Get someone to translate this for you.
Nothing can change the fact that crew claims were officialy recognised to be 50% higher than reality.
You asked for the documentation and you got it.
Tank commanders, who was best?
- Thread starter Lucky13
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Get someone to translate this for you.
Nothing can change the fact that crew claims were officialy recognised to be 50% higher than reality.
You asked for the documentation and you got it.
parsifal
Colonel
and we are off......
I speak German m_kenny, I can read what it says. And like I said, the German high command just took into account that knocked out tanks were recovered, just as it says. Double claiming is mentioned, yes, but it probably didn't take up more than 10%, the rest is vehicles recovered repaired.
So the German tanker's claims might very well be correct in that they hit and took out 90% of the number listed, but 50% or so got back into action because the Soviets were advancing.
So sorry, but you have proven nothing yet.
So the German tanker's claims might very well be correct in that they hit and took out 90% of the number listed, but 50% or so got back into action because the Soviets were advancing.
So sorry, but you have proven nothing yet.
Btw, eventhough I can read speak German pretty sufficiently I have to ask wether this is some sort of forgery ? Why ? Cause I've never heard of the word "Absug" before. "Absuch", yes, but Absug... no.. and I frankly find it very hard to believe that the German high command would make such a misspelling (If it is one). If it is infact a German word then just look past this, but still;
Where did you get this document from ? How do you know it's genuine ? BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY how can you conclude from ONE SINGLE report that the German high command always reduced claims by 50% ?? And last but not least, how in the world can you attribute allmost all of the 50% to doubleclaiming ??!! Esp. seeing that it is VERY well known that a VERY high percentage of tanks knocked out of action in combat got repaired to working order afterwards.
Sorry m_kenny but your case is just way too far out for anyone to believe. You're cherry picking as always making your own far fetched conclusions along the way.
Where did you get this document from ? How do you know it's genuine ? BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY how can you conclude from ONE SINGLE report that the German high command always reduced claims by 50% ?? And last but not least, how in the world can you attribute allmost all of the 50% to doubleclaiming ??!! Esp. seeing that it is VERY well known that a VERY high percentage of tanks knocked out of action in combat got repaired to working order afterwards.
Sorry m_kenny but your case is just way too far out for anyone to believe. You're cherry picking as always making your own far fetched conclusions along the way.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Doesn't Abzug mean "to withdraw from" or "moving away from"?
My German is rusty, so I may be wrong
My German is rusty, so I may be wrong
Ask all you want. Its genuine and nothing can change the fact that German crew claims were 50% higher than reality. Every ace list total should be reduced by half.
It means discount or deduction. You really are out of your depth here.
So now you say we can include every damaged tank as a kill? Great!
Looking at the Combat Reports for 2nd kp sSS PzAbt 102 for July/Aug 1944 we see that Tigers 211, 212,213,222,223,224,233,234,241 and 242 were all damaged at some point and had to go for repair. Can we then say these 10 tanks should be included in the British kill totals along with 221, 231 and 232 which are the only ones totaly destroyed?
This would also mean the 137 Tigers and Panthers repaired by 1 SS Pz.Korps 16 June-14 July 1944 should also be counted as Allied kills?
sPzAbt 503 listed 39 Tigers as combat ready on the night og July 17th 1944.
The night of 18/7/44 they only had 9 fit for action. Can we include those 30 Tigers as British kills?
Using damaged tanks as legitimate kills would mean that we could award some 5000 German tanks as kills in Normandy.
I love it when a true believer does not think through his excuses!
First you said there were no documents............wrong!
then you say they are fake...................wrong!
next you say the words are not German...................wrong
What is your next excuse?
It is odd that in all this demands for proof and sources you have yet to show us the documents that lead you to believe 6000 Soviet tanks were lost at Kursk.
parsifal
Colonel
Collins German to English dictionary:
Abzug
Translation Abzug in the German-English Collins dictionary
It is a word, but it has a number of meaning according to this translation
Abzug
Translation Abzug in the German-English Collins dictionary
It is a word, but it has a number of meaning according to this translation
parsifal
Colonel
There is not even the slightest chance of the Soviets ever losing 6000 tanks at Kursk. According to the latest research they lost 1080 heavy types and 220 Lights. However, all but 200 of the heavies were returned to service.
That bit of MKs argument I can accept. But MK you need to tone down your acrimony of the German tank specialists if you wnat this audience to believe you and Soren you need to look at sources other than the ones you are relying on at the moment. Both of you lose all your credibility when you start down this childish path . That applies to both of you. You can take from me now, or you can wait until the Mods step in. Either way I dont care.
The insistence by both of you to deal in absolutes, blind to any other possibility other than what you think you know as the truth is very off-putting to the other members of this forum
That bit of MKs argument I can accept. But MK you need to tone down your acrimony of the German tank specialists if you wnat this audience to believe you and Soren you need to look at sources other than the ones you are relying on at the moment. Both of you lose all your credibility when you start down this childish path . That applies to both of you. You can take from me now, or you can wait until the Mods step in. Either way I dont care.
The insistence by both of you to deal in absolutes, blind to any other possibility other than what you think you know as the truth is very off-putting to the other members of this forum
Yes, the simplest Google would have revealed this. One has to wonder at the competence of anyone making such a basic and fundemental error.
In the context where the word was used it clearly refers to a deduction (or discount) of 50% A total of 16251 troop kill claims is reduced to 8125.
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
Same with Parsifal, you're both knowledgable in tank warfare, but you need to tone down the attitudes.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Actually Abzug is a type of noun that can have a number of meanings depending on how it is applied in the sentance, the German language much like many older dialects have a good number of words like this.
I can appreciate a spirited debate, especially when it is of a fact finding nature.
But to sit here and watch this thread degrade into a mudslinging match is bullshit. Seriously.
I can appreciate a spirited debate, especially when it is of a fact finding nature.
But to sit here and watch this thread degrade into a mudslinging match is bullshit. Seriously.
So far the only figures I used are the Russian loss totals for Kursk quoted in Zetterlings book. Can you point me to a better source?
For Villers Bocage I use the number of tank wrecks on the road used by Wittmann (Eight) added to the number (three) he says he fired at on the other side of this road. The 8 wrecks are all photographed in situ the next day and thus are 'absolute'.
The remaining 3 are described in Wittmann's own account recorded the same night.
Is there a source that is more complete than Wittmann's testimony the Daniel Taylor or Agte books?
The 'fact' is the 50% reduction was applied to all German claims. That is an absolute fact. I even posted the except from Zetterling where he mentions it.
I also posted the page from 'Waffen und Geheimwaffen des deutschen Heeres 1933-1945, Band 2" by Fritz Hahn' that shows a period document showing how a 50% reduction was applied to 16251 tank kill claims in July and August in 1943.
I am not blind to the possibility some things are open to interpretation. However that does not mean everything is. We have fixed points that can not be ignored. Saying things like
lets remember that Wittmann himself claimed 11 to 15 tanks knocked out at Villers Bocage that day
is simply untrue.
He actualy said
"I first knocked out 2 tanks from the right of the column, then 1 from the left................I drove toward the rear half of the column on the road, knocking out every tank that came toward me as I went"
Thus he claimed 3 tanks only. He does not mention any other numbers. It just happens that the stretch of road he was on was photographed extensively by the Germans themselves and you can count the 8 tanks that were knocked out on it. 8+3 is the max number of tanks he could have knocked out. It was physicaly impossible for Wittmann to have hit any more than those 11. The award citation for Wittmann mentions 15+6 tanks but that was written by Dietrich. Just because someone believes it was 15 will not make it 15. Neither will a search of 'other' sources help because there is no better source than Wittmanns own words and the post battle photos.
For once I actually think Wiki i well documented on the matter:
At approximately 0900 Sergeant O'Connor, travelling towards Point 213 in a half-track, broke radio silence to give the only warning to British forces in and around Villers-Bocage before the German attack began.[57] A single Tiger tank, commanded by Wittmann, drove onto Route Nationale 175 and engaged the two rearmost tanks from A Squadron 4CLY, positioned on Point 213, destroying a Cromwell and Sherman Firefly.[56] Shortly afterwards two Cromwell tanks of A Squadron were knocked out by Tigers 221 and 223 (commanded by SS-Unterscharführer Georg Hantusch and Jurgen Brendt respectively.[2]), which had been making their way up to Point 213 via a wooded track[58] around 200 meters south of the main road.[34]
Following the destruction of the two rearmost tanks, Wittmann proceeded down Route Nationale 175 towards Villers-Bocage, and in the following minutes destroyed the mechanized transport of the 1st Rifle Brigade parked at the side of the road along with two QF 6 pounder anti-tank gun. As the riflemen had dismounted from their transport minutes before the attack began, they took the opportunity to take cover in the hedges and fields nearby when the firing started and suffered few casualties.[2] Some French sources, along with British eyewitness accounts of the fighting, report that two Tigers engaged and destroyed the transport of the Rifle Brigade and that it was not solely Wittmann's Tiger.[59] It is speculated that the second Tiger tank was positioned north of the main road, near the road junction to Tilly-sur-Seulles, and possibly out of fuel.[59] Wittmann's Tiger continued into Villers-Bocage driving down Georges Clémenceau Street.
There are conflicting accounts regarding what happened next and the number of tanks and vehicles destroyed by Wittmann and his crew. It is claimed by several historians that Wittmann's Tiger entered the town and quickly engaged and destroyed 3 M5 Stuarts of the 4CLY reconnaissance troop,[58][60] although other accounts, including a retrospect by Taylor,[61] dispute this[62] and photographs taken following the battle only show 2 destroyed tanks on the main road,[63] and then destroyed the 4CLY medical officer's half-track and the intelligence officer's scout car,[64] although no wreckage from these last 2 vehicles are visible in the post action photographs.[65] Following these events Wittmann's Tiger pushed further into Villers-Bocage and engaged the Cromwell tanks of the 4CLY regimental headquarters and the two artillery observation post tanks ("OP tanks") of the 5th Royal Horse artillery.[66]
Accounts differ as to the exact circumstances of Wittmann's disengagement. Drawing on testimony from British tankers in Villers-Bocage, the historians Forty and Taylor record that Wittmann duelled briefly and without result with a Sherman Firefly commanded by Sergeant Stan Lockwood before withdrawing[67][68] while Bob Moore, of the 4CLY, claims a shot from his tank was responsible for denting the driver visor on the Tiger tank that forced it to withdraw.[69] Their accounts then report that this move brought Wittmann face to face with a surviving Cromwell tank, of the regimental headquarters, commanded by Captain Pat Dyas who had followed the Tiger down the road seeking a shot at its thinner rear armour. Dyas opened fire without effect, before Wittmann returned fire and destroyed the Cromwell.[70] Wittman's Tiger is then said to have continued eastwards before being disabled by a British 6 Pounder anti–tank gun, under the command of Sergeant Bray, on the outskirts of Villers-Bocage at the road junction to Tilly-sur-Seulles,[71][72] however in his book on the Rifle Brigade Major Hasting omits this and claims Sergeant Bray is credited with the destruction of 2 halftracks and an armoured car.[73]
Wittmann's own account however contradicts this sequence of events. He states that his tank was disabled in the town centre and photographic evidence, taken after the event, of the Tiger tanks knocked out in Villers-Bocage corroborates this position.[74][75] This version means that Wittmann can not have engaged Dyas in the manner described above. Lieutenant Cloudsley-Thompson thinks that Dyas confused the sequence of events, believing instead that Dyas was hit by a shot from the Tiger as it traversed its turret rearwards whilst it advanced into Villers rather than meeting it head on as it withdrew.[69]
Within the space of only 15 minutes, Wittman's Tiger had destroyed between 10-11 tanks,[76] 2 anti-tank guns and 13 personnel carriers. A further 3 tanks were destroyed by the two Tigers near Point 213.[77] While most accounts of the battle suggest that Wittmann and the crew of his Tiger were the only Germans to enter the town that morning, British eyewitness accounts suggest otherwise, with men from the 4CLY reporting German troops firing at them from the upper floor windows of houses within the town.[69][78]
On Point 213 Lord Cranley and Major Wright, of the Rifle Brigade, held a short conference where they decided to hold their position and await reinforcements.[79] Lord Cranley attempted to organize an all round defence of the hill with the forces available: 7 Cromwell and 2 Firefly tanks of the 4CLY, 1 Cromwell OP tank of the 5RHA, two scout cars, three half-tracks, several officers and NCOs and around ten riflemen of the 1st Rifle Brigade.[79][80] Around 1000 hours SS-Panzergrenadiers of the 4th Escort Company of Schwere SS-Panzer-Abteilung 101 arrived.[81] The Panzergrenadiers began to engage and round up the men trapped on the hill, around 1030 hours Lord Cranley reported over the radio that the position was untenable and withdrawal impossible.[81][82] Within half an hour the radios in Lord Cranley's scout car and in all remaining tanks were off the air[81] and by 1300 hours the hill was fully in German hands.[83] Few managed to escape, Captain Christopher Milner MC of the Rifle Brigade spent the rest of the day on the run crossing back into British lines after dark,[84] whilst Corporal Hoar of A Squadron 4CLY, did not return to his unit until June 25.[82]
At approximately 0900 Sergeant O'Connor, travelling towards Point 213 in a half-track, broke radio silence to give the only warning to British forces in and around Villers-Bocage before the German attack began.[57] A single Tiger tank, commanded by Wittmann, drove onto Route Nationale 175 and engaged the two rearmost tanks from A Squadron 4CLY, positioned on Point 213, destroying a Cromwell and Sherman Firefly.[56] Shortly afterwards two Cromwell tanks of A Squadron were knocked out by Tigers 221 and 223 (commanded by SS-Unterscharführer Georg Hantusch and Jurgen Brendt respectively.[2]), which had been making their way up to Point 213 via a wooded track[58] around 200 meters south of the main road.[34]
Following the destruction of the two rearmost tanks, Wittmann proceeded down Route Nationale 175 towards Villers-Bocage, and in the following minutes destroyed the mechanized transport of the 1st Rifle Brigade parked at the side of the road along with two QF 6 pounder anti-tank gun. As the riflemen had dismounted from their transport minutes before the attack began, they took the opportunity to take cover in the hedges and fields nearby when the firing started and suffered few casualties.[2] Some French sources, along with British eyewitness accounts of the fighting, report that two Tigers engaged and destroyed the transport of the Rifle Brigade and that it was not solely Wittmann's Tiger.[59] It is speculated that the second Tiger tank was positioned north of the main road, near the road junction to Tilly-sur-Seulles, and possibly out of fuel.[59] Wittmann's Tiger continued into Villers-Bocage driving down Georges Clémenceau Street.
There are conflicting accounts regarding what happened next and the number of tanks and vehicles destroyed by Wittmann and his crew. It is claimed by several historians that Wittmann's Tiger entered the town and quickly engaged and destroyed 3 M5 Stuarts of the 4CLY reconnaissance troop,[58][60] although other accounts, including a retrospect by Taylor,[61] dispute this[62] and photographs taken following the battle only show 2 destroyed tanks on the main road,[63] and then destroyed the 4CLY medical officer's half-track and the intelligence officer's scout car,[64] although no wreckage from these last 2 vehicles are visible in the post action photographs.[65] Following these events Wittmann's Tiger pushed further into Villers-Bocage and engaged the Cromwell tanks of the 4CLY regimental headquarters and the two artillery observation post tanks ("OP tanks") of the 5th Royal Horse artillery.[66]
Accounts differ as to the exact circumstances of Wittmann's disengagement. Drawing on testimony from British tankers in Villers-Bocage, the historians Forty and Taylor record that Wittmann duelled briefly and without result with a Sherman Firefly commanded by Sergeant Stan Lockwood before withdrawing[67][68] while Bob Moore, of the 4CLY, claims a shot from his tank was responsible for denting the driver visor on the Tiger tank that forced it to withdraw.[69] Their accounts then report that this move brought Wittmann face to face with a surviving Cromwell tank, of the regimental headquarters, commanded by Captain Pat Dyas who had followed the Tiger down the road seeking a shot at its thinner rear armour. Dyas opened fire without effect, before Wittmann returned fire and destroyed the Cromwell.[70] Wittman's Tiger is then said to have continued eastwards before being disabled by a British 6 Pounder anti–tank gun, under the command of Sergeant Bray, on the outskirts of Villers-Bocage at the road junction to Tilly-sur-Seulles,[71][72] however in his book on the Rifle Brigade Major Hasting omits this and claims Sergeant Bray is credited with the destruction of 2 halftracks and an armoured car.[73]
Wittmann's own account however contradicts this sequence of events. He states that his tank was disabled in the town centre and photographic evidence, taken after the event, of the Tiger tanks knocked out in Villers-Bocage corroborates this position.[74][75] This version means that Wittmann can not have engaged Dyas in the manner described above. Lieutenant Cloudsley-Thompson thinks that Dyas confused the sequence of events, believing instead that Dyas was hit by a shot from the Tiger as it traversed its turret rearwards whilst it advanced into Villers rather than meeting it head on as it withdrew.[69]
Within the space of only 15 minutes, Wittman's Tiger had destroyed between 10-11 tanks,[76] 2 anti-tank guns and 13 personnel carriers. A further 3 tanks were destroyed by the two Tigers near Point 213.[77] While most accounts of the battle suggest that Wittmann and the crew of his Tiger were the only Germans to enter the town that morning, British eyewitness accounts suggest otherwise, with men from the 4CLY reporting German troops firing at them from the upper floor windows of houses within the town.[69][78]
On Point 213 Lord Cranley and Major Wright, of the Rifle Brigade, held a short conference where they decided to hold their position and await reinforcements.[79] Lord Cranley attempted to organize an all round defence of the hill with the forces available: 7 Cromwell and 2 Firefly tanks of the 4CLY, 1 Cromwell OP tank of the 5RHA, two scout cars, three half-tracks, several officers and NCOs and around ten riflemen of the 1st Rifle Brigade.[79][80] Around 1000 hours SS-Panzergrenadiers of the 4th Escort Company of Schwere SS-Panzer-Abteilung 101 arrived.[81] The Panzergrenadiers began to engage and round up the men trapped on the hill, around 1030 hours Lord Cranley reported over the radio that the position was untenable and withdrawal impossible.[81][82] Within half an hour the radios in Lord Cranley's scout car and in all remaining tanks were off the air[81] and by 1300 hours the hill was fully in German hands.[83] Few managed to escape, Captain Christopher Milner MC of the Rifle Brigade spent the rest of the day on the run crossing back into British lines after dark,[84] whilst Corporal Hoar of A Squadron 4CLY, did not return to his unit until June 25.[82]
Kenny,
Pages of posts and you still have not proven anything other offering the odd scrap of information here and there. If you want to discredit his claims or prove he over claimed a great deal. Then argue and disapprove his every battle and claim.....show some kind of pattern in his claims. You are posting very much the same way in this thread as you did in the following thread:
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/ww2-general/best-favourate-tank-west-708.html
Where to most people's ammusement you refussed to admit the Tiger was the better tank in a one on one battle then the Sherman.
You really are starting to sound like someone just bias towards German or Axis heros or equipment. I really don't care whether Wittmann is the greatest tank commander or not but what I find amusing is that you claim this and that but prove nothing so far. If you were in a court of law trying to prove you case beyond a shadow of doubt you would lose at this point.
You are knowledgeable on tanks and tank warefare but I also believe you are bias from your posting habits. Dispute Wittmann's claims on facts alone. Show multiple patterns of significant over claiming throughout his carreer (again not that the allies also did not over claim but we are talking about Wittmann here now). Then and maybe then I and others here might believe you.
Pages of posts and you still have not proven anything other offering the odd scrap of information here and there. If you want to discredit his claims or prove he over claimed a great deal. Then argue and disapprove his every battle and claim.....show some kind of pattern in his claims. You are posting very much the same way in this thread as you did in the following thread:
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/ww2-general/best-favourate-tank-west-708.html
Where to most people's ammusement you refussed to admit the Tiger was the better tank in a one on one battle then the Sherman.
You really are starting to sound like someone just bias towards German or Axis heros or equipment. I really don't care whether Wittmann is the greatest tank commander or not but what I find amusing is that you claim this and that but prove nothing so far. If you were in a court of law trying to prove you case beyond a shadow of doubt you would lose at this point.
You are knowledgeable on tanks and tank warefare but I also believe you are bias from your posting habits. Dispute Wittmann's claims on facts alone. Show multiple patterns of significant over claiming throughout his carreer (again not that the allies also did not over claim but we are talking about Wittmann here now). Then and maybe then I and others here might believe you.
parsifal
Colonel
the odd scrap of information? I had provided more actual sources and references then everyone else combined. No matter. I doubt you have an open mind on the subject
I did prove it for Villers. If you disagree then show how he knocked out 21 tanks
I proved there was systematic overclaiming by german tank crews. So much overclaiming that a 50% reduction had to be applied across the board.
You are confused. I never said any such thing. I consider the mythical 'one on one' scenario juvenile and completely absurd. Tanks fight in Units. There might be some who see tank warfare as a form of jousting where individuals fight in isolation between the lines. I prefer the reality where tanks operated as part of an integrated military machine. You overwhelm and subjugate your enemy rather than give him a chance in some sort of 'fair fight'. Its no good swanning about in your 5 super-panzers when the Infantry Divisions holding your flanks are ground into the dust by 100 bog-standard man killers.
To me you sound like someone who simply can not accept that others do not share your high opinion of German tanks.
I don't care either. However if you claim he was some sort of genius I will continue to remind you where he got it wrong..
I have. Several times with lots of facts. No one has yet bothered to give me a specific instance where they can show I got it wrong. Claiming I am wrong without giving specific examples of 'the wrong' have no effect upon me.
I find that most people are loath to admit their perceptions may be wrong. I do not seek to convert the faithful. I hope that by giving solid references and examples to back all my points the casual reader will draw the right conclusions.
Which is what I have been saying all along. Note that this is not the 21 claimed and added to Wittmann's score. It seems you now agree with me?
By the way you are quoting most of my own conclusions back at me-check who contributed!
General observation on overclaiming:
2.Leutnant Friederich Anding-18 kills
Friederich received his KC for the destruction of 6 tanks and 5 armored vehicles (so says his Verleihungsvorschlag zum Ritterkreuz), as adjutant of the Pz.Jg.Abt. Großdeutschland (commander of the battalion was Maj. Walle) on 8 May 1945. This action took place in northern Germany (more specifically in Stadensen) on 14-15 April. The battalion was attacked by a large number of enemy tanks and armored vehicles. Major Walle (9 destroyed tanks), Leutnant Anding and Obergefreiter Stützle (7 destroyed tanks) received KCs for their actions"
As you can see 22 tanks are claimed as destroyed in the action Stadensen. Note that armoured vehicles and tanks are claimed seperately.
If you were to check the History of the 6th Guards Tank Brigade you read:
"the tank crews...soon discovered that the village was already swarming with German SPs and half-tracks manned by Panzer Grenadiers... the Germans had managed to hoodwink the men of the outpost company into thinking that they were British armour and had completely overrun them." It appears that the Coldstream tanks, guns, transport etc were crammed nose to tail in the village. After the fierce battle, 12 out of 13 German SPs were knocked out and 7 half-tracks were deserted. At least 150 German dead and 150 prisoners taken. The Coldstreams lost 2 tanks, one petrol three tonner, 2 M10s; the Glasgow highlanders lost most of their carriers, their command vehicle and practically all their transport with 30 dead and 30 missing. The platoon of sappers suffered heavily and their transport was wiped out."
KC's awarded for 22 tank kills when the actual losses were 2 tanks and 2 SP's!
parsifal
Colonel
This is an okay source Soren, one that I use myself....but it does not say that 6000 Soviet tanks were destroyed in the battle....moreover it adopts the "narrow" definition of what was the battle of Kursk. Most western sources use the term "Battle Of Kursk" in a generic sense, covering the series of battles that raged around the salient in July through to August.
If you look at the "narrow" definition with current research, you will find a Soviet tactical defeat. It was doctored in the 1950s by the Soviets to make Krushchev look better than he actually was.....this is where the myth that it was a massive and heroic Soviet victory comes from.
If you take the wider, broader view of the battle, yet more myths arise, this time the myth that the Panzer waffe emerged unscathed and victorious. This is just as grotesquely untrue as the Soviet claims to victory at Prokorovkha. Facts are, the germans overall lost either a similar number or more tanks in the final wash up than the Soviets, because they were forced from the battlefield and could not recover all of the breakdowns and wounded AFVs in the same way as the Russians could
- Thread starter
- #99
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
In what timeframe did V-B take place? I have no idea how long it takes to make a Tiger's '88 ready to fire, I'd guess that they went in with one "in the pipe", right?
But from the first shot to the next it must take, I don't know 10-15 seconds depending on gunner and loader, fire-empty shell-load-aim-fire, or is that too long? And for all that firing, the cage behind the, must be getting rather full and some point that must add to the time as well as it needs to be emptied.
For anyone to knock out 21 tanks/vehicles at 10 seconds between firing would take roughly 3 minutes and that's without moving around, looking for cover, avoid getting hit by return fire, find better firing positions. At 15 seconds between firing, that is over 5 minutes. Also, this is that every shot is a hit and kill.....
But from the first shot to the next it must take, I don't know 10-15 seconds depending on gunner and loader, fire-empty shell-load-aim-fire, or is that too long? And for all that firing, the cage behind the, must be getting rather full and some point that must add to the time as well as it needs to be emptied.
For anyone to knock out 21 tanks/vehicles at 10 seconds between firing would take roughly 3 minutes and that's without moving around, looking for cover, avoid getting hit by return fire, find better firing positions. At 15 seconds between firing, that is over 5 minutes. Also, this is that every shot is a hit and kill.....
