Without a doubt, the Panther and the Elefant are among the 2 best tanks in history.
If the Nazis had waited until these 2 were in full production before starting WWII, well, the Western Allies wouldn't have stood a chance on the ground.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Upgraded Panzer IV with the capable long-barreled 75mm L/48. It has been argued by some military historians that were the Germans focused production on this tank rather than the Tigers and Panthers, they could've lasted longer in the war.
Close second would be the :
The Jagpanzer 38(t) aka "Hetzer". Its has all the qualities of a good defensive tank. Well sloped armor (=180mm protection), small (ideal for ambushes and defensive purposes), mechanically reliable and of course, the 75mm L48 gun which can destroy any allied tank at range.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Upgraded Panzer IV with the capable long-barreled 75mm L/48. It has been argued by some military historians that were the Germans focused production on this tank rather than the Tigers and Panthers, they could've lasted longer in the war.
I would tend to give that some credence. The Panzer III/IVs were very good tanks....easy to build, reliable, robust, well armed, and able to handle anything the Allies had in the field. Against a Sherman, I give the IV the edge due to gun performance, profile, and sheet armor. If the Germans had given more resources to the Panzer, versus the more expensive Tigers and Panthers, then there's an argument that the Wermacht could well have fielded more very suitable tanks and maybe had an impact.
The Hetzer and Stug series are, as you say, were nice units. Simple, well armed, light, mobile, and easy to build. Their limited main gun traverse is made up by their size, low profile, mobiliity and the power of their main gun. Too often these types are glossed over even though they are/were perfectly effective and made a contribution because they didn't "look" the part.
No doubt these little units did some nasty damage and made a serious contribution to the German war effort even if the full energy was never really spent on them.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
The Centurion A-41.
So if The NAzi did wait 2 more year to get the Panter right It would still end up agents This Bad Boy.
Active service with the UK 1945 till the mid 90's
FV4003 Centurion Mk 5 AVRE 165 The vehicle was used in the Gulf War (1991).
As recently as the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, the Israel Defense Forces still employed heavily modified Centurions, as armoured personnel carriers and combat engineering vehicles.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I find the Panzer IV as the best looking tank ever personally.
Now a little of change doesn't hurt so here some nobody would have thought about
FCM Chat 2C
look at the beast. Production has started in 1918, would have crushed the German trench if the war had continued
Now the best tank in 1940, the Somua S35
two big flaws: needed a well trained crew since it was one man turret and above all: no radio. Unforgivable mistake when you think even the FCM 2C above had a radio, in 1918!
With the radio, would have been superior to the Panzer IV of 1940.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Along with as the Tiger I and Panther V, mine has to be the Centurion... The fact that it has been used successfully by many armies around the world from 1945 until very recently says a lot about how good it was! A true classic.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Dumb germans could have produced more Jagdpanthers, which had superior frontal armor and the gun of the Kingtiger.
Although Tiger 1 and 2 were beasts too, they were too heavy, and a lighter tank with the 75mm (the Panther or the hetzer)
would be more reliable,and cost effective. I remember to have read that 1 Tiger had the same cost as 4 Panthers.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Dumb germans could have produced more Jagdpanthers, which had superior frontal armor and the gun of the Kingtiger.
Although Tiger 1 and 2 were beasts too, they were too heavy, and a lighter tank with the 75mm (the Panther or the hetzer)
would be more reliable,and cost effective. I remember to have read that 1 Tiger had the same cost as 4 Panthers.
Dumb? I don't know about that. Misguided or ill-managed? Yes.
Germany was after all the first with many modern concepts.......the jet engine.....the guided missile.....flying wing......the forerunner of the modern MBT in the Tiger.
What they didn't have worked out was the logistics and details......the science was there for them but they couldn't effectively convey the breakthroughs into economical mass production.
The Germans should have produced more Panzer IVs, FW-190s, and M-38s in the face of Tigers, Me-163s, and the first real modern assault rifle. That could well have saved them and we'd be looking at a very different world today. Fought the U.S. and Russia to a draw..........settled with some of their posessions like the Sudetenland and Prussia as a result......etc. Probably no Cold War as the Nazi state feared Communism more than the British and Americans and cooperated with the West in return for the forgivance.
My, my, who knows?
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Because I am a big fan of big picture operational effect for military operations including cost effectiveness. But also because it incorporated cutting edge solutions in its design.
Individually, both cousins to the 34 and tanks from other countries have had impressive designs that I do enjoy but in the end they fall short as a effective integrated piece of equipment.
A non-aligned opinion
----
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
To tell you the truth, as a kid fearing "the specter of commie tanks pouring through the Fulda gap" etc., news of the Abrams tank actually made me sleep better at night. It was the game changer that was supposed to take on the Soviets 1 to 4 and win...
... of course, it was all rather pointless in retrospect (I guess) because if those commie OMGs actually did ever invade Europe the world would eventually "get blowed up real good."
Still, my favourite all-time tank is this cold warrior, that still can mix it with the best of them.
[IMG][/IMG]
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Still, my favourite all-time tank is this cold warrior, that still can mix it with the best of them.
By "cold warrior" do you mean the M-1?
I've always considered the Cold War tank (from the American perspective) to be the M-60. It was the primary MBT for the highest 30 years of the confrontation....1957-87....and the most numerous for those years. The M-1 didn't take the helm until the early 1990s and even then the USMC was completely equipped with the M-60 at the time of Gulf Storm in 1991.
For the Cold War, it was for me M-48/60 vs. T-55/62 for the most part.
I guess, maybe, that's why the Israeli/Turkish Sabra conversions today are so attractive to me. A 40 year-old hull and suspension.......new turret and add-on armor.......and you've got a respectable modern opponent on the battlefield.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
pillow biter (Login Combat-Master) The Conquerors (Turkey)
Re: Your favourite Tank of all times
No score for this post
June 29 2008, 6:17 AM
woops
This message has been edited by Combat-Master on Jun 29, 2008 6:19 AM This message has been edited by Combat-Master on Jun 29, 2008 6:18 AM
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Really, the M-1 came in as the Cold War was ending. It's my personal favourite not so much because of it's time of service (certainly the M-48s and M-60s did the VAST majority of the "Cold-Warrioring") but because of what it meant to me as a kid/youth.
The M-1 was the first allied tank that clearly was head and shoulders above the competition. Kind of like a Gundam when compared to the usual mobile suits... OK, that analogy sounds a little weird, but you know what I mean.
[IMG][/IMG]
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I agree that the germans would have been at a greater advantage if they had concentrated on a few very effective armored vehicle designs.
I remember reading that the Sturmgeshutz III and IV was one of the most produced armored vehicle of the german army and that the Panzer IV Ausf-H more than held its own against British, American and Soviet designs. Panzer divisions composed of Assault Guns (StuG IV) Tank Destroyers like the Jagdpanther and with medium Battalions of Panthers and Heavy Battalions of Tigers would have been a formidible tank formation. If memory serves, a division commander by the name of Dr Franz Bake, commanded a Panzer regiment with a very similar make up and was extemely sucessful on the Russian front.
I'd like to add the Sturgeshutz III and IV to the list (They probably don't qualify since they were assault guns and not a tanks)
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Germany shouldew concetrated on producing only this as its main Tank (along whit the sturmgeschutze III,cus they were awsome Tank killers...)
And suspend the production of all other Tanks and variations,that way increase the output for Panter Ausf.G and Sturmgeschutze III by severalfold.
Panther proved to be eaven more lethal than Tiger.And its fear factor was high.Preformace was best
of any tank at time!It had speed,excilent high velocity gun and thick sloped armor!
And my faworite of modern Tanks is Leo 2 a6.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
BUT is there something more beautiful than the LEOPARD?
"As in the daytime there is no star in the sky warmer and brighter than the sun, likewise there is no competition greater than the Olympic Games". Pindar
This message has been edited by English_Latinkon on Aug 10, 2008 4:23 AM
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
So if The nazis did wait 2 more year to get the Panter right....................
-------------------------------------------------
Panther was a right Tank.Once the errors have been fixed(after battle of Kursk)it becomme
a awsome tank.5 Shermans to destroy 1 Panther.That is the same ratio as for a Tiger Tank.
But it was lighter and much faster than Tiger,and its high velocity 75mm gun was eavn bether
than the Tighers 88mm! But not bether than the King Tigers 88mm Gun!!!!!!
By the way,,,you know that Panther had a succesor.That was the Panther II.
And much of its features can be found on Leopard 1...
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
reasons being it was an inferior design of the 1935 ish
PzkwIV was sent to germany and the Soviets looked at it and were stunned that it was remarked that the germans must be holding something back, Infact they were
The NBZ (New Equipment vehicle) went by pzkw V before the panther some 4 were built, it did not go into full production soviets spies then went on to develop the KV-1
PzKpfw NbFz V (Rheinmetall)
Development of new medium tank started in October of 1932 and in 1933, Army High Command (Reichswehr) granted a contract for a development of "heavy tractor" (Grosstraktor). Both Rheinmetall-Borsig and Krupp were ordered to develop heavy tank and both provided their designs. At first vehicles were designated as PzKpfw VII (PzKpfw IV neu Art), but in October of 1933, they were designated as Neubaufahrzeug ("Newly Built Vehicle"). Rheinmetall's Model A and Krupp's Model B were very similar in their overall design and mainly differed in the armament and arrangement of the weapons mounted in the turret. Rheinmetall's (PzKpfw NbFz V) design had 37mm Tankkanone L/45 installed over a 75mm KwK L/24 and Krupp's (PzKpfw NbFz VI) design had 37mm Tankkanone L/45 installed beside 75mm KwK L/24. Both designs had two slightly modified Panzer I's turrets armed with machine guns (one mounted in the front and other in the rear). Those two tank designs were to complete the family of standardized German tanks.
Specifications for Krupp Design - PzKpfw NbFz VI
Weight: 23000kg
Crew: 6 men
Engine: BMW Va / 12-cylinder / 290hp
Maybach HL 108 TR / 12-cylinder / 300hp
Speed: Road: 25-30km/h
Range: Road: 120km
Fuel Capacity: 457 liters
Lenght: 6.65m
Width: 2.90m
Height: 2.90m
Armament: 1 x 75mm KwK L/23.5 (L/24)
1 x 37mm KwK L/46.5 (L/45) (turret)
2 x 7.92mm MG13/34 (2 small turrets)
Ammo: 75mm - approx. 80 rounds
37mm - 50 rounds
7.92mm - 6000 rounds
Armor: 13-20mm
">
Go not quietly into the night, be not afraid know that we will not forget you.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
My favorite is the T-34, it had it all. Easy to produce, reliable, good armor, mobility, gun, etc. The Sherman was a good tank for what it was designed for, to support infantry units, not tank to tank combat. US Army philosophy was to use artillery to destroy enemy armor. The Soviet Army also liked their Sherman tanks! While the Sherman lacked good armor, it was probably the easiest tank on the Allies side to repair battle damage.
QUOTE:
-------------
Really, the M-1 came in as the Cold War was ending.
-------------
The M-1 Abrams started service in 1980. So it was early enough that a NATO/WP conflict during the mid-1980's, the M-1 would be a major factor.
There could have been a bad surprise in a conflict with the Soviet Army, their variant of the T-72 had thicker frontal turret armor and could withstand HEAT rounds from the L7 (105mm) cannon! There are photos on the Internet that illustrate this point. (This was not the case for the export model of the T-72.) Thus the need for the 120mm cannon to handle all variants.
QUOTE: JoeinTX
-------------
The M-1 didn't take the helm until the early 1990s and even then the USMC was completely equipped with the M-60 at the time of Gulf Storm in 1991.
-------------
The US Army had the M-1's as their number one tank by 1983. The USMC had its first M-1's in combat during Desert Sabre.
The first USMC unit to get the M-1's was a reserve unit from Washington State because they had the best gunnery score for the 'Corp" in the previous year! So they started their conversion around October 1990 and were shipped to Saudi Arabia in December 1990. The M-1's they used were obtained in an agreement with the USMC from the US Army.
Adrian
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
[/IMG]
">
