Earlier Hetzer?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

What if instead of going in on the Marder series of tank destroyers, someone recognizes that having a lower, fully enclosed armor chassis would make for a better self propelled AT gun/tank destroyer and not take much longer to make, so that by Spring 1942 a version of the Hetzer has bee put out instead of the Marder? Would it result in the major increase of those sorts of vehicles in production and actually reduce demand for things like StuGs? How would they perform earlier in the war vs. in 1944 when they were introduced? Would it result in less prime movers and towed AT guns once the benefits of self propelled fully tracked AT guns are seen in the field?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hetzer
 
always wonder if they had large numbers of Hetzers (they built 100s of them late war in dire situation) whether they soldier along with Panzer IV? or has no impact on that decision?
 

Deleted member 1487

always wonder if they had large numbers of Hetzers (they built 100s of them late war in dire situation) whether they soldier along with Panzer IV? or has no impact on that decision?
Not sure what you mean? They were basically a self propelled anti-tank gun with an armored enclosure as opposed to the Marder series:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marder_III
That continued to fight into 1945, so I'd imagine that Hetzer would stay in service from 1942 through to the bitter end. If they make enough of them, say shooting for 1944 levels starting in 1942, then they could be used for all infantry divisions in their divisional antitank company, which was the plan by 1944 IOTL. You'd need probably 2000 to equip all the combat divisions including Panzer and motorized infantry. I don't know if those would just use StuGs though for their anti-tank units due to their flexibility as assault guns as well. The Hetzer was not an assault gun, just a self propelled tank hunter.
 
Design drawings of "Hetzer" were presented on December 17th 1943 and by January 24th 1944 mock up was ready.

Well Romanians were fester with their Maresal. According to article on Maresal first prototype was built in summer 1943 and by October 1943 3 more were built.




tier-5-maresal-m-05-axworthy.jpg
 
In 1942 Germany still had thousands of old/obsolete/captured light tanks that could be quickly [& cheaply] converted into Panzerjagers to fill SPAT role. What they needed to build was more tanks.
 
Design drawings of "Hetzer" were presented on December 17th 1943 and by January 24th 1944 mock up was ready.

Well Romanians were fester with their Maresal. According to article on Maresal first prototype was built in summer 1943 and by October 1943 3 more were built.




tier-5-maresal-m-05-axworthy.jpg


Thanks for this, its well seen were the Hetzer got its lines from.
 
What if instead of going in on the Marder series of tank destroyers, someone recognizes that having a lower, fully enclosed armor chassis would make for a better self propelled AT gun/tank destroyer and not take much longer to make, so that by Spring 1942 a version of the Hetzer has bee put out instead of the Marder? Would it result in the major increase of those sorts of vehicles in production and actually reduce demand for things like StuGs? How would they perform earlier in the war vs. in 1944 when they were introduced? Would it result in less prime movers and towed AT guns once the benefits of self propelled fully tracked AT guns are seen in the field?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hetzer

Earlier Hetzer is an excellent idea. Pump them and StuG-III out like hot rolls; the towed 7.5 cm needs more manpower and has less ability to quickly change it's position, whether in response vs. Allied attacks, let alone in German attack. Of course, the towed 7.5 cm is still needed.
 

Deleted member 1487

In 1942 Germany still had thousands of old/obsolete/captured light tanks that could be quickly [& cheaply] converted into Panzerjagers to fill SPAT role. What they needed to build was more tanks.
Yeah, I forgot the Marders were made from existing chassis, so they'd still have to be used, but they could also cancel Pz II and 38t production by 1942 and convert them to a variety of gun chassis, like the Wespe and Hetzer respectively. The Marders though never were enough. More tanks were needed, but so too were more mobile AT weapons.

Earlier Hetzer is an excellent idea. Pump them and StuG-III out like hot rolls; the towed 7.5 cm needs more manpower and has less ability to quickly change it's position, whether in response vs. Allied attacks, let alone in German attack. Of course, the towed 7.5 cm is still needed.
The US determined that an SP AT gun was 10x more useful as a towed gun, so while a Hetzer could not supplant towed guns in all roles, they were needed in much larger numbers than were historically available and would increase the AT gun role effectiveness dramatically once available in numbers. If there weren't enough German 75mm AT guns to go around for the Hetzer chassis, the French 75mm gun with HEAT round would surely be useful and lack the problems of the OTL carriage they were mated to if used on a Hetzer.
 
Yeah, I forgot the Marders were made from existing chassis, so they'd still have to be used, but they could also cancel Pz II and 38t production by 1942 and convert them to a variety of gun chassis, like the Wespe and Hetzer respectively. The Marders though never were enough. More tanks were needed, but so too were more mobile AT weapons.


The US determined that an SP AT gun was 10x more useful as a towed gun, so while a Hetzer could not supplant towed guns in all roles, they were needed in much larger numbers than were historically available and would increase the AT gun role effectiveness dramatically once available in numbers. If there weren't enough German 75mm AT guns to go around for the Hetzer chassis, the French 75mm gun with HEAT round would surely be useful and lack the problems of the OTL carriage they were mated to if used on a Hetzer.
Production of Pzkpwf 38(t) however ended in 1942 OTL. 26 were manufactured in June 1942 and 1 in October 1942. Since April 1942 Sdkfz 139 modifications were produced, in November 1942 Sdkfz 138 started to be produced. So they did phase out manufacturing of Pzkpfw 38(t) basically by mid 1942.
 

Deleted member 1487

Production of Pzkpwf 38(t) however ended in 1942 OTL. 26 were manufactured in June 1942 and 1 in October 1942. Since April 1942 Sdkfz 139 modifications were produced, in November 1942 Sdkfz 138 started to be produced. So they did phase out manufacturing of Pzkpfw 38(t) basically by mid 1942.
Right, so I'm suggesting instead of making new Marder IIIs or Pz 38ts, they make Hetzers instead, with the old Pz38t chassis being converted are made into Marders.
Also, the manufactures for 1942, were those conversions or new production?
 
What would be more interesting would be supplying upgrade kits to Sdkfz 139 (based on captured Soviet 7.62 cm PAK) or Sdkfz 138 to allies like Romania, Hungary and Slovakia. Instead of running around with Pzkpwfw 38 they would have 7.5 cm tank destroyer. Much more useful in mid 1942.
 
Right, so I'm suggesting instead of making new Marder IIIs or Pz 38ts, they make Hetzers instead, with the old Pz38t chassis being converted are made into Marders.
Also, the manufactures for 1942, were those conversions or new production?
Not sure how easy it would be to convert old chassis though. Looks relatively simple on drawings but still I have feeling I am seeing there some small construction differences which would mean old chassis - or more like armored tub would need to be basically taken apart and then again put back together with changes implemented. It was less time consuming to add Sdkfz 138 or 139 structure on the top. Mared M on other side was basically built this way from start and had bit lower profile.
 

Deleted member 1487

Not sure how easy it would be to convert old chassis though. Looks relatively simple on drawings but still I have feeling I am seeing there some small construction differences which would mean old chassis - or more like armored tub would need to be basically taken apart and then again put back together with changes implemented. It was less time consuming to add Sdkfz 138 or 139 structure on the top. Mared M on other side was basically built this way from start and had bit lower profile.
Do you mean converting existing chassis Hetzers or to Marders? IOTL they converted existing Pz 38ts and IIs to Marder IIIs and IIs respectively. I'm talking about converting the production lines in early 1942 to exclusively produce Hetzers while leaving any conversion of existing chassis for Marder style conversions.
 
...
The US determined that an SP AT gun was 10x more useful as a towed gun, so while a Hetzer could not supplant towed guns in all roles, they were needed in much larger numbers than were historically available and would increase the AT gun role effectiveness dramatically once available in numbers. If there weren't enough German 75mm AT guns to go around for the Hetzer chassis, the French 75mm gun with HEAT round would surely be useful and lack the problems of the OTL carriage they were mated to if used on a Hetzer.

The lack of 'full-power' cannons will probably never happen, after all Czech factories can produce them.

BTW - earlier Hetzer might mean skipping the JgdPz-IV/48 and going directly with L/70 variant.
 

Redbeard

Banned
Technically it should be possible to produce a Hetzer much before OTL (in production from April 1944), but if much before perhaps with 50mm or captured 47mm guns. The biggest problem probably would be the risk Hitler seeing them as a "sissy" defensive weapon and not wanting to pour resources into their development or production. In OTL anti-tank units had to change name from Panzerabwehr (tank defence) to Panzerjäger (tank hunter) because the first sounded too defensive for Hitler! But perhaps if the French succeed in gathering tank units for a counterattack in 1940 even Hitler might see the need of anti-tank units deploying extremely fast.

If the new Panzerjäger units are to be perfect they should be supplemented with SP 81 mm mortars. When an enemy tank column is spotted you first put HE mortar fire on them to have them "button up" ie make them virtually blind. Next have them under fire from the anti-tank guns and if/when the anti-tank unit has to withdraw to new firing positions have the mortars put up a smoke screen.
 
Do you mean converting existing chassis Hetzers or to Marders? IOTL they converted existing Pz 38ts and IIs to Marder IIIs and IIs respectively. I'm talking about converting the production lines in early 1942 to exclusively produce Hetzers while leaving any conversion of existing chassis for Marder style conversions.
Meaning converting early chassis to Hetzer could be bit problematic.
That's what I would stick to, convert existing 38s to Marders and start to built Hetzers from now on. Or even Katzchens. These were one nice APCs. :)
 
The Russians feel the Hetz earlier and lose more tanks,but they don't care. Expect to prolong the war by about a month tops. Allied casualties increase by around 200,000 mostly Russian infantry storming defense positions with less armor support.German casualties 200,000 to 500,000 mostly civilians killed in air raids or due to shortages of basic goods.
 

Deleted member 1487

If the new Panzerjäger units are to be perfect they should be supplemented with SP 81 mm mortars. When an enemy tank column is spotted you first put HE mortar fire on them to have them "button up" ie make them virtually blind. Next have them under fire from the anti-tank guns and if/when the anti-tank unit has to withdraw to new firing positions have the mortars put up a smoke screen.
They tested them with 105mm howitzers

The Russians feel the Hetz earlier and lose more tanks,but they don't care. Expect to prolong the war by about a month tops. Allied casualties increase by around 200,000 mostly Russian infantry storming defense positions with less armor support.German casualties 200,000 to 500,000 mostly civilians killed in air raids or due to shortages of basic goods.
Depends on how many extra tanks are lost from 1942-45 and what that means for the Eastern Front; that comes down to how many Hetzers are turned out; IMHO they are a much better investment than the Panther. Add in some 105mm howitzer variants or even PAW 1000s and they might well have significant impact on the situation in Africa, Italy, and the West. Butterflies could be quite substantial.

The lack of 'full-power' cannons will probably never happen, after all Czech factories can produce them.

BTW - earlier Hetzer might mean skipping the JgdPz-IV/48 and going directly with L/70 variant.
How's that? The L70 didn't fit and would have required a Pz III modified chassis.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just to add a small tidbit about Romania here, in 1942 they were working on the TACAM T-60 and TACAM R-2 conversions (similar to Marder), but due to Romania's small industrial capacity things progressed slowly. In retrospect, as at the time it was patently clear the romanians had nothing to successfully oppose the likes of KV-1 and T-34, they should't have been allowed nowhere near Stalingrad without at least having these few dozens TACAM conversions done (which require german help), and same goes for the hungarians and italians too.

As for Maresal, perhaps the engineers who conceived it have a discussion with the germans in 1942 about their concept or something, so the Hetzer, and with german assistance the Maresal too appear earlier. Marder/TACAM style conversions together with significant numbers of Hetzers and similar concept vehicles built in Hungary, Italy and Romania could have a significant impact in the battles of 1942-1944.
 

Redbeard

Banned
They tested them with 105mm howitzers


Depends on how many extra tanks are lost from 1942-45 and what that means for the Eastern Front; that comes down to how many Hetzers are turned out; IMHO they are a much better investment than the Panther. Add in some 105mm howitzer variants or even PAW 1000s and they might well have significant impact on the situation in Africa, Italy, and the West. Butterflies could be quite substantial.


How's that? The L70 didn't fit and would have required a Pz III modified chassis.
Ideally you have a Forward Observer with a radio connection to the Divisional artillery, but I'd like the individual anti-tank companies to have their own organic fire support - just like infantry companies got during WWII in most armies. A section with two 80 mm mortars is cheap (you could get 20 80mm mortars for one 105mm howitzer), easy to command and supply and can instantly give sufficient firepower to have a tank unit button up. If you add a few GPMG for each ATG platoon (which was usual) your anti-tank company/bataljon is extremely potent in blocking any intrusion into the Divisional position.
 
Top