Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Tiger was unquestionably a backward step for the resilience of german armoured formations. Whilst individually these vehicles were peerless engineering marvels, well protected and requiring an inordinate expenditure of resources to deal with the, their individual unit costs, on a real basis, was such that they contributed to the dilution of strength for each of the panzer formations. Tiger was never an easy tank to build, never an easy tank to use and limited in several areas (notably range and mobility) that damned it to mediocrity throughout....................The tiger was probably one of the best heavy tanks of the war, but was not suited to the impoverished german Army 1942-45. There were definite penalties to numbers as a result of the tigers introduction. Moreover, whilst everyone was toying with the concept of a super heavy tank they fell out of favour after the war almost immediately in favour of the "main battle tank" which favoured an all round compromise between the often competing demands of protection, firepower and mobility. Whilst heavy tanks might concentrate on one or two of these facets at the expense of the other(s), this was found to be less than ideal after the war. Tiger was no exception to that.
Tiger was unquestionably a backward step for the resilience of german armoured formations. Whilst individually these vehicles were peerless engineering marvels, well protected and requiring an inordinate expenditure of resources to deal with the, their individual unit costs, on a real basis, was such that they contributed to the dilution of strength for each of the panzer formations. Tiger was never an easy tank to build, never an easy tank to use and limited in several areas (notably range and mobility) that damned it to mediocrity throughout its career.
Cost is the first demerit of the tank. There will always be massive disagreements as to the final unit cost of the tiger. Suffice it to say it was exorbitant. Massively so….some sources suggest that at least 30 T-34s could be had for the same cost as a single Tiger I. Tigers are known to have an exchange rate of about 10:1 in battle, but those odds shortened considerably if total losses are compared. Many tigers were lost to mechanical breakdowns running out of fuel as the hordes of T-3s simply bypassed them.
The second limitation affecting the Tiger was its very limited range….may 87 miles maximum. As suggested above, this led to many tigers simply being abandoned after running out of fuel and severely limited the type in any offensive roles
The third constraint affecting the type was its distinct lack of mobility. It had difficulty crossing may bridges, it suffered heavy losses in boggy terrain, it was never great in rough terrain
Other adverse issues was its slow turret traverse
The tiger was probably one of the best heavy tanks of the war, but was not suited to the impoverished german Army 1942-45. There were definite penalties to numbers as a result of the tigers introduction. Moreover, whilst everyone was toying with the concept of a super heavy tank they fell out of favour after the war almost immediately in favour of the "main battle tank" which favoured an all round compromise between the often competing demands of protection, firepower and mobility. Whilst heavy tanks might concentrate on one or two of these facets at the expense of the other(s), this was found to be less than ideal after the war. Tiger was no exception to that.
Seems like a lot of the associated costs of using the Lancaster is not included. For example the cost of crew training etc. prorated over expected life of the plane. Also a 2000 lb bomb cost about 100 GBP. It took about 1.7 tons of fuel to 1 ton of bombs. https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/2123/664/2/adt-NU20050104.11440202whole.pdfI think David Irving ruffled feathers because he actually looked at archive documents himself in Germany and Russia rather than following the old known stories about WW2 and its personalities, many legends that dated back to the 1950's when the archives were closed. His book on 1945 Dresden bombing also showed a rather bad light on civilian area bombing by both RAF and USAAF in this case. The V1 and V2 program was also not a nice thing and probably kept British resolve to keep area bombing germany right till the end.
But from that document costs I get, (adding on cost of warhead & fuel to V1 as ~200GBP as that was not in the bill of construction.)
Lancaster loaded ~30,000 GBP (6 x 2000lb bombs)
V2 ~10,000 GBP (2200lb bomb)
V1 ~300 GBP (1900lb bomb)
Now certainly a Lancaster is best value with 6x the bomb load, known accuracy and re-usability unlike the V1/2, although it can be intercepted while the V2 cannot.
Good point, the V1 didn't need trained crews just a few techs and some tractor drivers LOL.For example the cost of crew training etc. prorated over expected life of the plane
Good point, the V1 didn't need trained crews just a few techs and some tractor drivers LOL.
Actually this brings up the He162 Volksjager, supposedly built as a cheap fighter to be used by barely trained pilots, its hard to find any reference that they shot down more than a handful of planes.
I tend to agree--except for the pilot-less V series rockets used by Germany as the Allies were fast closing in-- we should remember that all the aircraft flown by the Axis and the Allies in the ETO were flown by humans, with all their flaws and strong suits thrown into the mix.. Germany lost a fair amount of their most experienced pilots early on in WW11- The Allies were able to draw upon pilots from: England, Canada, Australia, and after Dec. 1941, The USA. I wish to "tread lightly" here, when I venture a guess that the Luftwaffe was very surprised when the famed "Red Tail" P-51 Mustangs were piloted by men that their Nazi idealogy deemed to be inferior to Aryans- Jesse Owens in 1936 in Berlin non-withstanding--I think that diehard fanboys of Luftwaffe aircraft predate on-line games and even the Internet. Some of the fanboyism is definitely political, in that it is held by people who support Hitler's ideology.
when I venture a guess that the Luftwaffe was very surprised when the famed "Red Tail" P-51 Mustangs were piloted by men that their Nazi idealogy deemed to be inferior to Aryans---
Would the He 100 count as over rated? It's performance was leaked, with much propaganda fan-fare, but achieved nothing. Besides posed photo's, neatly lined up on the airfield, painted in fictitious unit markings.
The type was eventually abandoned, but it did exist. And was proclaimed to be the greatest fighter in the world, capable of astonishing speeds. However in reality, it achieved nothing useful, and faded into obscurity. Perhaps it was deliberately over-rated by the Germans, as they had no intention of producing it, but it was over-rated none the less. Or maybe not.Not sure how it can be seen as over rated. The Germans propagandized a great many things and the He100 was seen as a useful subject at the time.
lol...that may be more accurate!Perhaps it would be more accurate to say the He 113 was over rated?