Let's Complete The Trifecta. What Tanks Never Should Have Seen Service?

You're absolutely right, if Italy wanted to field any significant amount of tanks they really had no other choice than to rivet the armor. I do wonder what would happen if they'd had a small number of competent tanks instead of the much larger number of crappy tanks.

Now, the riveted tanks did make a lot of sense for the interwar Italian escapades, as there was little to no AT fire. It's just that the North Africa campaigns decisively showed how flawed the M13/40 was.

The Italian command then produced two upgrades to the M13/40, the M14/41 and the M15/42. The M14/41 was no better than the M13/40, in that it was fragile, cramped and underpowered, while prone to mechanical failure. The M15/42 was a desert-prepared variant of the M14/41, with a better engine and air filters. By the time it was introduced, the allies were in Sicily and Italy, and the North Africa Campaign was over.

In contrast, the Servomente 75/18, a SP gun on a M13/40 or M14/41 chassis, actually had a stellar (for the Italians, at least) service record. With a lover profile, heavier gun, and ability to fire either as direct fire AT/infantry support or as indirect artillery, it was arguably the best Italian AFV of the war.

While there was no choice, really, for the Italians to avoid riveting, there was a choice to modify many, if not most of the Italian M13-15 series to the S75/18 or similar SPG platforms, and increase their performance (as antitank weapons and survivability) by a good margin. However, that would have meant that the Italian command shifted their production and strategy to a defensive stance as early as mid 1941. It's rather unlikely. :D

To sum it up, the M14/41 and M15/42 should not have been introduced.

you have basically described my tl manstein in africa :p
 
Everything the Germans made heavier than a Panther, in addition to the Jagdpanzer IV. For every Tiger, you could have had 2 Panthers. For every King Tiger, possibly 4 or 5. All the effort that went into making the Maus and Jagdtiger could have made a few dozen Panthers.

On that same note, the Sturmtiger.

Personally, I would have loved to see a Jagdmaus. Just imagine that huge thing stealthily creeping up on an unsuspecting herd of Shermans, it's giant engines rumbling silently while preparing for the kill.

The Panthers would have wait their turn. :cool:
 
Personally, I would have loved to see a Jagdmaus. Just imagine that huge thing stealthily creeping up on an unsuspecting herd of Shermans, it's giant engines rumbling silently while preparing for the kill.

The Panthers would have wait their turn. :cool:

very little stealth needed if you are shooting from the next county... albert ernst knocked out shermans from 4+ km with the 128mm jagdtiger in the battle for the ruhr pocket (without gps and laser range finders)
 
I don't think anyone has mentioned the WWII-era Japanese tanks.

While heavy armor would have been a Bad Idea in China/South East Asia (hold up the advance, we need to build ANOTHER new bridge...), there's just something sad when you tanks are clearly inferior to Sherman 75's.

I'll volunteer the modern Japanese Type 90 Tank. Sure, it's fast, has good optics and fire control, low profile, good protection, very good gun...

but it was introduced 50 years too late!
 
and since the tiger 1 was competitive, if not superior to all other "heavy" tanks (which it should be rated against, as opposed to medium tanks like the t34, the panther or the sherman) its hardley a total failure in the manner of the second generation version (plus the tiger 1 didn't have nearly the mobility problems of its bigger brother)

The Panther's a medium now? A 45 t machine when the Pershing was only 42 t and IS series tanks are also around that weight? Oh, the Tiger gains some advantages over other heavy tanks by being 10 t heavier, but that same weight limits it to being basically a purely defensive tank. A task at which a Jadgpanther can do as well for lower cost.
 
The Panther's a medium now? A 45 t machine when the Pershing was only 42 t and IS series tanks are also around that weight? Oh, the Tiger gains some advantages over other heavy tanks by being 10 t heavier, but that same weight limits it to being basically a purely defensive tank. A task at which a Jadgpanther can do as well for lower cost.

by doctrine and employment the panther was a medium tank

the tiger I wasn't a purely defensive tank, they where involved in several long distance counter offensives (third kharkov and kaments come to mind)... it burned a shit load of fuel and wasn't the most reliable tank on earth but in terms of a ww2 independent heavy tank, (which predated a number of its competitors who had the advantage of learning from the tiger I's flaws) it wasn't a failure
 
The Panther's a medium now? A 45 t machine when the Pershing was only 42 t and IS series tanks are also around that weight? Oh, the Tiger gains some advantages over other heavy tanks by being 10 t heavier, but that same weight limits it to being basically a purely defensive tank. A task at which a Jadgpanther can do as well for lower cost.

Myself, I'd call the Panther the first MBT. It straddles the medium/heavy line (once the early mechanical problems were mostly solved); it can fight a heavy, and eat mediums for breakfast, but it can maneuver with mediums and withstand quite a lot of AT weapons at least from the front.

Also, compared to a Tiger, it looks like a medium tank. Compared to a Sherman (pre-Easy 8) it looks like a heavy, but... that's compared to a Sherman.
 

mats

Banned
i'd nominate every japanese tank made upto the modern type 90 and most early ww 2 british tanks even the sherman wich was just a burning coffin on tracks.
but also the II tiger and the Maus Btw look a these badass german tanks that were proposed to be landcrusers although the latter one is more of a self propeld heavy artillery (which BTW firedmassively huge shells the shell was about the size of a t-34 yes, a t-34, wich would be simply vanished if hit, along with evertything else in a 100 m radius, it was something similar to the Bismark but in comparison would be a supercarrier to a rowboat to any allied tank) whilst the first one is a battlecruiser on land with 20+ crew an only 8 aa guns (20mm flak 38)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1000_Ratte
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster
 
all those early WW2 tanks that had machine guns and no cannons. Seriously... "Oh boy, I got a PZKW 3 barreling down on me, and all I got is a pair of machine guns?!"

That big Russian tank that had 5 (!) turrets. Can you imagine trying to command that one? "Okay, Yuri, you shoot at that artillery post over there, Dimitri, you shoot at that armored car up on the ridge, Pavlov, you... oh never mind... while I was giving all you guys your orders, the Germans blew off our treads with their crappy little tanks and we're prisoners now"
 

mats

Banned
That big Russian tank that had 5 (!) turrets. Can you imagine trying to command that one? "Okay, Yuri, you shoot at that artillery post over there, Dimitri, you shoot at that armored car up on the ridge, Pavlov, you... oh never mind... while I was giving all you guys your orders, the Germans blew off our treads with their crappy little tanks and we're prisoners now"

well oh yeah forgot about that one.
but that monster tank (it's actually called"monster") is so badass that i could roundhouse kick chuck norris every day of the week, twice, how that's even possible? i don't know it would have just run over that puny little 5 turret "so called"" monster tank of yours. leave the monsterly ineffective tank desinging to the germans
 
Top