No Tiger Tank with an artillery twist

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

Okay - the 'Waffen revue' article about the German 12,8 cm guns (both prototypes and production) really states that Pak 80 was at 7000 kg (!). However, the ordnance of the Kanone 81 was at just 3353 kg!
Weird. Where did you get the article? Any chance you could email it to me?

The carriage was the same for the 122mm cannon and 152mm gun-howitzer.
IMO, it is not a question if the carriage was too big, but the fast that carriage used cost no resources for the Germans to buy/produce it.
Fair point. For a towed version it would be pretty good if used as an artillery piece, not as a AT weapon like the PAK44. And if it were used with the L46 version. Plus that should work well with the VK3001H, though I'm sure Germany wouldn't need yet another chassis...but better that it and no Tiger than the other way around.
 
Weird. Where did you get the article? Any chance you could email it to me?

Just a small part of the article is devoted to the Pak 80. Red arrow points to where it is said that 'in table "12,8 cm Pak 80" weapon weights 7000 kg. Weight in transport position is 74000 kg' [presumed for the whole JagdTiger]
As bonus, the Panther-based SP AT gun of 12,8 cm is at the right half of the pic.
Granted, I'll try to get a better handle on the weight figure of the Pak 80 now that I'm intrigued.

80.jpg


Fair point. For a towed version it would be pretty good if used as an artillery piece, not as a AT weapon like the PAK44. And if it were used with the L46 version. Plus that should work well with the VK3001H, though I'm sure Germany wouldn't need yet another chassis...but better that it and no Tiger than the other way around.

The Hummel, but with 12,7 or 12,8 cm is a no-brainer.
The towed AT guns are so ... French. The sooner they are self-propelled the better.
 
Given the attritional style of warfare that the East turned into from 1942 on, artillery was one of the most important factors in maintaining a more favorable casualty ratio, so wouldn't it have made more sense and made more of a practical difference having large self propelled artillery instead of Tiger tanks and using things like the Nashorn tank destroyer for long range AT work?
And where are you going to get the logistics to supply those SPGs?
 

Deleted member 1487

And where are you going to get the logistics to supply those SPGs?
As I said, no Tigers, which thanks to the chassis being lighter than the Tiger improves fuel, maintenance, spare parts usage. Then the guns themselves...don't make the PAK44, limit the PAK43, while don't make as many 150mm K18s and 39s. Also not having Tigers means no KwK36s, so the logistics/raw materials/production/labor for that can get rolled into the SP 128mm guns.

The towed AT guns are so ... French. The sooner they are self-propelled the better.
Didn't the US find that SP AT guns are about 10x more effective than towed? Unless you're the USSR and can just have heaps of them in reserve, it doesn't make much sense to waste the resources.

In terms of towed 128mm field guns, those were useful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/122_mm_howitzer_2A18_(D-30)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
...
Didn't the US find that SP AT guns are about 10x more effective than towed? Unless you're the USSR and can just have heaps of them in reserve, it doesn't make much sense to waste the resources.

I'm sure that everyone found that SP AT guns were a better investment than the towed pieces. Towed AT guns are a child of fortress-mentality, as unsuitable for the quickly changing ww2 batllefield as possible.

In terms of towed 128mm field guns, those were useful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/122_mm_howitzer_2A18_(D-30)

Excellent howitzer, even if it is out of our time frame.
The 122mm cannon was another league, though. It took the naval 130mm modified to the ground role to replace it.
 

Deleted member 1487

Excellent howitzer, even if it is out of our time frame.
The 122mm cannon was another league, though. It took the naval 130mm modified to the ground role to replace it.
That's what I'm saying, there is a serious role for a 120-130mm gun howitzer and even if heavy relative to the post-war piece, it can certainly do the job very well.

Though longer, it might weigh the same and have a somewhat similar performance:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/130_mm_towed_field_gun_M1954_(M-46)

The K81/2 mounted on the Soviet 122mm gun carriage was 8.2 tons in action, 1 ton heavier than the Soviet 152mm, but with better performance.
https://books.google.com/books?id=E...WT6CVQQ6AEISTAJ#v=onepage&q=Kanone 81&f=false
The K44 was 10 tons in action.

So if the L55 128mm was 8.2 tons in action, the L45 version could have been about 7 tons or so. The Skoda 128mm version was 6.6 tons in action (estimated).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In 1941 the issue was more about getting it to the front in Russia and Libya.


They only made 61 of those guns and the 170mm outranged it by 4km and they made over 300 over those.
The K18 was much more common:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_cm_Kanone_18
Even then there were only about 100 of them made, as it was realized it was too much gun for too little shell, hence the 170mm K18. So again it comes back to the 17cm piece.

I'm pretty sure the Skoda gun was maxed out IOTL and it wasn't that much different than the 15cm sFH:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_cm_sFH_18
Once they got the RAP working, the Krupp gun was longer ranged and had much more production already in place.

Now taking the Skoda gun and turning THAT into the Hummel...
the Hummel as produced was a 15 cm sFH 18 mounted on what was a bit of a frankentank chassis. Therefore, I'd say that for a Tiger chassis, nothing below a 17cm would be likely to be agreed on, and you might actually be more likely to get a 21cm in there.
 

Deleted member 1487

the Hummel as produced was a 15 cm sFH 18 mounted on what was a bit of a frankentank chassis. Therefore, I'd say that for a Tiger chassis, nothing below a 17cm would be likely to be agreed on, and you might actually be more likely to get a 21cm in there.
The 128mm L45 might actually work on the Hummel, as the Dicker Max mounted the L52 K18 version, but the VK3001 chassis would probably be ideal.
 
OTL was there an SP Artillery proponent in the German Army? Have him become more prominent earlier on?

Have the Germans early into Barbarossa be defeated/nearly defeated by a Soviet force heavily equipped with some ZiS-30 and the Germans are inspired to take it from there?

Although some officers in the artillery where very traditional there must have been a few who where keen on mechanisation. The real driver however comes from the Panzer Corps who wanted artillery support capable to keep up with the tanks and mechanised/motorised infantry. In OTL they recognised this requirement after Poland and experimented in France with SPG, using the simple method of bolting a 150mm howitzer in a crude armoured box onto a Panzer 1. If we made the performance of these SPG's more noteworthy in France 1940 (perhaps being in the right place at the right time to make an impact on the campaign say a dozen able to bring heavy fire down on the Arras counter attack) then it could be a earlier driver for mounting guns on the Pz2 and Pz38 (OTL Wespe and Grille respectively) in time for the kick off of Barbarossa in 1941. These vehicles made significant contributions to German operations so with more available earlier it would become a natural progression to the (earlier) OTL Hummel and ITTL mounting a heavier gun the Tiger-Motte (Tiger moth)? or
Heuschrecke (locust)? Based on the Tiger type chassis.

Of course the requirement for SPG had been recognised in western armies since the 1920's so German artillery and Tank officers would have been aware of this and its likely would have at least some knowledge of what work was being done abroad. The conversion of the Pz1 to a simple SPG could have been done much earlier and its imporved mobility could have been tested in prewar manouvers. This would also act as a driver for more and earlier SPG's with the German army.

Or just have Hitler walk by some prototypes/mock ups in the mid 30's and have him decide that he likes them and wants more (just like with tanks OTL).

I dont think any of this will kill the Tiger tank from happening as in late 1941 the Germans needed something ASAP that could match the T34 and KV1 for both armour and firepower not just in combat but also for morale and propaganda purposes. Never underestimate the importance of national pride as a reason for doing very stupid things. However in this scenario the Germans would probably produce less Tiger in exchange for a more useful SPG version.
 

Deleted member 1487

So for the OP idea of 17cm and 21cm guns on a Tiger chassis:
http://www.achtungpanzer.com/grille-series-cricket-series.htm
In 1942, Krupp received order to design the vehicle (waffentrager) using Tiger II‘s components, which was to be part of Grille Series.It was to be able to mount 170mm K 72 L/50 gun – Grille 17. It was ordered that its weight should be 53 to 58 tons. It was also planned to convert Grille 17 into Grille 21 armed with 210mm Mortar 18/1 L/31. Next in the series was Grille 30. It would be armed with Skoda 305mm GrW L/16 mortar. Project of Grille 42 was under the development.It was to be armed with 420mm Grw mortar. In 1943/44, Krupp started production of the prototype, while full-scale production was to start in mid-1945, but the end of the war cancelled any further development.

Grille 17/21/30/42 had its armament mounted on the rail platform inside the hull allowing it to be dismounted anytime. Each variant was also armed with two 7.92mm machine guns.It would be operated by the crew of eight (driver, commander, gunner, radio operator and four loaders). Powered by Maybach HL230P30 or HL230P45, Grille would be able to travel at maximum speed of 45 km/h with range of 250km. Fuel capacity was to be 1000 liters. Grille was 13 meters long (with gun), 3.27 meters wide and 3.15 meters high. Its armor protection ranged from 16mm (side) to 30mm (front). Grille 17 weighted 58000kg but only carried 5 rounds of ammunition. Grille 21 weighted 52700kg and carried only 3 rounds of ammunition. One prototype with 170mm gun was almost completed in May of 1945 and was captured by British troops at Haustenbeck near Paderborn.

http://www.kfzderwehrmacht.de/Homep...ut_numbers/Grille_17_-_21/grille_17_-_21.html
Already by mid 1942, Krupp had suggested to create a self propelled gun carriage for the 17 cm K 18 and the 21 cm Mrs 18. By the end of 1942, Krupp had received a contract to create a testing vehicle made of components of the Tiger I. A larger delay occured because it was decided to use components of the new Tiger II.

g07057_4488299.jpg


p4.jpg


p1.jpg
 

Deleted member 94680

I dont think any of this will kill the Tiger tank from happening as in late 1941 the Germans needed something ASAP that could match the T34 and KV1 for both armour and firepower not just in combat but also for morale and propaganda purposes. Never underestimate the importance of national pride as a reason for doing very stupid things. However in this scenario the Germans would probably produce less Tiger in exchange for a more useful SPG version.

The problem isn't so much not having a proponent in the army, it is getting Hitler to listen. Still, encountering the Soviet 122mm did inspire the 128mm field gun variant, but it wasn't ready by the end of the war apparently and time was wasted on the PAK version. The original FLAK 128 wasn't ready until 1942 IOTL, so perhaps the naval 127mm version is an inspiration for such a piece early enough to have it ready in time?

If these SP units are in place for '41 - July at the latest(?) they could be used against the KV-1s and T-34s when they were encountered in greater numbers. What was (would be?) the AT performance of the 127mm gun mentioned earlier? Maybe the Tiger is reserved for the SS only, as an elite tank for the elite units? Keep them in the propaganda pictures whilst the Pz IIIs and IVs supported by the SP Art do the real work?
 

Deleted member 1487

If these SP units are in place for '41 - July at the latest(?) they could be used against the KV-1s and T-34s when they were encountered in greater numbers. What was (would be?) the AT performance of the 127mm gun mentioned earlier? Maybe the Tiger is reserved for the SS only, as an elite tank for the elite units? Keep them in the propaganda pictures whilst the Pz IIIs and IVs supported by the SP Art do the real work?
No, they aren't protected enough to be used for direct AT work except in an extreme situation.

The L47 127mm had a muzzle velocity of 830mps for an HE shell, which is the same as the AP shell muzzle velocity of the Dicker Max. Basically good enough to kill anything fielded by the Allies at at least 2500m.

It would be a more powerful Dicker Max that could also be used as artillery.
 

Deleted member 1487

I suppose the next question is if the 127mm L46 is a worthwhile weapon, should it supplant the 105mm K18, also made by Rheinmetal? It could use the same carriage:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_cm_schwere_Kanone_18
The German army wanted a new 10.5 cm gun as well as 15 cm howitzer which were to share the same carriage. Guns are heavier than howitzers due to the longer barrel. This also led to the 15 cm sFH 18. As such both weapons had a similar weight and could be carried by a similar carriage. By 1926 Krupp and Rheinmetall had specimen designs, and prototypes were ready by 1930, but was not fielded until 1933–34. Both Krupp and Rheinmetall competed for the development contract, but the Wehrmacht compromised and selected Krupp's carriage to be mated with Rheinmetall's gun.
It might be a little bit big for the towed carriage, but should be fine for the VK3001H Stuerer Emil set up, as it was lighter and shorter than the L61 gun by a substantial margin, making it much easier to carry. I think the 105mm K18/15cm sFH 18 carriage would be similar to the Soviet carriage that the 128mm K81 was mounted on (same weight as the 15cm sFH18) and given that the 128mm gun would be no heavier than the 15cm howitzer and about 1 ton or so heavier than the 105mm, but having a shell with nearly twice the weight (28kg vs. <15kg) and similar range or perhaps even better I should think it would make sense to drop the 105mm K18 entirely and just make towed and SP 127mm L46s instead, as they can use the same carriage and were made by the same company. The only downside would be they'd need a new chassis to be self propelled, but given the advantages of the VK3001H as a 'Waffentrager' it would prevent the Geschützwagen III/IV and free up production for more Panzer IVs, even if it limited Panther/Tiger production (though IMHO the Tiger chassis had greater utility as a 17cm weapons carrier).
 
...
The K81/2 mounted on the Soviet 122mm gun carriage was 8.2 tons in action, 1 ton heavier than the Soviet 152mm, but with better performance.
...
The K44 was 10 tons in action.
So if the L55 128mm was 8.2 tons in action, the L45 version could have been about 7 tons or so. The Skoda 128mm version was 6.6 tons in action (estimated).

(the Google books link leads to just the title picture, nothing else)
The shell weight is an imprortant part of the gun's performance. SInce the Soviet 152mm howitzers and gun/howitzers fired a 43-56 kg shell/projectile, we can't really say that a gun that fired a 24-26 kg shell/projectile has a better performance.
Granted, with a dedicated carriage the 12,7-12,8 cm gun will weight less than with a 'borrowed' carriage.

I suppose the next question is if the 127mm L46 is a worthwhile weapon, should it supplant the 105mm K18, also made by Rheinmetal? It could use the same carriage:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_cm_schwere_Kanone_18

It might be a little bit big for the towed carriage, but should be fine for the VK3001H Stuerer Emil set up, as it was lighter and shorter than the L61 gun by a substantial margin, making it much easier to carry. I think the 105mm K18/15cm sFH 18 carriage would be similar to the Soviet carriage that the 128mm K81 was mounted on (same weight as the 15cm sFH18) and given that the 128mm gun would be no heavier than the 15cm howitzer and about 1 ton or so heavier than the 105mm, but having a shell with nearly twice the weight (28kg vs. <15kg) and similar range or perhaps even better I should think it would make sense to drop the 105mm K18 entirely and just make towed and SP 127mm L46s instead, as they can use the same carriage and were made by the same company. The only downside would be they'd need a new chassis to be self propelled, but given the advantages of the VK3001H as a 'Waffentrager' it would prevent the Geschützwagen III/IV and free up production for more Panzer IVs, even if it limited Panther/Tiger production (though IMHO the Tiger chassis had greater utility as a 17cm weapons carrier).

Looks like the 15cm sFh 18 used the same carriage as the 10,5cm K18? At any rate, the carriage looks like it could withstand the stress, and with muzzle brake indeed it should. Having the 12,7-12,8 cm instead of the 10,5 cm makes a lot of sense.
The chassis used for the SP version will still be the version of the mass-produced Pz-IV, or indeed the Geshutzwagen III/IV.
 

Deleted member 1487

(the Google books link leads to just the title picture, nothing else)
The shell weight is an imprortant part of the gun's performance. SInce the Soviet 152mm howitzers and gun/howitzers fired a 43-56 kg shell/projectile, we can't really say that a gun that fired a 24-26 kg shell/projectile has a better performance.
Granted, with a dedicated carriage the 12,7-12,8 cm gun will weight less than with a 'borrowed' carriage.
Don't know what to tell you about the google books thing, works for me. Anyway the 152mm howitzer and the 128mm field gun have different roles/missions. As the 128mm even the L46 would outrange the regular 152mm howitzer in CB fighting the range of the 28kg shell matters more than the 43-56kg shell, which was designed more for hitting front line targets. If a 28kg shell can hit you, but you can't reach them with your 50kg shell, you've got a problem.

Oh found something for you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/152_mm_howitzer-gun_M1937_(ML-20)
The Czechoslovakian howitzer K4 (used by Germans as 15 cm sFH 37(t)) was about 2 tons lighter, but with range more than 2 km shorter and only 178 pieces were built
I think Skoda's capacity was limited.

Looks like the 15cm sFh 18 used the same carriage as the 10,5cm K18? At any rate, the carriage looks like it could withstand the stress, and with muzzle brake indeed it should. Having the 12,7-12,8 cm instead of the 10,5 cm makes a lot of sense.
The chassis used for the SP version will still be the version of the mass-produced Pz-IV, or indeed the Geshutzwagen III/IV.
Since the same company made the 105mm K18, then the 127mm naval gun should be able to be made by the same company with the freed up capacity. Especially if it happens either early in the war or pre-war then there are tons of resources for the 127mm gun and thousands could be made, especially if it replaces the PAK44 and 43 also. If they get it self propelled too, then it could do so serious damage, as it would out range almost all of Soviet guns except the heaviest of the corps level guns and the super heavies. It wouldn't be able to compete with the Long Tom, but that is what the 170cm K18 is for.
I'm not sure if the Pz IV or Geschutzwagen III/IV could handle it. The Pz IV had trouble with the 105mm K18, which would be lighter than the 127mm. Though if it could do the Hummel with the sFH18 then maybe it would work. If so that would be fantastic as then you don't need a special chassis for it. But you'd need to put more resources into Geschützwagen III/IVs. I wonder if it would also replace the Nashorn if it could direct fire? As a general piece it might be able to take on multiple roles with the SP mounting.
 

Redbeard

Banned
When proposing alternate equipment of the Wehrmacht the "limited resources" factor often is a real showstopper but if we limit this to making a piece like the 170mm gun self propelled then I think it is well inside the plausible - even without deleting the Tigerprogramme.

Only about 300 were built, but it was an extremely effective gun and a few battalions concentrated at a high priority sector will be an important contribution in "disturbing" enemy activity well behind the frontline. In OTL the problem of the 17cm gun was its heavy weight and the time it took to be brought into (and out of) firing position. With a self propelled carriage this could be reduced drastically and I wouldn't waste resources on a heavy armoured vehicle - something based on one of the heavier half track prime movers might be enough.

BTW now we are at it, I once read somewhere that the Germans worked on (fantasised about) a very heavy mortar (40+ cm) mounted on a heavy tank chassis (Tiger II?). I haven't seen any drawings but would imagine it would be something like the mortar being "hinged" from the chassis down to the ground (on a baseplate) and fired from here - but that is just my weird imagination. Anyone here know more?
 

Deleted member 1487

When proposing alternate equipment of the Wehrmacht the "limited resources" factor often is a real showstopper but if we limit this to making a piece like the 170mm gun self propelled then I think it is well inside the plausible - even without deleting the Tigerprogramme.
Not always, the Nazis were extremely wasteful and disorganized early on and there was potential for getting more out of things without playing zero-sum games. For instance not initiating the Plan-Z construction in 1939, lots of saved resources and manpower. The entire 4 Year Plan was a mess too.
You could certainly not cancel the Tiger Program, but you'd have to scale it back a fair bit and they'd have to start earlier than late 1942 and not interrupt design to restart on the Tiger II chassis.

Only about 300 were built, but it was an extremely effective gun and a few battalions concentrated at a high priority sector will be an important contribution in "disturbing" enemy activity well behind the frontline. In OTL the problem of the 17cm gun was its heavy weight and the time it took to be brought into (and out of) firing position. With a self propelled carriage this could be reduced drastically and I wouldn't waste resources on a heavy armoured vehicle - something based on one of the heavier half track prime movers might be enough.
More could have been built had they wanted to, because for some reason later in the war they switched back to making the cancelled 210mm mortars. I agree with most of the above here except for mounting it on a heavy prime mover; none were big enough to handle it, it required a large tank chassis.

BTW now we are at it, I once read somewhere that the Germans worked on (fantasised about) a very heavy mortar (40+ cm) mounted on a heavy tank chassis (Tiger II?). I haven't seen any drawings but would imagine it would be something like the mortar being "hinged" from the chassis down to the ground (on a baseplate) and fired from here - but that is just my weird imagination. Anyone here know more?
Yes, it was the Grille 42 IIRC, part of the Grille 17 program I referenced above for mounting the 17cm on the Tiger chassis. It was just a proposal and never got off the ground.
 
Just don't forget these vehicles can't carry much (if any) on-board ammo and so will need dedicated ammo carriers assigned...
 

Deleted member 1487

Just don't forget these vehicles can't carry much (if any) on-board ammo and so will need dedicated ammo carriers assigned...
A few trucks per battery isn't that big of a deal. Plus towing trucks/prime movers weren't carry much ammo either, so they needed ammo carriers themselves.
 
Don't know what to tell you about the google books thing, works for me. Anyway the 152mm howitzer and the 128mm field gun have different roles/missions. As the 128mm even the L46 would outrange the regular 152mm howitzer in CB fighting the range of the 28kg shell matters more than the 43-56kg shell, which was designed more for hitting front line targets. If a 28kg shell can hit you, but you can't reach them with your 50kg shell, you've got a problem.

There is no point to compare cannons and howitzers. One group 'chases' range, another 'chases' shell weight. Both are needed, neither can do other group's job well. Nobody used howitzers for CB if they had cannons around.

Oh found something for you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/152_mm_howitzer-gun_M1937_(ML-20)

I think Skoda's capacity was limited.

Thanks for the numbers.
As for the Skoda's capacity, I think you've added 2 and 2 together and arrived at 5. Germans were reluctant to invest anywhere but Germany proper (with few exceptions), while encouraging their Allies to buy what was produced in Germany. Skoda was a premier exporter of artillery pieces between the wars, that is not achieved by having low capacity to produce, nor with outdated designs.

Since the same company made the 105mm K18, then the 127mm naval gun should be able to be made by the same company with the freed up capacity. Especially if it happens either early in the war or pre-war then there are tons of resources for the 127mm gun and thousands could be made, especially if it replaces the PAK44 and 43 also. If they get it self propelled too, then it could do so serious damage, as it would out range almost all of Soviet guns except the heaviest of the corps level guns and the super heavies. It wouldn't be able to compete with the Long Tom, but that is what the 170cm K18 is for.
I'm not sure if the Pz IV or Geschutzwagen III/IV could handle it. The Pz IV had trouble with the 105mm K18, which would be lighter than the 127mm. Though if it could do the Hummel with the sFH18 then maybe it would work. If so that would be fantastic as then you don't need a special chassis for it. But you'd need to put more resources into Geschützwagen III/IVs. I wonder if it would also replace the Nashorn if it could direct fire? As a general piece it might be able to take on multiple roles with the SP mounting.

Churn out the Geshutzwagen III/IV as much as possible, it is a non-nonsense vehicle that can use powerful artillery pieces from 15cm sFh down. Since the 'G III/IV' handled the sFh 18 recoil, it will not have the problem with 12,7 cm.
Good idea might've been to outfit the big guns with muzzle brakes ASAP, though.
 
Top