tanks that were recorded lost by the Germans. I wonder what the views of the German tank crews were on this.
3) The German claims are just that, claims. So calculating a ratio of tank kills to rounds fired is a mugs game of the same order as according any value to the Tiger kill ratios proposed in 'Sledgehammers' by C. Wilbeck.

muse.jhu.edu/article/173363

My view on this is that, given that claims are invariably higher than reality, while the number of rounds fired is presumably true, the ratio of rounds fired to achieved kill will be higher than one could derive from these examples, but it will be close to impossible to figure out by how much.

For general purposes, here is a write-up by the Germans on the best use of AA guns, after CRUSADER.

link

Carry on.

All the best

Andreas

If you hit the front sprocket wheel of a Tiger II from the front, so that your round hit the track and then the wheel through it, I have to believe you would immobilise the tank whatever you were firing. OK, probably an anti-tank rifle or a 20mm could not do so but I struggle with the idea that a high velocity 37mm or 40mm round would not snap the track.

That was what was recommended for field guns against Matildas in 1942.

link

All the best

Andreas

@ Andreas

That's interesting. Depending on range and the evenness or otherwise of the terrain, it might be hard to aim at and hit a wheel, of course.

I don't game in 1/300 any more, but if I did, I think I would want a rule whereby you don't necessarily get to fire at extreme ranges. In a 3-hour game ammo is not often a problem, but it is in real life. I wonder how often crews engaged tank-size targets at 2,000 metres or whatever. Some must have considered it wasteful of ammunition and preferred to conserve their supply for targets they were likelier to hit and to damage.

There was clear guidance for when to open fire at what. Note that in this case the trial was done at 600m, which gives you an indication of the expected ranges. Once the tanks are that close,bugging out is an issue, because you are in Besa range (if you are a German gun crew), so you have to fight it out.

I can't see them doing hail Marys at 2,000m either. At that range you might want to stonk them a bit to ensure they notice they have been seen, get them to button up and be more careful, and strip away any soft stuff (trucks, crunchies).

All the best

Andreas

Indeed. I can see direct fire with HE at 5km against a whole horse-drawn and limbered battery, because it's a large target and you needn't hit it; a near miss is still going to be a nuisance. But yes, if you wanted to try a hail Mary at a single tank 2km away on the table, I'd make you roll a die just to be allowed to try.

Although it would be quite funny to hit and brew up a T-37 or a Mk VIB or something from that range :-)