Alternate Tiger Tank

Hi guys I'm reading up some Germans tank history in WWII and of course, they won't left out the infamous Tiger tanks. The actual design of the tank was actually quite early, before the war, and the Germans were forced to get it into production early to counter the Russian Kv-1 and T-34s.

Now my question is what if the Finnish had, after the Winter War, given an example or two of each Russian tank to the Germans for testing? As I recalled Mannheim was quite close to one of the German generals-can't recall his name off the top of my head-would this have allowed the Germans to develop a heavy tank with all the experiences gained in the war so far?

Also the POD doesn't have to be the one I said-anything that will allow the Germans to have heavy tanks that are designed with the extra experience of the war gained will work.

What will such a tank look like? Designed by? Built by?

Please forgive me as I don't know much about WWII history as a whole...:eek::(

Any comments/discussion is welcomed!:)
 

Deleted member 1487

I don't think it would speed up German tank production, but it probably would make the Pak40 and Marder much higher priority.
 
There's been an excess of German tank threads this last week's. Bump it next week and people will jump in.
 
Build the Stug IV with the 105mm cannon and that can become the premier Assault Infantry Tank and ad-hoc tank killer for the 1941 campaign.... :D:eek:
 

Deleted member 1487

Build the Stug IV with the 105mm cannon and that can become the premier Assault Infantry Tank and ad-hoc tank killer for the 1941 campaign.... :D:eek:
The 75mm L24 StuG with HEAT round was what was used IOTL. 105mm HEAT isn't really necessary (that's the only way the short howtizer would kill a KV, the blast effect wasn't enough IIRC though it would stun the crews).
 
Hi guys I'm reading up some Germans tank history in WWII and of course, they won't left out the infamous Tiger tanks. The actual design of the tank was actually quite early, before the war, and the Germans were forced to get it into production early to counter the Russian Kv-1 and T-34s.

Now my question is what if the Finnish had, after the Winter War, given an example or two of each Russian tank to the Germans for testing? As I recalled Mannheim was quite close to one of the German generals-can't recall his name off the top of my head-would this have allowed the Germans to develop a heavy tank with all the experiences gained in the war so far?

Also the POD doesn't have to be the one I said-anything that will allow the Germans to have heavy tanks that are designed with the extra experience of the war gained will work.

What will such a tank look like? Designed by? Built by?

Please forgive me as I don't know much about WWII history as a whole...:eek::(

Any comments/discussion is welcomed!:)

KV-1 was tested during the Winter War (with the SMK and T-100) but with only one exemplary. The abwher can't make analysis with so few datas (but they miss the T-34 too ;))
 
KV-1 was tested during the Winter War (with the SMK and T-100) but with only one exemplary. The abwher can't make analysis with so few datas (but they miss the T-34 too ;))

The Tiger had its start with the realization that the heavy tanks planned to assist the Mk III and IV would not cope with the existing Matilda II and Char B1 bis in 1940.

The next year the same happened to the planned medium tanks, that got bulked up to the Panther, after the T-34 and KV were encountered
 
I'm always baffled by the fact that in creating the Tiger the germans had still not realized the importance of sloped/ cast armour. Yes, they did not knew about T-34, but they did had access to those french and british tanks and apparently they have learned about the KV-1 as well. Surely they would have had enough time to alter the Tiger design, the thing only entered service in late 1942.
 

Deleted member 1487

I'm always baffled by the fact that in creating the Tiger the germans had still not realized the importance of sloped/ cast armour. Yes, they did not knew about T-34, but they did had access to those french and british tanks and apparently they have learned about the KV-1 as well. Surely they would have had enough time to alter the Tiger design, the thing only entered service in late 1942.
They did, they just didn't have to time to make the changes that it would require and already the Tiger was over weight and behind schedule. Sloping would have delayed it for 6-12 months and added a bunch of weight to maintain the same internal crew space. Cast armor was an issue of industrial equipment, slope was one of time and ergonomics. Still the Tiger's armor was extremely hard:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_I#Armour
Armour plates were mostly flat, with interlocking construction. The armour joints were of high quality, being stepped and welded rather than riveted and were made of maraging steel. The thick armor made the Tiger impervious to frontal fire from tanks like the 75mm armed M4 Sherman, 76.2mm armed T-34 and 75mm armed Cromwell tank, but vulnerable to the 76mm of up-gunned Shermans, the 85mm of the T-34-85 and the British Ordnance QF 17-pounder
 
Still the Tiger's armor was extremely hard:

True, but sloped armour would have reduced the required thickness to say 80mm, so less weight, in fact a bit less armour thickness all around but sloped even if not T-34 style but more in line to contemporary 1940 tanks would have made the tank lighter, with less strain on transmission and engine hence more reliable. A Tiger at 45 tons with an elongated sloped turret seems ideal to me, particularly if also that overly complicated wheel design is replaced with something simpler and more conventional.

This is of course just hindsight.
 

Deleted member 1487

True, but sloped armour would have reduced the required thickness to say 80mm, so less weight, in fact a bit less armour thickness all around but sloped even if not T-34 style but more in line to contemporary 1940 tanks would have made the tank lighter, with less strain on transmission and engine hence more reliable. A Tiger at 45 tons with an elongated sloped turret seems ideal to me, particularly if also that overly complicated wheel design is replaced with something simpler and more conventional.

This is of course just hindsight.

Yeah, but sloped 80mm armor in the front and 50-60mm armor on the side gets heavy because it requires a larger chassis. Its probably going to remain at least 55 tons if not 60.
 
True, but sloped armour would have reduced the required thickness to say 80mm, so less weight, in fact a bit less armour thickness all around but sloped even if not T-34 style but more in line to contemporary 1940 tanks would have made the tank lighter, with less strain on transmission and engine hence more reliable. A Tiger at 45 tons with an elongated sloped turret seems ideal to me, particularly if also that overly complicated wheel design is replaced with something simpler and more conventional.


This is of course just hindsight.

Perhaps a sloped armor Tiger 1 as above with the long 88 would have been a better idea than the Tiger 2 with its reliability problems?
 

Deleted member 1487

Perhaps a sloped armor Tiger 1 as above with the long 88 would have been a better idea than the Tiger 2 with its reliability problems?
No doubt. Though it should have had 100mm sloped in that case. Frankly though I'm still a proponent of the 88mm Panther from the German MBT thread as the sole 'heavy' panzer.
 
But I want my answers NOW!!!!!!:mad::(:p

Ok, so as I understand it the answers wanted were in terms of what changes having practical experience - a small pre-production batch perhaps - from Finland and the Winter War would have on the final design of the Tiger tank.

First, how different were the Finns to the Germans in terms of attitudes? I mean would the Finns be putting more emphasis on making it easier to maintain in the field? On reliability and ease of mass production? On the idea that something that was too complicated for young conscripts with rushed training to use confidently was a bad design for mass conscript armies.

German equipment generally seems to pay lip service to these concepts and then go on to produce hideously over-complicated designs that were far too expensive and inevitably could only be made in small numbers because of that.

Sixty Nine King Tiger tanks were committed to the Battle of the Bulge. None were destroyed by allied action, and none survived the offensive. A different Logistics Vs Combat Power emphasis in the design process would make a bigger difference than most realise.

Looks: Sloped armour, partly to reduce weight for a given effectiveness. Broader tracks to reduce ground pressure and make it less likely to sink into mud, snow etc. Turret putting an emphasis on avoiding shot traps and deflection of shot rather than just blocking it. Still the 88 main gun.

Design by who: How about someone from outside the normal system? Someone of the minimalist school, to produce a comparatively simple, easy to produce and maintain vehicle. By heavy tank standards anyway. Hitler and the Nazi's were revolutionaries, not upper class members mostly. Supporting a radical new cliche would be in line with the loonies thinking anyway.

Is that closer to what you started the thread to get?
 

Deleted member 1487

German equipment generally seems to pay lip service to these concepts and then go on to produce hideously over-complicated designs that were far too expensive and inevitably could only be made in small numbers because of that.
It depends on the issue; the Tiger was designed to be a boutique item and its complication was the result of making the best piece of equipment possible without concern for numbers. The Panther was a mix of mass production and designing the best performing tank possible, hence the complicated suspension which made it the most maneuverable tank of the war, but for its transmission and final drive issues. Even then though that wasn't so big of an issue because it was mass produceable, but Allied bombing really wrecked production from 1943 on, just as it was getting into mass production, so could have had a lot more of them produced if not for that. In the end they did make mass produceable weapons, its just Allied bombing disrupted their production and denied units in the field spare parts, so much so that even the reliable Pz IIIs and IVs had abysmal serviceability by mid/late 1944. But keep in mind too that the German philosophy was that they couldn't out produce or keep up with Allied production, so their aim was to have a better weapon at the cost of numbers so they could get better kill ratios. Were it not for strategic bombing being successful in disrupting AFV production then the Allies would have had a MUCH rougher time on the ground against a lot more Panzers from 1943 on.

Sixty Nine King Tiger tanks were committed to the Battle of the Bulge. None were destroyed by allied action, and none survived the offensive. A different Logistics Vs Combat Power emphasis in the design process would make a bigger difference than most realise.
That one was all Hitler needing to have the biggest imaginable tank and being dictator, so having his way on technical issues. Also it was a function of Allied airpower destroying German supply lines during the Bulge when the weather cleared so that those monsters couldn't get the gas or spares they needed to retreat. The issue wasn't German logistics were shit, it was Allied airpower ensuring that nothing moved during the day and that they were advancing over only a few roads, which meant airpower could be concentrated against supply lines VERY easily. Of course by then the war was lost anyway, so its not exactly a great example to prove your point.


Design by who: How about someone from outside the normal system? Someone of the minimalist school, to produce a comparatively simple, easy to produce and maintain vehicle. By heavy tank standards anyway. Hitler and the Nazi's were revolutionaries, not upper class members mostly. Supporting a radical new cliche would be in line with the loonies thinking anyway.
The normal system worked fine, they just needed time to develop the technology. What turned into the Tiger was being constantly worked on since at least 1939 with the DWII and what resulted in 1942-43 was the product of years of work, not something that could have been turned out in a single year or even two. Even the Panther was the result of years of work that were updated with sloped armor, wider tracks, and a bigger gun.
 
The funny thing is that if the Germans get a T-34 by 1940, a year in advance with the first encounter with that tank, the effect could be upon the design of the Panther more than in the Tiger's one, IMHO.

Could be there a VK3002 by April 1940?
 

Deleted member 1487

The funny thing is that if the Germans get a T-34 by 1940, a year in advance with the first encounter with that tank, the effect could be upon the design of the Panther more than in the Tiger's one, IMHO.

Could be there a VK3002 by April 1940?
If they started developing it in 1936, but they only started working on an early version of it, the DBW I, in 1938 and didn't change the designation to VK3001 in 1940. Then the first prototypes weren't ready until 1941 by which time requirements changed and it became the VK3002 (the 2 instead of 1 was to demonstrate that this was a new version of the project).

The VK3002 as we know it could not have been started before encountering the T-34, as it was a direct response to it; they could have had a 30 ton VK3001 earlier if they had started working on such, but the Pz IV was thought to be upgradeable and well within the ability to handle all opponents at the time.
 
Top