Sloped Panzer Mark IVs?

Shackel

Banned
How do you think blitzkrieg would have worked out if the Mark IV had sloped armor? If this was one of the largest technological benefits in the T34, how would this work out in the Soviet Union?
 

Deleted member 1487

How do you think blitzkrieg would have worked out if the Mark IV had sloped armor? If this was one of the largest technological benefits in the T34, how would this work out in the Soviet Union?

Considering how few of them there were in 1941, little to no effect at all. The Stukas were the #1 T-34 killer and PzIVs were not nearly as reliable or all terrain as the T-34. I suppose you're interesed in the Germans having their own version of the T-34 during Barbarossa, but that would require the Germans not to over engineer their tanks and be the only nation besides Russia to have discovered the slope principle. It doesn't help with the Blitz, which was more logistically constrained, but later in the war it wouldn't hurt one bit. Great survivability for tanks and their crews means minor changes perhaps delaying the end for about a month on the Eastern Front. Perhaps this is enough for the West do seize Berlin? Who knows...but don't it expect it to be a war winner for the Germans.
 
Sloped armor is no panacea. It would be more difficult for the overstressed German industrial machine to produce, and the Pz IV was by far the most important German tank design of WWII precisely because it was the only modern design Germany could produce in numbers. Further, it generally worsens ergonomics, and indeed the T-34 had some of the worst ergonomics of the war, which directly relates to combat performance.

An improvement in protection that would only be important later in the war, but fewer, less efficient tanks for the duration on is just as likely to hurt Germany as help.
 
This design seems to appear in wargaming as the Panzer IV L model. The tank body to a great degree resembles the Panther. The was some sonsideration of building it but only if the Panther had not been build.
 
I think the Panzer IV with sloped armor would work better; from Combat Mission I can tell you that Pz IV armor usually couldn't stop anything bigger than a 75mm from less than 500m away. I think it would be worth the extra cost of production.
 
How do you think blitzkrieg would have worked out if the Mark IV had sloped armor? If this was one of the largest technological benefits in the T34, how would this work out in the Soviet Union?

I've read once(not sure if it's true or not, but it makes some sense), that sloped armor was considered for the Panzer III & IV, but it was discarded because of space inefficiency of the layout(sloped armor means that in order to have the same internal volume, a bigger - and thus, heavier - tank is needed)
 
I suppose you're interesed in the Germans having their own version of the T-34 during Barbarossa, but that would require the Germans not to over engineer their tanks and be the only nation besides Russia to have discovered the slope principle.

Yes, this is a nitpick, but I believe the Dutch used sloped armor on an armored car they built in small numbers before the Germans took them over.

In terms of the probable intent of the original post, building Panzer 4s with high or even medium velocity 75mm guns prior to Barbarosa would probably be more feasible and useful. The big shock to the Germans was their initial inability to reliably knock out T34s at a reasonable distance. Of course upgunning Panzer 3s with a higher velocity 50mm prior to the invasion would have helped a lot too.
 
I don't know if sloped would be in the cards, but a simple review of captured t-26's and bt series tanks from Spain would have put the Germans in the general vicinity since these tanks at least had angled armor/

Given that German tanks did casting and a lot of spot welds, you could see them do angled armor (not heavy duty sloping like the t-34 or the panther) to a degree probably as early as the Panzer MK 4 series c... with only a minor reduction in interior space (which was large in German tanks vs their peers anyway)

However, you have to look at German doctrine of the 1939-42 period, namely they did not want their tanks to engage other tanks, but instead to advance into enemy rear areas and cause chaos... enemy tanks where supposed to be eliminated with air power and anti tank guns... so uparmoring the tanks doesn't fit into their doctrine... and if they are going to change their tactics to say that their panzers should engage enemy tanks then they would have to upgun the tanks too

given german goals, and limited cannon stockpiles; it probably doesn't make sense for them to bother with this idea till after stalingrad when they where mostly on the defensive (which is exactly what happened in otl)
 
Top