*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 10:20:47 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1686638
  • Total Topics: 118117
  • Online Today: 777
  • Online Ever: 2235
  • (October 29, 2023, 12:32:45 AM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: Top 5 Tanks  (Read 3982 times)

Offline Arrigo

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1074
  • errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum est
    • Forward HQ my new blog where you can laugh at my crappy photos!
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #15 on: September 29, 2020, 09:50:13 AM »
Well weight is important not just for logistics, also for mobility. Bridges, roads and so on... yes you can improve them, but even with a great logistical support you can do only so much. One important consideration for the Heer in the latest version of the Leo2 was bridge weight. Too much and you say goodbye to the majority of German bridges.

Also tidbit from history... do you know that the only way to work on the Panther's transmission was to cut through the frontal armor, and then re-weld it after work?

Also, despite the usual focus on tank vs tank, remember that the majority of time your tank will engage infantry. Zaloga had some interesting data on the number of HE vs AP round fired  by US tanks in WW2, and basically infantry and guns were the majority targets.

By the same token mines, and 'fausts' were far bigger killers than German tanks. The big question is... how many tigers the average US or CW or Polish tanker encountered in its WW2 career? Answer from very few to none. Also by the same token, number shown that for each Sherman destroyed by Panthers 1.81 Panthers were knocked down by Shermans, that for the 'superior tanks myth' or the crap five Shermans for a tiger... (that appears ot be a post war construction).  The young gentleman deriding the supposed superior German tanks may have more of a point that some here are willing to concede...  lol

Then you have crew quality, ergonomics, production quality and so on. The T-34 was supposed to be a reliable tank. By all standard in 1940 it was. Then you have the big displacement east of industrial infrastructure and the subcontracting process. A 1943 T-34 was utterly unreliable compared to a 1940 one (okay nadir year was 42... then Morozov and Kartsev started to get things back under control).

Then you have doctrine. The way you employ tanks is important. Too often a tank is designed for a role and then used in a different way.







"Put Grant straight in"

for pretty tanks and troops: http://forwardhq.blogspot.com

Offline Digits

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3774
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #16 on: September 29, 2020, 09:51:39 AM »
Sounds to me like you need a set of these!


Offline Plynkes

  • The Royal Bastard
  • Elder God
  • Posts: 10212
  • I killed Mufasa!
    • http://misterplynkes.blogspot.com/
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #17 on: September 29, 2020, 10:12:43 AM »
I love Top Trumps. They did a Top Trumps of Prince William's wedding to Kate Middleton, and some joker bought it for me.

I was in heaven. It helped me decide one of the classic "who would win in a fight?" questions that I had long pondered over:


Posh Spice vs. Westminster Abbey: One wins, one dies!
Only on pay-per-view, this weekend on Sky Sports.


With Cat-Like Tread
Upon our prey we steal...

Offline DCRBrown

  • Bookworm
  • Posts: 73
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #18 on: September 29, 2020, 12:15:48 PM »
Arrigo,

Quote
Also by the same token, number shown that for each Sherman destroyed by Panthers 1.81 Panthers were knocked down by Sherman's, that for the 'superior tanks myth' or the crap five Sherman's for a tiger... (that appears to be a post war construction).

I don't believe that statistic or,  in fact, any statistic that states something like it took 5 Sherman's to knock out 1 Tiger , etc.  Its absolute nonsense as tank kill ratio's are entirely dependent upon the tactical situation and doctrinal usage, as you note later on. A Tiger in  good position could knock out ten Sherman's or a Sherman encountering Tiger and getting off several quick shots could take out one Tiger...

I think I know what you mean about the T34 standard in 1940, but compared to a Panzer III, which was designed well before 1940, the T34 was decidedly inferior in 1940/1 and right up until the end of the war, with regard to crew ergonomics, turret layout, situational awareness, etc, etc. But having said that compared to an A10 or a M11/39, maybe not so bad..... ;)

DB

Offline has.been

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 8236
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #19 on: September 29, 2020, 01:07:35 PM »
I saw an interview in a magazine with a WW2 Russian Tanker. He said his favorite tank was...
a Valantine!!???
His unit of mainly T34s ran into a Tiger. It kept knocking out any T34 that tried to close. They
sent the Valantine out on one flank & the Tiger couldn't get a good hit on it, even had difficulty
seeing it as it was such a low profile. It managed to get behind the Tiger & disable it.

Yet most wargamers would take the T34 ???
 

Offline Arrigo

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1074
  • errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum est
    • Forward HQ my new blog where you can laugh at my crappy photos!
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #20 on: September 29, 2020, 02:38:50 PM »
DCR,

the data is not meant to say the M4 is always superior to the Sherman on the ground, but that at the end more Panthers were killed by Shermans than the other way round. It reminds me of an internet fight years ago... a chap maintained that the Panther was superior because the ballistic performance of its gun were superior at 1000 meters over the Shermans.  I said that in NWE the bulk of engagements happened at less than 500 (I think the average was around 300).  It also remind me a discussion I was told about... a challenger II can engage enemy infantry at 3000 meters.... but nothing was told about the ability to spot...

Offline FierceKitty

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1718
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2020, 02:49:09 PM »
Crusader Mk III - just because it's so beautiful.
Tiger I - for the "cool" factor
WW I Mk IV - because it's so dam' ugly
Grant - see above
Hussite war waggon - unbeatable!
The laws of probability do not apply to my dice in wargames or to my finesses in bridge.

Offline sukhe_bator

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1620
  • bad hair day
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2020, 04:37:22 PM »
My vote is for the Panther - a cool looking tank though it was a heavy s.o.b. for a so-called 'medium tank... Kindof like the T-34's more attractive but overweight German cousin.
Warriors dreams, summer grasses, all that remains

Offline armchairgeneral

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • Mastermind
  • *
  • Posts: 1731
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2020, 06:41:46 PM »
The JS (or IS)2 should be up there as having an excellent gun and good armour particularly for its weight which was similar to a Panther.

The Sherman Firefly has the cool looks of the Sherman but with the excellent 17pdr. It should not be forgotten that the Sherman was comparatively an excellent tank when it came out, it just got outclassed later in the war.

T34 for its radical design and production practicality.

The Stug because it looks cool and was cheap to make, though perhaps it is more an assault gun than an tank.

Tiger 1 for its looks, armour and gun. It had a lot of problems as a tank but given that it came out in 1941, it remained a fearsome tank throughout the war.

Offline GDonk

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 289
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2020, 07:32:04 PM »
Definitely the T34-85 for sheer good looks in mass production and longevity but without a doubt the sexiest of all time is the CKD LT vz. 38 or Panzer 38(t) and all its lovely derivatives

Offline FramFramson

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 10681
  • But maybe everything that dies, someday comes back
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #25 on: September 29, 2020, 07:37:11 PM »
If I was in a tank in WW2, I'd want to be in one that was both survivable and easy to bail.  Churchhill I guess.  And if I got to pick a variant, the mortar one that doesn't ever go anywhere near the enemy.  I've read their commander reports and it's just responding to fire support requests over and over and over.

Now with the more interesting criteria of which tank is best being the number of turrets, the M3 Lee/Grant and the Soviet T35 are hilarious contenders.  Though I'd much rather be in a M3 than a T35.
Wasn't the Churchill notoriously difficult to bail out from? Or am I mistaken there?

As for survivability, I recall the Churchill's main weakness in terms of armour was appallingly thin underplating which left the crew very vulnerable to mines.

I mean I don't want to rag on the poor thing overmuch - as Cubs points out, the Church had its good points. At the same time, having some redeeming qualities and a reputation worse than its actual combat record does not make it a top tank or even a hidden gem.


I joined my gun with pirate swords, and sailed the seas of cyberspace.

Offline FramFramson

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 10681
  • But maybe everything that dies, someday comes back
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #26 on: September 29, 2020, 07:48:39 PM »
Definitely the T34-85 for sheer good looks in mass production and longevity but without a doubt the sexiest of all time is the CKD LT vz. 38 or Panzer 38(t) and all its lovely derivatives
The T-34 was a tank which I recall the Germans used in quantity when captured and often quoted as feeling it was superior to anything they produced, both among senior commanders and tank crews.

Once production was worked out again by '43 and once the crew actually had proper radios in every tank and better doctrine, the T-34 arguably combined the reliability and mobility and ease of production of the Shermans, with reasonable firepower and a hull with a better armour profile than any other tanks of comparable size and weight.

The ergonomics of the T-34 were absolutely terrible though, no doubting that, and the various guns it mounted weren't exactly tiger-killers.

The T34-85 basically solved all the problems with the base T-34 but the switch to the 85mm and larger turret (and a stronger engine to match) pretty much put it at the top of the heap for WWII "medium" tanks IMO. The Firefly is effectively comparable in capability, but I think the armour profile of the T34/T34-85 gives it the edge. 

Offline Elbows

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 9452
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2020, 07:54:34 PM »
The T-34 also shares the dubious honor of being the most wiped out tank in WW2 with some 40,000 losses.  Granted many of these are likely mobility kills or abandoned tanks from the early days when crews were horribly trained...or outright untrained.

Even in the later years though, with the T-34/85 the Soviets still suffered appalling casualties vs. the Germans, but even when the Germans managed to kill four or five per tank loss...it wasn't enough to stop the advance.

If I had a simple top five, just...for "pure joy", in no order I'd have to say:

Char 2C (simple silliness)
Jagdtiger (most beautiful tank/tank hunter in the war)
KV-1 (just my favourite generic tank shape/style)
Churchill (because..Churchill)
Panzer III (a borderline perfect tank, only limited by its turret ring)



2024 Painted Miniatures: 166
('23: 159, '22: 214, '21: 148, '20: 207, '19: 123, '18: 98, '17: 226, '16: 233, '15: 32, '14: 116)

https://myminiaturemischief.blogspot.com
Find us at TurnStyle Games on Facebook!

Offline fastolfrus

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 5247
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #28 on: September 29, 2020, 08:52:19 PM »
My father was in Shermans in North Africa and then Normandy (including Goodwood).
He never had much to say about them apart from their inability to take hits in the desert, although he complained that some hits could go straight through.

He took me to Bovington when I was a young teenager (back when you could still climb up a ladder onto the top of the Jagdtiger).
He was very impressed by most of the German tanks, but especially by the Jagdtiger (we were standing on top of it at the time).

The only German tanks that he mentioned in action were Panzer IVs.
 
Gary, Glynis, and Alasdair (there are three of us, but we are too mean to have more than one login)

Offline Cubs

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 4914
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: Top 5 Tanks
« Reply #29 on: September 29, 2020, 09:44:54 PM »
Wasn't the Churchill notoriously difficult to bail out from? Or am I mistaken there?


I thought it was the opposite, with hatches all over the place.  But again, I might be mistaken.
'Sir John ejaculated explosively, sitting up in his chair.' ... 'The Black Gang'.

Paul Cubbin Miniature Painter

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
13 Replies
3743 Views
Last post June 10, 2008, 02:17:52 AM
by Mancha
2 Replies
2246 Views
Last post July 04, 2010, 05:02:52 AM
by Darkson
0 Replies
1212 Views
Last post February 08, 2015, 02:45:49 PM
by Vanvlak
11 Replies
1522 Views
Last post November 16, 2017, 11:51:29 PM
by Tim
5 Replies
789 Views
Last post June 13, 2023, 02:15:23 PM
by Daeothar