Pzkpfw VII vs. Pzkpfw VIII

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
User avatar
Hans_Rudel
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: 19 Feb 2004 19:44
Location: Canada

Pzkpfw VII vs. Pzkpfw VIII

Post by Hans_Rudel » 23 Apr 2004 00:12

If you had to pick between developing one of these tanks in the beginning of 1942, what would you pick, the 'Maus' or the 'Löwe'?

User avatar
ViKinG
Member
Posts: 529
Joined: 08 Mar 2004 08:14
Location: Edmonton Alberta Canada

Post by ViKinG » 23 Apr 2004 01:17

Well If I HAD to pick one of the two, I would have picked the Lowe since it at least would have contained similiar parts to the Tiger II which would have simplified production and there would be more spare parts readily accessible. ALso it weighed less than the giant Maus. If you look at both the Lowe Leitche and the Schewe, one can easily see that the Leitche would have virtually no anti-personel defence since the turret was located on the rear of the hull. On the Schewe Version, it was located more or less in the front/center. From the side it looks much like a Tiger II with a bigger gun. But in 1942, would have been a royal waste of time and of resources. They could barely make Tiger tanks in mass numbers...let alone introduce an even HEAVIER tank. But it sure would have given the soviets quite a scare with its 140 mm of armor!!
:D :D

Viking

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002 12:15
Location: UK

Post by Tim Smith » 23 Apr 2004 01:58

Neither. Both were a waste of time and resources.

User avatar
Tom Houlihan
Member
Posts: 3980
Joined: 06 Oct 2002 05:53
Location: MI, USA

Post by Tom Houlihan » 23 Apr 2004 02:01

Neither

I would have opted to make the minor improvements on the Tiger that were based on the experiences of the crewmen in the field. Then I would have called for making a LOT more of 'em!!

User avatar
Hans_Rudel
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: 19 Feb 2004 19:44
Location: Canada

Post by Hans_Rudel » 23 Apr 2004 03:04

Tom wrote:Neither

I would have opted to make the minor improvements on the Tiger that were based on the experiences of the crewmen in the field. Then I would have called for making a LOT more of 'em!!
I would personally go ahead with development on the Panther, rather then the Tiger series of tanks.

User avatar
Conacher1941
Member
Posts: 913
Joined: 17 Sep 2003 22:56
Location: Toronto, Canada

Post by Conacher1941 » 23 Apr 2004 05:21

But the Panther was barley a foetus in 1942, whereas the Tiger had already gone through most of it's teething. I agree with Warden Tom on this one: talk to the experienced Tiger crews; find out what works-keep it, find out what doesn't work-fix it. And then for goodness' sake stop building short barreled Panzer cannons!!!

Cheers,
...Conacher

User avatar
Tom Houlihan
Member
Posts: 3980
Joined: 06 Oct 2002 05:53
Location: MI, USA

Post by Tom Houlihan » 23 Apr 2004 05:23

You're right! How about increased production of both, but with emphasis on the Panthers?

User avatar
ViKinG
Member
Posts: 529
Joined: 08 Mar 2004 08:14
Location: Edmonton Alberta Canada

Post by ViKinG » 23 Apr 2004 07:44

Well, if the Tiger or Panther would have been choices instead of the Maus or Lowe I would have picked them too! :D :D :D :D

Viking

maltesefalcon
Member
Posts: 2016
Joined: 03 Sep 2003 18:15
Location: Canada

Post by maltesefalcon » 23 Apr 2004 19:19

Check out this link for the "Ratte" P1000 tank supposedly on the drawing board.

Judging from the site's other content and context, I would suspect a hoax, but it is still entertaining.

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=1636

User avatar
Hans_Rudel
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: 19 Feb 2004 19:44
Location: Canada

Post by Hans_Rudel » 23 Apr 2004 23:03

maltesefalcon wrote:Check out this link for the "Ratte" P1000 tank supposedly on the drawing board.

Judging from the site's other content and context, I would suspect a hoax, but it is still entertaining.

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=1636
No, its for real, there is no hoax.

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/p1000.htm#1000

Polynikes
Member
Posts: 2229
Joined: 03 Jan 2004 02:59
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Post by Polynikes » 23 Apr 2004 23:34

The Ratte was the most stupid idea for a weapon I have ever seen....

What were they on?

User avatar
MAX_theHitMan
Member
Posts: 965
Joined: 19 Apr 2004 00:28
Location: Planet*Portugal

Post by MAX_theHitMan » 23 Apr 2004 23:39

Yep, quite true about the german army having a "fetish" for everything HUGE. Well, perhaps not rthe german army, but Hitler himself was fascinated about the stuff. It´s just amazing how the industry went along into making these monsters just to please their "boss".
I seriously don´t believe any of these new "wonder-weapons" could have changed the war, let alone make any significant wins on the battlefield. They defenitly would scare the hibbie-jibbies out of the soldiers trying to fight these things, but in the end they would defenitly would have thought of something quick.
In this "what if" scenario between the Lowe (lion) and the Maus (mouse), I would probably go with the Lowe. As mentoned above by ViKinG, the Lion version would have weighted significantly alot less than the very slow-moving Maus, but still carried enough cannon power to eliminate it´s adversaries. In a blitzkrieg war, movement means victory. The maus would have just been a major headache for the panzer units to deal with. Let alone trying to find decent bridges for the tank to cross. There is something mentioned about the tank been prepared to cross rivers submerged, but why would you want to do that? The thing weighted Tons of steel. It would be just stuck in the mud under the river, and then you would have a very "wet-mouse".
The Lowe seemed a bit more practical on the battlefield if it would ever be used. But then again it would be a waste of time constructing such a steel beast. They should have improved 100%, the Panther and the Tiger II versions even more.
That´s my two-cents of "what if" :roll:

I wonder if they really came up with the tracked version of the "Dora" kanone?? Or at least the tracked vehicles that were going to be used for it? :lol: Imagine then a REAL Godzilla on the battlefield. LOL

maltesefalcon
Member
Posts: 2016
Joined: 03 Sep 2003 18:15
Location: Canada

Post by maltesefalcon » 24 Apr 2004 02:02

MAX_theHitMan wrote:I wonder if they really came up with the tracked version of the "Dora" kanone?? Or at least the tracked vehicles that were going to be used for it? :lol: Imagine then a REAL Godzilla on the battlefield. LOL
The original rail Dora/Karl weapons needed a seperate crane on a panzer chassis to load it and an entire regiment for logistic and AA support.
I can't see the tracked SP versions being any more practical.

maltesefalcon
Member
Posts: 2016
Joined: 03 Sep 2003 18:15
Location: Canada

Post by maltesefalcon » 27 Apr 2004 02:32

Despite the fact that there were not even enough 128mm guns to go on the 70-odd completed Jadgtiger, they went ahead with the Maus, which was designed to accept the same main gun.

Back to the Ratte design. What were the German engineers smoking in the late war period?

The Ratte could not possibly have been very useful even if completed. The ammunition would have to be stored onboard, limiting the number of rounds carried, especially if there was a mixture of HE, AP and smoke. There would have to be some kind of automatic loader as well, as the rounds would be far too heavy for any crewman to lift. Can you imagine what the concussion and noise level inside the vehicle would be once they opened fire?

Not content to have 1, 280mm gun, they planned for 2. What kind of target needs to have 2 rapid fire rounds this size to knock it out? Would it not be smarter at least to only have 1, and reduce the weight?

The vehicle would be only able to ford rivers at the appropriate points, as it was far too large and heavy for any bridge. For the same reason, it could not be moved by rail, making its redeployment slow and drivetrain stress high.

Of course, its huge size and imposing weaponry would make it both an inviting and easy to hit target for the vast array of fighter bombers that the Allies had at their disposal at the time. Anyone care to hazard a guess how long one of these brutes would have lasted under actual combat conditions?

Alexander39
Member
Posts: 64
Joined: 06 May 2005 23:16
Location: Copenhagen . Denmark

Post by Alexander39 » 12 May 2005 20:24

maltesefalcon wrote:Despite the fact that there were not even enough 128mm guns to go on the 70-odd completed Jadgtiger, they went ahead with the Maus, which was designed to accept the same main gun.

Back to the Ratte design. What were the German engineers smoking in the late war period?

*Something much stronger than today i guess*

The Ratte could not possibly have been very useful even if completed. The ammunition would have to be stored onboard, limiting the number of rounds carried, especially if there was a mixture of HE, AP and smoke. There would have to be some kind of automatic loader as well, as the rounds would be far too heavy for any crewman to lift. Can you imagine what the concussion and noise level inside the vehicle would be once they opened fire?

*What target on land would demand a AP round 8O , not mention smoke grenades weighing in at 300 kg??*

Not content to have 1, 280mm gun, they planned for 2. What kind of target needs to have 2 rapid fire rounds this size to knock it out? Would it not be smarter at least to only have 1, and reduce the weight?

*Best idea yet, since even a close hit by a 28cm cannon would flip over a Tiger II. and backup cannon of 12.8cm PAK?? not to mention a small AA battery.*

The vehicle would be only able to ford rivers at the appropriate points, as it was far too large and heavy for any bridge. For the same reason, it could not be moved by rail, making its redeployment slow and drivetrain stress high.

*Look at the height of the vehicle, it could ford most rivers around the world whit out drowning the engine,*

Of course, its huge size and imposing weaponry would make it both an inviting and easy to hit target for the vast array of fighter bombers that the Allies had at their disposal at the time. Anyone care to hazard a guess how long one of these brutes would have lasted under actual combat conditions?
*At the time of it's conception, the Allies hadn't gotten the superioity in the air so while it would be correct later, it isn't at the time this coo-cooo idea was born. It's main contribution on the battlefield would be psychological, a pair or three of these brutes on any battlefield in 42-43 would be unerving to say the least, but the energy wastet in them would go a long way in helping the Allied victory!!*

Return to “What if”