WI: Different French occupation zone of Germany? (Also French Panther and Tiger II tanks?)

[Nell_Lucifer]

This question stemmed from a more, interesting one, that being, what if France continued Tiger and Panther production post war instead of going with the ARL 44 or the AMX M4 1945?

Obviously it would have been quite complicated given that they (or as far as I know) were not in possession of any German tank factories compared to the British, Americans or the Soviets. As such, that lead to this post's title and question.

Would it have been possible for the French to have a different occupation zone? Perhaps getting North Rhine-Westphalia instead of South Baden and Württemberg-Hohenzollern? With Hesse going to the British instead of the Americans?

North Rhine-Westphalia offers a better chance for the French to continue the production of German vehicles than the OTL territories given that DEMAG was producing Panthers in Duisburg, Krupp Tiger IIs in Essen and D.H.H.V in Dortmund. However, in this case (exchanging South Baden and Württemberg-Hohenzollern for North Rhine-Westphalia) the French will not have access to the ZF (transmission) and Maybach (engines) factories, however, I believe setting those up would be easier than to set up the production of the tanks' hull and turret.

In the case of continued Panther and Tiger production, do you see them replaced by the mid 1950s like in OTL with the French Panthers? (As they ran out of spare parts) Or upgraded to remain competitive with newer Soviet (and American/British) tanks, if so, how would they look? - I could see the Panther receiving the heavy duty ZF transmission like some Jagdpanthers did, an autoloader, rangefinder, stabilizer and a better engine? As for the Tiger II, maybe the 100 mm cannon of the AMX 50 and later the 105 CN 105 F1?

(Would be funny if they were sold to Israel instead of the AMX 13...)

 

[CV12Hornet]

The French did look into using the Panther postwar, having been gifted a large stock of the tanks and actually using them in one regiment.

Their experience with the Panther was, AIUI, so negative that there’s no way they’d actually buy more of them.

 

[cortz#9]

This question stemmed from a more, interesting one, that being, what if France continued Tiger and Panther production post war instead of going with the ARL 44 or the AMX M4 1945?

Obviously it would have been quite complicated given that they (or as far as I know) were not in possession of any German tank factories compared to the British, Americans or the Soviets. As such, that lead to this post's title and question.

Would it have been possible for the French to have a different occupation zone? Perhaps getting North Rhine-Westphalia instead of South Baden and Württemberg-Hohenzollern? With Hesse going to the British instead of the Americans?

North Rhine-Westphalia offers a better chance for the French to continue the production of German vehicles than the OTL territories given that DEMAG was producing Panthers in Duisburg, Krupp Tiger IIs in Essen and D.H.H.V in Dortmund. However, in this case (exchanging South Baden and Württemberg-Hohenzollern for North Rhine-Westphalia) the French will not have access to the ZF (transmission) and Maybach (engines) factories, however, I believe setting those up would be easier than to set up the production of the tanks' hull and turret.

In the case of continued Panther and Tiger production, do you see them replaced by the mid 1950s like in OTL with the French Panthers? (As they ran out of spare parts) Or upgraded to remain competitive with newer Soviet (and American/British) tanks, if so, how would they look? - I could see the Panther receiving the heavy duty ZF transmission like some Jagdpanthers did, an autoloader, rangefinder, stabilizer and a better engine? As for the Tiger II, maybe the 100 mm cannon of the AMX 50 and later the 105 CN 105 F1?

(Would be funny if they were sold to Israel instead of the AMX 13...)

Maybe the French end up making something like this?

Panther-II turret on a modified AMX-50 hull.

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

The French did look into using the Panther postwar, having been gifted a large stock of the tanks and actually using them in one regiment.

Their experience with the Panther was, AIUI, so negative that there’s no way they’d actually buy more of them.

I did mention that the French used Panther tanks post war, though, I wouldn't say their experience was that negative. From what I've been able to find (the 1947 report) their problems with the Panther would be those: (Also, I did not say for the French to buy more Panthers, but rather, make them as part of their occupation rights and reparations)

The turret traverse drive is not strong enough to either turn the turret or hold it in place when the Panther is on an incline of more than 20 degrees. The Panther is therefore not capable of firing when driving cross-country.

During rapid rate of fire it is not uncommon to be forced to break off firing when the recoil of the gun has reached its permissible limit (cease fire).

A rate of fire of 20 rounds per minute is only permitted in exceptional cases when circumstances so dictate.

Elevating the gun is normally simple, but made difficult if the stabilizer operated by compressed nitrogen has lost pressure.

[...] the engine was not operable over 1500 km. The average engine life amounted to 1000 km.

The truly weak spot of the Panther is its final drive, which is of too weak a design and has an average fatigue life of only 150 km.

All those problems could be ameliorated if the French are in control of the German factories. The turret traverse drive could be replaced by a stronger one, German designed, French designed or mixed. Boehringer GmbH (Ingelheim am Rhein, Rhineland-Palatinate) worked on the Panther turret traverse from what I know so they could make a stronger one if the French demand it so now with no resource constraints or bombing fear.

The final drive of the Panther could be replaced if needed with the Tiger II (given they have Krupp's Tiger factory under their control) or with an improved/strengthened one now with no disruption of production concern.

The engine I think would be the trickiest part, though, they might have a solution for both the Tiger and Panther in the Klöckner Humboldt Deutz AG factory in Cologne who built a 700 hp two-stroke water-cooled diesel engine (T8 M118) that could easily replace the HL 230 (as it was designed to)

Maybe the French end up making something like this?
View attachment 808802
Panther-II turret on a modified AMX-50 hull.

I don't think the AMX-50 in this timeline would see the light of the day, neither the hull shape or oscillating turret for the fact that they already have a heavy and medium tank (Tiger II and Panther) or the money to invest in a whole new tank design. (Also the Panther II turret with the 88 is physically impossible to mount the long 88 and it was never planned to have that gun)

I don't think the French will touch the Panther F turret as they would not be in possession of it as I don't believe DEMAG was ever accorded a contract to build the turret, neither Krupp... Though, from a bit more research, the French might end up with the Panther F hull if not the turret as Ruhrstahl AG did end up assembling some Panther F hulls...

 

[marathag]

I did mention that the French used Panther tanks post war, though, I wouldn't say their experience was that negative. From what I've been able to find (the 1947 report) their problems with the Panther would be those: (Also, I did not say for the French to buy more Panthers, but rather, make them as part of their occupation rights and reparations)

The turret traverse drive is not strong enough to either turn the turret or hold it in place when the Panther is on an incline of more than 20 degrees. The Panther is therefore not capable of firing when driving cross-country.

During rapid rate of fire it is not uncommon to be forced to break off firing when the recoil of the gun has reached its permissible limit (cease fire).

A rate of fire of 20 rounds per minute is only permitted in exceptional cases when circumstances so dictate.

Elevating the gun is normally simple, but made difficult if the stabilizer operated by compressed nitrogen has lost pressure.

[...] the engine was not operable over 1500 km. The average engine life amounted to 1000 km.

The truly weak spot of the Panther is its final drive, which is of too weak a design and has an average fatigue life of only 150 km.

All those problems could be ameliorated if the French are in control of the German factories. The turret traverse drive could be replaced by a stronger one, German designed, French designed or mixed. Boehringer GmbH (Ingelheim am Rhein, Rhineland-Palatinate) worked on the Panther turret traverse from what I know so they could make a stronger one if the French demand it so now with no resource constraints or bombing fear.

The final drive of the Panther could be replaced if needed with the Tiger II (given they have Krupp's Tiger factory under their control) or with an improved/strengthened one now with no disruption of production concern.

The engine I think would be the trickiest part, though, they might have a solution for both the Tiger and Panther in the Klöckner Humboldt Deutz AG factory in Cologne who built a 700 hp two-stroke water-cooled diesel engine (T8 M118) that could easily replace the HL 230 (as it was designed to)


I don't think the AMX-50 in this timeline would see the light of the day, neither the hull shape or oscillating turret for the fact that they already have a heavy and medium tank (Tiger II and Panther) or the money to invest in a whole new tank design. (Also the Panther II turret with the 88 is physically impossible to mount the long 88 and it was never planned to have that gun)

I don't think the French will touch the Panther F turret as they would not be in possession of it as I don't believe DEMAG was ever accorded a contract to build the turret, neither Krupp... Though, from a bit more research, the French might end up with the Panther F hull if not the turret as Ruhrstahl AG did end up assembling some Panther F hulls...

The best fix is to junk the German driveline completely, and replace with Centurion guts, used with US style live track for long service life. Turret traverse, replace with US hydraulic.
Since they didn't have the actual 75mmL70 machinery, do as OTL and just make a 75mm in the same power class.

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

The best fix is to junk the German driveline completely, and replace with Centurion guts

Not possible for a few reasons: 1 - The British will surely not give the French access to the Centurion's parts; 2 - The French will certainly refuse asking the British for help given what happened in 1945 in Syria; 3 - The Centurion is a new tank barely a year old in service and not proven; 4 - It is cheaper to use the final drive of the Oval transmission (Tiger II) which is interchangeable to some degree with the AK 7-400 than wholly replacing the whole drivetrain.

used with US style live track for long service life. Turret traverse, replace with US hydraulic.
Since they didn't have the actual 75mmL70 machinery, do as OTL and just make a 75mm in the same power class.

I don't really see the point in this, the French were happy with the performance of the Panther tracks, even surprised at their resilience, the US hydraulic not sure if it is rated for the 9 or so tones the Panther turret weighted for it to work reliably.

I think it would be easier and cheaper to set up a production line at ABS or APX instead of spending more time on designing a new cannon and new ammunition. I could see the French producing a copy of the 7.5 cm KwK 44 L/70 named CN-75-45 and later APX producing their original SA49 for the AMX 13 bypassing the SA50 (not like it was that liked compared to the L/70) This way, they save a lot of money, at least, short term before they get back on their feet. The SA49 for example is being able to use M3/M6 US shells while the CN-75-45 German stocks.

 

[CV12Hornet]

I did mention that the French used Panther tanks post war, though, I wouldn't say their experience was that negative. From what I've been able to find (the 1947 report) their problems with the Panther would be those: (Also, I did not say for the French to buy more Panthers, but rather, make them as part of their occupation rights and reparations)

The turret traverse drive is not strong enough to either turn the turret or hold it in place when the Panther is on an incline of more than 20 degrees. The Panther is therefore not capable of firing when driving cross-country.

During rapid rate of fire it is not uncommon to be forced to break off firing when the recoil of the gun has reached its permissible limit (cease fire).

A rate of fire of 20 rounds per minute is only permitted in exceptional cases when circumstances so dictate.

Elevating the gun is normally simple, but made difficult if the stabilizer operated by compressed nitrogen has lost pressure.

[...] the engine was not operable over 1500 km. The average engine life amounted to 1000 km.

The truly weak spot of the Panther is its final drive, which is of too weak a design and has an average fatigue life of only 150 km.

All those problems could be ameliorated if the French are in control of the German factories. The turret traverse drive could be replaced by a stronger one, German designed, French designed or mixed. Boehringer GmbH (Ingelheim am Rhein, Rhineland-Palatinate) worked on the Panther turret traverse from what I know so they could make a stronger one if the French demand it so now with no resource constraints or bombing fear.

The final drive of the Panther could be replaced if needed with the Tiger II (given they have Krupp's Tiger factory under their control) or with an improved/strengthened one now with no disruption of production concern.

The engine I think would be the trickiest part, though, they might have a solution for both the Tiger and Panther in the Klöckner Humboldt Deutz AG factory in Cologne who built a 700 hp two-stroke water-cooled diesel engine (T8 M118) that could easily replace the HL 230 (as it was designed to)

At this point you’re getting pretty close to designing a new tank with extra steps.

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

At this point you’re getting pretty close to designing a new tank with extra steps.

It is in the same vein as going from the M4A2 to the M4A3E8. Hardly designing a new tank, just replacing/improving an already existing platform without making any big changes to it.

 

[marathag]

I don't really see the point in this, the French were happy with the performance of the Panther tracks, even surprised at their resilience, the US hydraulic not sure if it is rated for the 9 or so tones the Panther turret weighted for it to work reliably

Steel tracks chew up pavement, requiring trailers to move armor around without destroying the roads. Rubber blocks do not.
The standard M4 Sherman hydraulic worked fine with the 10 ton Jumbo turret and if needed, had the T26/T29/T30 drive for far heavier turrets.

 

[marathag]

It is in the same vein as going from the M4A2 to the M4A3E8. Hardly designing a new tank, just replacing/improving an already existing platform without making any big changes to it.

Though with the number of changes, was almost a different tank.

 

[New Cleo Genesis]

Maybe the French end up making something like this?
View attachment 808802
Panther-II turret on a modified AMX-50 hull.

Apropros: could someone explain to me where these pictures of fictional tanks come from? Is there a website that allows users to create them, or are they just done with Photoshop or some other image editing software?

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

Steel tracks chew up pavement, requiring trailers to move armor around without destroying the roads. Rubber blocks do not.
The standard M4 Sherman hydraulic worked fine with the 10 ton Jumbo turret and if needed, had the T26/T29/T30 drive for far heavier turrets.

Hmm, I see, though I see them doing what they did with the AMX 13 tracks, adding a rubber block between each connector? or whatever the name for it is could solve the problem. Also, good to know about the hydraulic, I guess they will go with something based on the M4 Sherman for the Panther turret drive.

Though with the number of changes, was almost a different tank.

Depends where you draw the line as that would apply to a very wide variety of tanks and aircrafts, especially aircrafts from different batch numbers.

Apropros: could someone explain to me where these pictures of fictional tanks come from? Is there a website that allows users to create them, or are they just done with Photoshop or some other image editing software?

Basically, you search for some base vehicles (in cortz case the Panther II and AMX 50) in blueprint form then combine them in whatever editing software you can get your hands on (Photoshop, GIMP, Paint etc) sometimes drawing new details or fixing some lines.

 

[cortz#9]

I don't think the AMX-50 in this timeline would see the light of the day, neither the hull shape or oscillating turret for the fact that they already have a heavy and medium tank (Tiger II and Panther) or the money to invest in a whole new tank design. (Also the Panther II turret with the 88 is physically impossible to mount the long 88 and it was never planned to have that gun)

I don't think the French will touch the Panther F turret as they would not be in possession of it as I don't believe DEMAG was ever accorded a contract to build the turret, neither Krupp... Though, from a bit more research, the French might end up with the Panther F hull if not the turret as Ruhrstahl AG did end up assembling some Panther F hulls...

I wasn't implying that the French would modify their OTL AMX-50 design, I simply used a pic of an AMX to make my alternate design of what a post war French Panther with improvements made might look like.
Different engine and exhaust system, rear drive instead of frontal drive and I could see the French adopting the Panther-II Turret in their improved design but again, "I" modified an AMX-50, not the French.

The AMX I imagine would not come into existence ITTL.

As for the schmalturm turret, the British and the Americans both captured an example of the schmalturm at the end of the war and conducted test with them, I could see the US and the British sharing the results with the French and ITTL maybe giving them one of the schmalturm turrets to test for themselves.

 

[cortz#9]

Apropros: could someone explain to me where these pictures of fictional tanks come from? Is there a website that allows users to create them, or are they just done with Photoshop or some other image editing software?

I made the pic using my computer's Pant-Tools and line drawings of a Panther-II and an AMX-50, I erased the bits I didn't need and shortened the suspension from 9 road wheels to 7.
you can see more of these types of alternate AFV designs on this site - https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...ory-armoured-fighting-vehicles-part-3.470632/
You can even request a design if you have an idea for one.

 

[Bougnas]

This question stemmed from a more, interesting one, that being, what if France continued Tiger and Panther production post war instead of going with the ARL 44 or the AMX M4 1945?

Obviously it would have been quite complicated given that they (or as far as I know) were not in possession of any German tank factories compared to the British, Americans or the Soviets. As such, that lead to this post's title and question.

Would it have been possible for the French to have a different occupation zone? Perhaps getting North Rhine-Westphalia instead of South Baden and Württemberg-Hohenzollern? With Hesse going to the British instead of the Americans?

North Rhine-Westphalia offers a better chance for the French to continue the production of German vehicles than the OTL territories given that DEMAG was producing Panthers in Duisburg, Krupp Tiger IIs in Essen and D.H.H.V in Dortmund. However, in this case (exchanging South Baden and Württemberg-Hohenzollern for North Rhine-Westphalia) the French will not have access to the ZF (transmission) and Maybach (engines) factories, however, I believe setting those up would be easier than to set up the production of the tanks' hull and turret.

In the case of continued Panther and Tiger production, do you see them replaced by the mid 1950s like in OTL with the French Panthers? (As they ran out of spare parts) Or upgraded to remain competitive with newer Soviet (and American/British) tanks, if so, how would they look? - I could see the Panther receiving the heavy duty ZF transmission like some Jagdpanthers did, an autoloader, rangefinder, stabilizer and a better engine? As for the Tiger II, maybe the 100 mm cannon of the AMX 50 and later the 105 CN 105 F1?

(Would be funny if they were sold to Israel instead of the AMX 13...)

While having more factories for technical parts and assembly would have been nice for the AMX-50 program, I don't think there was any interest whatsoever in continued production of Panthers and Tiger IIs with limited changes.

For one France explicitly stated they would spend as little as possible on production weapons to focus on R&D for 1950 and later. The country needed money for reconstruction and there was a feeling that spending money on actually up-to-date designs was preferable to pursuing dead ends. The only notable exception were the limited ARL-44 production and AMD-178B upgrades, but even those programs were considerably downscaled compared to initial objectives and the ARL only survived due to inertia as it was seen as a technological dead-end even before entering service.
As is, there wasn't even enough money to expand and reequip the 1945-50 army as much as the French high command wanted.

The second aspect is that even as early as 1945, France had drawn requirements for new tanks that neither the Panther nor Tiger II met, which is why they are even closer to dead-ends. Namely, a 75mm high velocity gun was contemplated only for the 12t airborne tank and 22-32t general purpose tank programs, while the weight and armor of the Panther were closer to the 45-50t battle tank meant to carry a 90mm gun. Finally the 1945 spec said the 65-70t tank was to have a 105mm gun minimum. Mobility requirements also diverged.
Of course you can technically reach the 90mm 50t tank requirement by modifying the Panther, but you de-facto arrive to the AMX 50. And indeed the first schematics arrived as early as 1945. As such it was perfectly acceptable to wait and refine a future project rather than warming over a WW2 design, no matter how future-proof it could have been.​

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

While having more factories for technical parts and assembly would have been nice for the AMX-50 program, I don't think there was any interest whatsoever in continued production of Panthers and Tiger IIs with limited changes.

For one France explicitly stated they would spend as little as possible on production weapons to focus on R&D for 1950 and later. The country needed money for reconstruction and there was a feeling that spending money on actually up-to-date designs was preferable to pursuing dead ends. The only notable exception were the limited ARL-44 production and AMD-178B upgrades, but even those programs were considerably downscaled compared to initial objectives and the ARL only survived due to inertia as it was seen as a technological dead-end even before entering service.
As is, there wasn't even enough money to expand and reequip the 1945-50 army as much as the French high command wanted.

The second aspect is that even as early as 1945, France had drawn requirements for new tanks that neither the Panther nor Tiger II met, which is why they are even closer to dead-ends. Namely, a 75mm high velocity gun was contemplated only for the 12t airborne tank and 22-32t general purpose tank programs, while the weight and armor of the Panther were closer to the 45-50t battle tank meant to carry a 90mm gun. Finally the 1945 spec said the 65-70t tank was to have a 105mm gun minimum. Mobility requirements also diverged.
Of course you can technically reach the 90mm 50t tank requirement by modifying the Panther, but you de-facto arrive to the AMX 50. And indeed the first schematics arrived as early as 1945. As such it was perfectly acceptable to wait and refine a future project rather than warming over a WW2 design, no matter how future-proof it could have been.​

I will point out that the ARL-44 was even from its designing stage seen as an outdated dead-end. Meant to restart French tank industry and enter production as soon as possible, with the overall requirement to be better than the Sherman M4A1, which it did. Though, by that point (1944) the French realized that the ARL-44 ACL-1 (with the 75 mm gun and 60 mm of hull armor) was outclassed by newer Sherman tanks in French service (M4A3 76) and a redesign was necessary. As such, the armor was increased and the gun replaced with a 90 mm equivalent of the 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71, which delayed the whole thing until 1947 by which point the tank was obsolete and expected to be replaced by the AMX 50 in 1952. As such, I don't see the ARL's survival being attributed to inertia, more to the lack of any actual replacement...

Also, how are the Panther and Tiger II dead-ends exactly? Given that those two vehicles shared a lot in common with the post-war modern French tanks. (AMX M4 1945; Lorraine 40t; Souma SM sharing the most in common with the Tiger II)

And speaking of the requirements... The 22-32t general purpose tank was initially the AMX 45/AMX M4 1945 with 30 mm of armor right? Which soon was abandoned because of the absurd protection for the crew leading to the 50 t AMX 50. I am unfamiliar with any 65-70 t tank requirements in 1945, same with the 105 mm gun as a minimum.

In addition, the 90 mm SA45 was the most powerful gun in the French arsenal until 1947. It was heavy, outdated and plagued with problems compared to the 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 that it was built as a response to. It wasn't until the 90 mm SA47 that those problems got fixed. The earliest 105 the French worked on was in the mid 1950s way too late for the 1945 requirement given that they spend half a decade working on the 100 mm SA47. I think the French in this case, as they have the 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 Krupp factory under their control will adopt it instead of the 90 mm SA45, perhaps later in 1947-48 when the German ammunition stocks start to deplete they will re-bore the 88 to a 90 mm caliber or make a better cannon.

The Tiger II could in this case accept the AMX 50 (100 mm SA47) turret as it has the same turret ring diameter, or be upgunned in the original turret as the shells are of smaller dimensions than the proposed 10.5 cm KwK L/68 Tiger II.

The Panther will be probably upgraded to a 90 mm gun, in the same vein as the AMX-13-90 or ARL 44 (as it has a slightly larger diameter than the 44 so there should be no problems of making a new, larger turret) or it could continue with the 105 till the early 60s given that the French looked into upgrading their stocks of M4s with the 75 SA50.

But by that point, the Europanzer project will start and any future upgrades for the Panzers will be pointless. (Also a tidbit. The Souma SM seems to be using the ZF AK-5-250 which is a simplified transmission based on the AK-7-200 - Panther's transmission)

 

[Bougnas]

Also, how are the Panther and Tiger II dead-ends exactly? Given that those two vehicles shared a lot in common with the post-war modern French tanks. (AMX M4 1945; Lorraine 40t; Souma SM sharing the most in common with the Tiger II)

The Tiger II could in this case accept the AMX 50 (100 mm SA47) turret as it has the same turret ring diameter, or be upgunned in the original turret as the shells are of smaller dimensions than the proposed 10.5 cm KwK L/68 Tiger II.

The Panther will be probably upgraded to a 90 mm gun, in the same vein as the AMX-13-90 or ARL 44 (as it has a slightly larger diameter than the 44 so there should be no problems of making a new, larger turret) or it could continue with the 105 till the early 60s given that the French looked into upgrading their stocks of M4s with the 75 SA50.

But by that point, the Europanzer project will start and any future upgrades for the Panzers will be pointless. (Also a tidbit. The Souma SM seems to be using the ZF AK-5-250 which is a simplified transmission based on the AK-7-200 - Panther's transmission)

I meant "dead-ends" in the sense that the French arrived so quickly at new reqs and the AMX 50 layout (November 45) that rearmed/modded Panthers and Tiger IIs would most likely have morphed immediately into AMX 50s. So the initial configuration for both German tanks would not necessarily even reenter production.

To expand on the tidbit, the AK-5-250 was also present on AMX designs. In fact down the line the first AMX-30 prototype used a modified and lightened AMX-50 transmission, a surprisingly long design life.

And speaking of the requirements... The 22-32t general purpose tank was initially the AMX 45/AMX M4 1945 with 30 mm of armor right? Which soon was abandoned because of the absurd protection for the crew leading to the 50 t AMX 50. I am unfamiliar with any 65-70 t tank requirements in 1945, same with the 105 mm gun as a minimum.

No, it's a separate spec. I'm not even sure the AMX 45 with 30mm of armor ever existed, the only source for that is some people saying it, no blueprints or citation. I have checked the archives and the oldest blueprint of an AMX M4 dates from November 1945, the first one with armor specs from December and it already had a 80-90mm-thick frontal plate and 40mm sides, and that already looked like the M4 45. Note that the first document asking for new tank specs dated from April 1945 (btw, before Germany was defeated), and the only tank with a 90mm gun in that spec was the 50t one.

The 20-35t tank is mentionned multiple times, but unlike the 12t airborne tank or the 50t tank, no blueprints for the 1945-52 period have been found to date. The first actual vehicle in that spec was the DEFA proposal from 1952 which became the Batignolles-Chatillon 25t platform. However clear requirements were written and a document from 1948 on various programs say it was possibly expected for late 1950, and now define it as being 25t.

The 105mm gun was a Schneider long gun, but the first blueprints of the AMX-65/68/70t already had the 120mm D1203 gun so the 105 Schneider probably died out extremely quickly. It just says that the French already wanted the tank in the Tiger II's weight class to use an extremely big gun, which again warrants the turret/hull mods necessary to morph into AMX-50.

In addition, the 90 mm SA45 was the most powerful gun in the French arsenal until 1947. It was heavy, outdated and plagued with problems compared to the 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 that it was built as a response to. It wasn't until the 90 mm SA47 that those problems got fixed. The earliest 105 the French worked on was in the mid 1950s way too late for the 1945 requirement given that they spend half a decade working on the 100 mm SA47. I think the French in this case, as they have the 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 Krupp factory under their control will adopt it instead of the 90 mm SA45, perhaps later in 1947-48 when the German ammunition stocks start to deplete they will re-bore the 88 to a 90 mm caliber or make a better cannon.

Correcting myself: the 1945 spec notes that the 50t tank can use either the 90mm Schneider or the 88 L71, the choice will be made after the studies on captured Tiger IIs end. It's possible the lack of 88 production capacity killed the idea, but it's also possible the French legitimately thought the 90 more suitable. Regardless, having access to 88 as an alternative to the 90 is good news.

 

[Fire and shadow]

Maybe the French end up making something like this?
View attachment 808802
Panther-II turret on a modified AMX-50 hull.

The Schmalturm was never intended for the Panther II project?

 

[AbeTheBabe]

Would it have been possible for the French to have a different occupation zone? Perhaps getting North Rhine-Westphalia instead of South Baden and Württemberg-Hohenzollern? With Hesse going to the British instead of the Americans?

To answer the political portion of your question since everyone hear seems to be jumping in on the technological side:

Yes, I think it is possible that France's occupation zone was larger or included different territories. Though the big reason this didn't happen is because DeGaulle and his generals contributing to the allied war effort were notoriously prickly and difficult for the Americans and British to work with. There were other occupation plans more favorable to France that were discussed in OTL, but they were scrapped mostly as a slight to DeGaulle. It is notable that DeGaulle was excluded from the Potsdam Conference where the final decisions on German occupation were made.

I don't remember at all what any of these plans might have entailed and don't have the time to go research it right now, but I do remember Rick Atkinson doing a good job of setting the scene for those discussion in "The Guns At Last Light."

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

I meant "dead-ends" in the sense that the French arrived so quickly at new reqs and the AMX 50 layout (November 45) that rearmed/modded Panthers and Tiger IIs would most likely have morphed immediately into AMX 50s. So the initial configuration for both German tanks would not necessarily even reenter production.

Eh, you mean this one?

Spoiler: AMX nov 45

It is still pretty close to the Tiger II and Panther, the biggest difference I see would be the rear-drive which I guess comes from the Entwicklung Program and I am not sure if the French will really push for that if they could restart the German tanks production as soon as possible? It would certainly be cheaper to continue to improve upon a somewhat mature design than start from scratch. Though I believe you are right about not producing them 'as is' and ask (demand) some changes which I think will be following the proposed or upcoming improvements already planned for July and the future. For example D.H.H.V was preparing to introduce the rangefinder after the 600th turret so I guess that will be introduced by the French?

To expand on the tidbit, the AK-5-250 was also present on AMX designs. In fact down the line the first AMX-30 prototype used a modified and lightened AMX-50 transmission, a surprisingly long design life.

Interesting... Though I wonder why they pursued the AK-5-200 in the first place? And not the AK-7-400? From my understanding the reasoning of MAN for going with a lower gear transmission stems from the decrease of the maximum speed of the Panther, from 55 km/h to 45 km/h. Though I admit I am little knowledgeable in the intricacies of gearboxes and transmissions.

No, it's a separate spec. I'm not even sure the AMX 45 with 30mm of armor ever existed, the only source for that is some people saying it, no blueprints or citation. I have checked the archives and the oldest blueprint of an AMX M4 dates from November 1945, the first one with armor specs from December and it already had a 80-90mm-thick frontal plate and 40mm sides, and that already looked like the M4 45. Note that the first document asking for new tank specs dated from April 1945 (btw, before Germany was defeated), and the only tank with a 90mm gun in that spec was the 50t one.

The 20-35t tank is mentionned multiple times, but unlike the 12t airborne tank or the 50t tank, no blueprints for the 1945-52 period have been found to date. The first actual vehicle in that spec was the DEFA proposal from 1952 which became the Batignolles-Chatillon 25t platform. However clear requirements were written and a document from 1948 on various programs say it was possibly expected for late 1950, and now define it as being 25t.

Hmm, perhaps the earlier drawings are at fault? If one were to look at the armor scheme it looks extremely thin compared to later drawings.

Spoiler: thin armor

Either way, what you said about the medium tank program got me thinking, would it have been possible for the M50 and M4 FL12 to have been part of it? At least, as a consideration beyond the export focus.

The 105mm gun was a Schneider long gun, but the first blueprints of the AMX-65/68/70t already had the 120mm D1203 gun so the 105 Schneider probably died out extremely quickly. It just says that the French already wanted the tank in the Tiger II's weight class to use an extremely big gun, which again warrants the turret/hull mods necessary to morph into AMX-50.

Correcting myself: the 1945 spec notes that the 50t tank can use either the 90mm Schneider or the 88 L71, the choice will be made after the studies on captured Tiger IIs end. It's possible the lack of 88 production capacity killed the idea, but it's also possible the French legitimately thought the 90 more suitable. Regardless, having access to 88 as an alternative to the 90 is good news.

I guess you could design a better turret for the Panther and give it the 88 (the Panther F turret was quite cramped) or reduce the armor on the Tiger hull to 120 mm to bring the weight down?

Hmm. The Tiger II can certainly accept a 105 mm gun, though the original proposal required two piece ammunition for it to work with no modification to the turret so not sure if the 105 Schneider would fit the criteria. And the 120 mm D1203? Wasn't the whole AMX-65 project started in late 1946? And the gun also being still in development right? I think it would be possible to give it the T.C.B. 120 turret, the turret ring is very close to the Tiger II's.

The Schmalturm was never intended for the Panther II project?

No. The intended turret was this one, based on the Panther A turret if simplified.

Spoiler: Panther II turret

To answer the political portion of your question since everyone hear seems to be jumping in on the technological side:

Yes, I think it is possible that France's occupation zone was larger or included different territories. Though the big reason this didn't happen is because DeGaulle and his generals contributing to the allied war effort were notoriously prickly and difficult for the Americans and British to work with. There were other occupation plans more favorable to France that were discussed in OTL, but they were scrapped mostly as a slight to DeGaulle. It is notable that DeGaulle was excluded from the Potsdam Conference where the final decisions on German occupation were made.

I don't remember at all what any of these plans might have entailed and don't have the time to go research it right now, but I do remember Rick Atkinson doing a good job of setting the scene for those discussion in "The Guns At Last Light."

This is both hilarious and sad... but good to know that it would have been possible for a larger occupation zone than OTL if only DeGaulle kept his mouth closed and politely asked.