Best Tank Destroyer/ self-propelled gun

[Civettone]

I've never heard about this.

In fact I've heard the opposite, namely that the Tigers had the best crews.

Can you direct me towards an online source??
Kris

 

[Hakenkreuz]

I think that the T-34 was the best tank killer ever made. There`s also a photo of a Jagdpanther front armor with two holes in it on the Imperial war museum london Web site

 

[Soren]

The T-34 was more likely the best tank-fodder ever made

 

[MacArther]

The T-34 was more likely the best tank-fodder ever made

Now, now, lets not forget the good old "Ronson" Shermans....

 

[comiso90]

The T-34 was more likely the best tank-fodder ever made

I'll take 100 T-34's over 10 Panthers any day!!!!!


I love this photo! If the Jagdpanther had breasts and could make lasagna, I'd marry it... beautiful!!!

.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I have to agree with Comiso here. I think it is hard to argue that the Panther and the Tiger were not the best tanks of the war however I would rather have 100+ Shermans or T-34s over only a handful of Tigers and Panthers.

 

[plan_D]

Depends on the situation; Italian mountains on the defence - I'll have 10 Tigers [and lots of ammo] ... Asian steppes on the offence - 100 T-34-85, thanks.

 

[Soren]

I as well Plan_D.

On the Russian countryside I'd rather have 10 Tigers or Panthers as-well.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Actually pD said on the Russian steppes he would rather have 100 T-34s over a handfull of Panthers or Tigers.

Italian mountains on the defence - I'll have 10 Tigers [and lots of ammo] ... Asian steppes on the offence - 100 T-34-85, thanks.

 

[Soren]

I didn't know Russia was part of Asia...

On the Russian countryside I'd always prefer 10 Tigers or Panthers over 100 T-34's! And seeing that this wasn't an anomally for German Tigers on the Eastern front to be facing and yet come out triumphant, I'd say I have a pretty good argument here.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I didn't know Russia was part of Asia...

Are you serious?

 

[plan_D]

I'm confused now, but Russia is Eurasian it's one of only two countries that are (the other is Turkey). The map of Europe is simply a line drawn around the Medieval civilisations which ended at tribe Rus in and Constantinople in the east, and Sciliy and Gibraltar in the south. Russia is Eurasian because it expanded eastward past the European line, and Turkey is Eurasian because it took Constantinople in the 15th Century - Istanbul.

But, anyway, I'd prefer 100 T-34-85s in open ground but it is a hard decision. Any mention of T-34-76s and I'm going for Tigers.

 

[Soren]

Are you serious?

Yes I am Adler.

Image:LocationAsia.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Soren]

But, anyway, I'd prefer 100 T-34-85s in open ground but it is a hard decision. Any mention of T-34-76s and I'm going for Tigers.

If the engagement starts at any distance past 1,500m then I'm going for the Tigers and Panthers, and thats regardless of wether its against T-34/76's or T-34/85's. The T-34/85 couldn't lay down accurate fire past 800m and wasn't deadly for the Tiger Panther past that range either.

 

[plan_D]

That map shows Russia in Asia, Soren...

There's European Russia and Asian Russia - but it's all Russia. I've had this discussion countless amount of times. I did have an outstanding website the describe the political and geographical positions of countries inside continents, but I lost it.

You make a good point on the tank discussion, Soren, but the problem is the T-34s are racing toward you - and you've got to be able to count on the crews of the Tigers [or Panthers] to be reloading quick enough to knock all ten out in front of them before receiving destructive hits themselves. As I say, it's a hard decision and in reality the Panther did achieve (if I remember correctly) a 9:1 kill ratio against the T-34.

 

[Soren]

The way I see it the map shows that by far most of Russia is within Eastern Europe. (Or atleast the most civilized Russia)

Well I've always considered Russia to be Eastern European and not Asian, besides the Germans only fought in Eastern Europe, they never fought in Asia.

 

[plan_D]

Most people do simply consider Russia as European, but it's not, it's Eurasian - politically it's European, but geographically it's Eurasian.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Yes I am Adler.

Image:LocationAsia.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read pD's post above yours. And if you dont wish to believe him:

"Russia is a transcontinental country extending over much of northern Eurasia (Europe and Asia)."

"Russia is a country located in Europe and in North Asia."

"The Russian steppe has long been depicted as the typical Russian landscape. It is a broad band of treeless, grassy plains, interrupted by mountain ranges, extending from Hungary across Ukraine, southern Russia, and Kazakhstan before ending in Manchuria."

The Ural Mountains are the most famous of the country's mountain ranges because they form the natural boundary between Europe and Asia; the range extends about 2,100 kilometers from the Arctic Ocean to the northern border of Kazakhstan."

Geography of Russia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Soren]

Adler,

Thats all fine, but the Germans didn't fight in Asia, they fought in Europe. There wasn't any fighting over the Asian steppes between the Germans and Russians.

PS: I can't see where I ever wrote that I didn't believe Plan_D on the fact that Russia is infact Eurasian. Like I said I myself always considered Russia to be Eastern European and not Asian, that might be because thats where the Germans fought the Russians, in Eastern Europe. I never gave it much thought.

 

[plan_D]

Alright, if it was on the Pontic steppes I would choose the T-34-85s... it's pretty much the same landscape as the Asian steppes.