Best/Favourate Tank in the west

Whats is the Best/your favourate tank from in North Africa

  • Total voters
    130

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I'm sorry, but you're all wrong, the best tank in the West, especially in North Africa would have to be the M3 Grant . I mean, what can you possibly do against 2.3 inches of armor? Still, I do really like the tank, because of the unorthodox layout, which was both a help and a hindrance.
 
Soren said:
Yes Adler you've got that right, so don't bother yourself with those two and there meaningless remarks.

.
Click to expand...
Is there anything more meaningless than stating a tank was fully functional even when you know it had a jammed turret

You'd make a good used car salesman
 
redcoat,

From a technical point of view, the Tiger would have been able to drive back to it's lines and be repaired within a few hours. The lucky hit by the Churchill gives no indication that the Churchill could defeat a Tiger.

What you did imply though, was the "only engagement" between the two in North Africa saw the Tiger knocked out. You seemed to forget to mention that four Churchill's were knocked out in the same battle.
 
I read a eyewitness report of a US tank crew man on a Sherman who said that they engaged a King Tiger and the King Tiger knocked out 8 of them and then reversed slowly and then drove away and disappeared without being damaged.

Now the fact is that the Churchill did have a lucky hit thus not disabling the tank but crippling her. If she was knocked out she would not be able to drive and the crew would be unable to use the tank, for anything.

I think someone does not know the meaning of words and must get a better dictionary, gees I am not even a english speaking person and I know that.
 
Henk said:
I read a eyewitness report of a US tank crew man on a Sherman who said that they engaged a King Tiger and the King Tiger knocked out 8 of them and then reversed slowly and then drove away and disappeared without being damaged.
Click to expand...

Please post it and we can all have a laugh.............

Now the fact is that the Churchill did have a lucky hit thus not disabling the tank but crippling her. If she was knocked out she would not be able to drive and the crew would be unable to use the tank, for anything.
Click to expand...

It must really hurt that the uber-panzer was hit and captured. Notice how the true believers engage in gymnastics to try and salvage the Tiger myth.

I think someone does not know the meaning of words and must get a better dictionary, gees I am not even a english speaking person and I know that.
Click to expand...

Words may confuse you but myths don't?
 
Another complete and 'indestructable' Tiger captured in Normandy. A couple of Shermans fired at it and the crew baled out and ran away.
 

Attachments

  • SS101 1.kp. Tiger 114 Sherman collision vid grab #2.jpg
    33.7 KB · Views: 129
m kenny said:
Please post it and we can all have a laugh.............
Click to expand...

Not saying it happened, but it is believable. The Koenigs Tiger was better than any tank the allies could throw at it. Even Sherman fans know there tank was undergunned and underarmoured compared to the Tiger, Panther and Koenigs Tiger.



m kenny said:
It must really hurt that the uber-panzer was hit and captured. Notice how the true believers engage in gymnastics to try and salvage the Tiger myth.
Click to expand...

The Tiger was not undefeatable but it was still better than any tank the allies could throw at it. Believing that the Sherman and anything else was better is quite naive.
 
Not a fan of wikipedia because I find lots of errors in it but I used it just for a quick search here.

Tiger

Tigers were capable of destroying their most common opponents, the T-34, Sherman, or Churchill IV at ranges exceeding 1,600 m. In contrast, the T-34s equipped with the 76.2 mm gun could not penetrate the Tiger frontally at any range, but could achieve a side penetration at approximately 500 m firing the BR-350P APCR ammunition. The T-34-85's 85 mm gun could penetrate the Tiger from the side at over 1,000 m. The IS-2's 122 mm gun could destroy the Tiger at ranges exceeding 1,000 m from any aspect.

The M4 Sherman's 75 mm gun could not penetrate the Tiger frontally at any range, and needed to be within 500 m to achieve a side penetration. The British 17-pounder as used on the Sherman Firefly, if firing its APDS round, could penetrate frontally at over 1,500 m. The US 76 mm gun, if firing the most common APCBC ammunition, could not penetrate the Tiger frontally at any range, and needed to be within 1,000 m to get a side kill. However, if the 76 mm was firing HVAP ammunition (usually in short supply), frontal penetrations were possible at 1,000 m.

As range decreases in combat, all guns can penetrate more armour (with the exception of HEAT ammunition, which was rare in WW2). The great penetrating power of the Tiger's gun meant that it could destroy many of its opponents at ranges at which they could not respond. In open terrain this was a major tactical advantage. Opposing tanks were often forced to make a flanking attack in order to kill a Tiger. American tank crews were told that the safest and surest way to kill a Tiger was "to get it by its ***" - that is, to manoeuver behind it and hit it in the engine compartment, where the armour was thinnest.

and

The Tiger's armour and firepower, however, were feared by all its opponents. In tactical defence, its poor mobility was less of an issue. Whereas Panthers had been the more serious threat to the allied tanks, Tigers had a bigger psychological effect on Allied crews, causing a "Tiger hysteria". Allied crews would sometimes evade rather than confront Tigers, even if a tank only looked like one, such as the Panzer IV with turret skirts applied. In the Normandy campaign, it could take four to five Shermans to knock out a single Tiger tank by manoeuvring to its weaker flank or rear armour; the Soviet T-34s fared similarly against the German tanks, as had the German PzIII earlier against the Soviet heavy tanks. An accepted Allied tactic was to engage the Tiger as a group, one attracting the attention of the Tiger crew while the others attacked the sides or rear of the vehicle. Since the ammunition and fuel were stored in the sponsons, a side penetration often resulted in a kill. This was, however, a risky tactic, and often resulted in the loss of several Allied vehicles. It took a great deal of tactical skill to eliminate Tiger units.

and

On 7 July 1943, a single Tiger tank commanded by SS-Oberscharführer Franz Staudegger from the 2nd Platoon of 13th Panzer Company of 1st SS Panzer Grenadier Division "LSSAH" engaged a Soviet group of some 50 T-34 tanks around Psyolknee (the southern sector of the German salient in the Battle of Kursk). Staudegger used up his entire ammunition after destroying some 22 Soviet tanks, while the rest retreated. For his achievement, Franz Staudegger was awarded the Knight's Cross.

and

The Tiger is particularly associated with the name of SS-Haupsturmführer Michael Wittmann of schwere SS-Panzerabteilung 101, who was one of the most successful tank commanders of World War II. He worked his way up, commanding various vehicles and finally a Tiger I. In one day he destroyed over two dozen Allied vehicles including several tanks; and single-handedly held up an entire advance until his tank was knocked out and abandoned at the Battle of Villers-Bocage.

Over 10 Tiger tank commanders had over 100 kills on their account, including: Johannes Bölter with 139+ kills, Otto Carius with 150+ kills, Kurt Knispel with 168 kills, and Michael Wittmann with 138 kills.

and

In May 1943, a Tiger of the Afrika Korps (turret number 131) was captured after a fight with Churchill tanks in Tunisia. It was repaired and displayed in Tunisia before being sent to England for a thorough inspection. The Western Allies, however, did little to prepare for combat against the Tiger despite their assessment that the newly-encountered German tank was superior to their own. This conclusion was partly based on the correct estimate that the Tiger would be produced in relatively small numbers. It was also based on the doctrine of the United States Army, which did not place emphasis on tank-versus-tank combat, relying instead in the use of tank destroyers. The British army, on the other hand, hastened their efforts to get Cruiser tanks armed with 17 pounder guns into operation after assessing the Tiger, albeit without a great deal of success.

and

An oft-quoted statistic for weapons systems is the kill ratio. Against the Soviet and western Allied production numbers, even a 10:1 kill ratio would not have been sufficient for the Tigers. Some Tiger units exceeded the 10:1 kill ratio, including 13. Kompanie/Panzer-Regiment Grossdeutschland (16.67:1), schwere SS-Panzer-Abteilung 103 (12.82:1) and schwere Panzer-Abteilung 502 (13.08:1). These numbers must be set against the opportunity cost of building the expensive Tiger. Every Tiger built, for example, cost as much as four Sturmgeschütz III assault guns. One measure of cost-effectiveness, therefore, would be whether the Tiger's kill ratio was four times as high as the Sturmgeschutz III.

Tiger I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Erich said:
doubtful as it was abandoned by the 1st W-SS crew
Click to expand...

Well it was from sSS PzAbt 101. It was captured on 26/27th June 1944. Several Shermans fired at it and the crew baled out and ran away. The Tiger was taken as a prize and driven by men of The Nottinghamshire Sherwood Rangers Yeomanry. It was sent to the UK and used up in gunnery trials. A detailed account of the acrtion can be found in Stuart Hill's book 'By Tank Into Normandy' page 107. (Cassell 2002)
 

Attachments

  • SS101 1.Kp. Tiger 114 - British test vid grab #4.bmp
    225.1 KB · Views: 109
  • page12vbATBM0007.bmp
    900.1 KB · Views: 100
  • ss101a.jpgsml.jpg
    25.7 KB · Views: 107
Well no tank is indestructable M_kenny, so I really don't get that comment of yours.

Here's an early Tiger Ausf.B also taken about by a Sherman from the side at point blank range - this again serves to demonstrate just how desperate the Allies got when'ever faced by a Tiger:
 

Attachments

  • pic62887.jpg
    37.3 KB · Views: 108
The above is from 18/7/44 and Operation Goodwood. Not a good example to use as crew accounts from the Tiger II say the commander panicked and drove backwards through a hedge into the Sherman. The (decorated for this act)Sherman commader says he saw it and drove forward to ram it.

Of course the Germans then claim it was hit in error by German PAK (this is not 'discovered' until the 1960's by the way) as no Sherman could ever knock out a TII!
 
m kenny, you live in a dream world. The Tiger and King Tiger were no myths, they were far superior to anything the Allies produced in firepower and armour. And the Panther - well that was better at everything. There was no better rounded tank than the Panther.

If you're so sad, m kenny, as to not see the facts then that's your problem. But the facts remain, the Tiger captured in North Africa was in good enough shape to drive it back to the German lines. It was a lucky hit, whereas if the Tiger had hit the Churchill in the same place - the Churchill turret would have gone missing from the chassis.
 
plan_D said:
m kenny, you live in a dream world.
Click to expand...


A 'Tigers are cool' dream world?


Yep the Tiger was 'unlucky' and the crew ran away.

Tiger '114' in Normandy was 'unlucky' and the crew ran away.

The TII in Goodwood was 'unlucky' because the commander 'panicked' and tried to reverse out of trouble........

It was 'unlucky' that it had to be knocked out by its own A/T guns (course I believe it)

The 100+ Tigers that were destroyed in the 8 weeks of the Normandy campaign were 'unlucky.

Gosh what an 'unlucky' tank it was!

7 'unlucky' Tigers in Russia.
 

Attachments

  • TigersUnlucky0001.jpg
    21 KB · Views: 107
  • TigersUnlucky0002.jpg
    29.2 KB · Views: 103
  • TigersUnlucky0003.jpg
    22.3 KB · Views: 102
Yes M_Kenny its all one big conspiracy, cause like we all know the Germans won the war so they wrote the history books and we all know what that means ! OMG, we've all been fouled ! Panic !!

Christ !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Z
Best tank engines of WWII
15 16 17
Replies
335
Views
22K
Reluctant Poster
R
A
Rolls Royce Tank Engines
Replies
2
Views
607
Reluctant Poster
R
P
Which tank is this ?
Replies
2
Views
736
programa
P
O
British Balloon Bombs in the Balkans, Summer 1943?
Replies
4
Views
495
Old MacDonald
O
T
The Tank Museum Wins!
Replies
4
Views
1K
WATU
W
Menu
Log in
Register