110% agree I said that before but that was one of several questions he will not answer of mine.
Best/Favourate Tank in the west
- Thread starter Yeomanz
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
110% agree I said that before but that was one of several questions he will not answer of mine.
You are talking about half the German tanks. 'Light' does not enter it. The only other TANK (not SP Guns) would be the PzIV
800 Panthers/Tigers and 900 PzIV
Once you start upping the heavies score you take nearly all the kills away from the PzIV's, Anti-tank guns, mines, infantry ect. Nothing is left for anyone else.
With the overall loss rate ( 3000:1800 roughly) 5:1 is simply not possible.
Not sure what you are trying to say in the first paragragh. I want to know is this.
-How many Tiger/Panthers/Tiger2 were lost to Allies tanks in those months.
-How many Allied tanks were lost to the Tiger/Panther/Tiger2 tanks in those months.
I know that is a hard question but I have to ask it. Not sure if you or anyone else can tell me that but what the heck. I am not trying to up any numbers, I am just trying to get to some understanding that we both can agree on here.
What I was trying to say is if the Germans had a 2:1 kill ratio in their favor (including all German tank losses). If you were to included only the Tiger/Panther/Tiger2 losses and compared that to what they actually killed I think the number would be higher than 2:1 ratio in favor of the Germans.
500 German tanks kill 1000 Allied tanks
ratio 2:1
of the 500 give 200 of them 5:1
now we have the same overall ratio but 300 German tanks have no kills at all.
Once you up the score of a few tanks the majority of them become losers.
I did illustrate it in an earlier post
Let us take the J/J/A monthly totals (the German August totals are incomplete)
48 Tigers lost= 480 Allied tanks at 10:1.
All Tigers on the British front. Total UK losses to August = 1211.
Thus 40% of all British losses to 50 Tigers?
Silly isn't it?
Can I ask why people are saying there is a 5:1 kill ratio?
Is there some proof posted somewhere that I have missed?
Tell me what it is that makes you think the ratio is valid.
I can tell you there is absolutely no official figure anywhere that quotes it.
What on earth started this rumour in the first place
ratio 2:1
of the 500 give 200 of them 5:1
now we have the same overall ratio but 300 German tanks have no kills at all.
Once you up the score of a few tanks the majority of them become losers.
I did illustrate it in an earlier post
Let us take the J/J/A monthly totals (the German August totals are incomplete)
48 Tigers lost= 480 Allied tanks at 10:1.
All Tigers on the British front. Total UK losses to August = 1211.
Thus 40% of all British losses to 50 Tigers?
Silly isn't it?
Can I ask why people are saying there is a 5:1 kill ratio?
Is there some proof posted somewhere that I have missed?
Tell me what it is that makes you think the ratio is valid.
I can tell you there is absolutely no official figure anywhere that quotes it.
What on earth started this rumour in the first place
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
I got an idea... Why dont u take ur "I wanna prove the world wrong" attitude somewhere else... U are caustic to everyone here and a wise-@ss who think their stats are the only right stats....
All these numbers ur putting out here are numbers that are not 100% accurate, just like everyone elses, so u need to take ur holier-than-tho attitude and shove it up ur @ss....
Where on earth did the rumour start up about there only being a 2:1 ratio??? I can find no official figures anywhere that quote it.... Oh wait a minute, if kenny says its so, it must be the gospel written from up high... I soooo very glad we have the worlds leading tank expert here with his 100% accurate statistics... Gimmie a freaken break....
Heres some Moderator advice... Give up the attitude pal, otherwise ur stay here will be short... Ur quest to quell the internet boogeyman and the bogus stats of the world shall not be fulfilled here...
All these numbers ur putting out here are numbers that are not 100% accurate, just like everyone elses, so u need to take ur holier-than-tho attitude and shove it up ur @ss....
Where on earth did the rumour start up about there only being a 2:1 ratio??? I can find no official figures anywhere that quote it.... Oh wait a minute, if kenny says its so, it must be the gospel written from up high... I soooo very glad we have the worlds leading tank expert here with his 100% accurate statistics... Gimmie a freaken break....
Heres some Moderator advice... Give up the attitude pal, otherwise ur stay here will be short... Ur quest to quell the internet boogeyman and the bogus stats of the world shall not be fulfilled here...
Well a 'wise ass' should be easy to discredit. Instead of general abuse show me where the figures are wrong.
And you need to understand that a big mouth does not give you the right to discredit 'statistics' that are indeed 'accurate'.
Perhaps you could tell me why the official US Army figures for destroyed tanks are 'not 100% accurate?
Why are the German monthly round ups of tanks lost in Normandy 'not accurate'
Have you found mistakes in the UK table of tanks lost in June/July and August of 1944?
They are not 'my numbers' so please show me where they are wrong.
I can see your problem though. The figures punch a huge hole in the mythical 5:1 Panther/Tiger ratio. To get back to this distortion you do need to ignore the real totals.
Other than invective can you add anything here?
By the way you misquoted me. I said:
" Can I ask why people are saying there is a 5:1 kill ratio?"
Rateh than your distorted
"Where on earth did the rumour start up about there only being a 2:1 ratio???"
If you believe the conclusion to be wrong then show why. Losing your temper may be theraputic but it is rarely informative.
I should defer to those who recycle myth as reality?
This is forum policy?
The way I see it 'pal' is my information has upset a lot of people here.
They constantly tell me I am 'wrong'
The deride my information.
They insult me.
But they not one of them has posted a fact that casts the slightest doubt on anything I wrote.
I do not claim that 'I' am right.
It is not 'my' discovery.
It is in the monthly loss tables.
I have just given them more exposure.
Show the facts are wrong. Prove the figures are bogus.
Do that instead of hysterical chest thumping and you might get somewhere.
To make it simple.
Can anyone here give me examples where a Tiger Unit in Normandy achieved a 10:1 kill ratio?
Cite specific examples where individual Tigers took on and beat 10 Shermans,?
5 Shermans?
As this 5:1 was the norm there should be mountains of evidence to back it up.
We already know about Wittmann and Barkmann but I am after the ordinary everyday German tanker and his 5 kills.
Please do not bother posting Willy Feys account of August 7th. It is bogus.
No screaming or little girl tantrums now, just the facts.
While I think this argument has got a little out of hand. I'm going to have to say something
While I can understand a moderator warning a member about insulting another members, warning a member because he's insulting a tank is a first
So far, the numbers he's put up for the total number of tanks lost by both sides in the Normandy battles are correct.
If you can find different figures please post them, so we all can share
while m kenny might be a little caustic in his attitude, his knowledge of German tanks in Normandy is greater than anybody else on this forum.
He has given figures to back up his statements, we are still waiting for the other side to give theirs.
We may have a long wait
I suppose you are going to warn the other members about their personal insults towards m kenny as well
[
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
Nope, but I will give both of u @ssholes a warning... Redcoat, mind ur own business....
M_kenny you are infact the one who is making stuff up.
But Ok M_kenny, whats your source exactly ??
Also please prove that the Allied rule of thumb that it took 5 shermans for every Tiger is wrong - I'm very interested in this since a very regarded expert on these matters from bovington told me about this fact.
Now read a book by Thomas L. Jentz would you, cause you desperately need to !
But Ok M_kenny, whats your source exactly ??
Also please prove that the Allied rule of thumb that it took 5 shermans for every Tiger is wrong - I'm very interested in this since a very regarded expert on these matters from bovington told me about this fact.
Now read a book by Thomas L. Jentz would you, cause you desperately need to !
Actually could you do me a favour, and remove me from the members list... I no longer wish to be associated with this forum.
Bye folks
No-one can touch your source if it doesn't exist...
Please be so good as to indicate which source you doubt. Then I can dispell your cofusion.
That is the thing m kenny. Is we dont have to prove anything especially with stats. We know the stats are there. No one is saying that Tigres were not destroyed. What we are saying is technologically the Tiger was more advanced than any allied tank and was one on one superior. No one is challenging your stats. So as some one else said get off your high horse!
I dont care what you know about German tanks or what you dont know about them. I know with common sense that with a better gun, better armour the Tiger is better than anything that the allies put up. So get off your fricken national pride because I dont care about it!
He does not want to be part of this forum, he is gone.
Actually could you do me a favour, and remove me from the members list... I no longer wish to be associated with this forum.
Bye folks
Goodbye dont let the door hit you on your way out.
Now is your chance. Show everyone my fabrication and I am finished.
Source for what, exactly?
Give me a specific example where you want clarification.
And this 'very regarded expert ' from Bovington is............. Name him and we can check how well regarded he is ourselves. If neccessary I will contact him to see why he would say this.
Do you realise what you ask?
I have to prove your case for you do I?
It would be far easier for you to give examples of this ratio-if you had any examples-I know you have none.
If you want to enter a name dropping contest with 'regarded experts' then I can oblige you.
Do you want to know which German Tiger super expert asked me for help on his last book about Normandy Tigers? Only one specific area but still.........
Which UK 'regarded expert' game me a credit in his last article in After The Battle Magazine (no.132)
How many articles have you been asked cast your eye over before they go for publication?
I will stop there before I am accused of bragging.
Which one? Pick one of my titles and I will read it. I have 32 books by Jentz.
After all this chest thumping can we get back on topic?
Can anyone show the official loss figures are incorrect, mistaken or downright falsified?
Attachments
Another miss. I am Irish. What national pride did you think was involved?
I dont give a damn if you are Irish, Japanese, or Zwahili, you dont get off your high horse you can get out of here as well.
Oh and by the way. I dont give a damn what books you helped out on.
YOU CAN BITE ME!
You see when you tell me to go and Bite you, I will help you leave! No one I repeat no one in this forum will tell me to Bite Them!
YOU CAN BITE ME!
You see when you tell me to go and Bite you, I will help you leave! No one I repeat no one in this forum will tell me to Bite Them!