Tank Destroyer Vs turret fitted tanks. Rotation speed?
I'm not actually a qualified technician, but i do have a lot of hands on experience operating machines that use hydraulics, and i have had to conduct running repairs and general maintenance of hydraulic components in my time.
I don't know exactly how this relates to tanks, but i think i have a fairly good idea.
The hydraulic system usually has enough pressure built up to maintain operation of the required implements for quite some time after the engine has dropped from operating RPM to idle RPM, but, at the idle the speed and power of those implements will gradually decrease due to the nature of hydraulics.
While more revs CAN be used to speed up hydraulic implements, this is NOT NECCESARY with systems i have experience with.
That is because there are fine tuning levers and the systems are in parallel, not in series, so to speak.
When the fine tuning lever is used, the bulk of the fluid pressure returns to the fluid reservoir, and a small jet fine tunes the implement,
Or, a small valve only opens partially to operate said implement.
In a tank i expect they would adjust the engine idle speed, to ensure the Hydraulic pump was maintaining sufficient pressure to rotate the turret while the engine was at the idle. Simple really, very simple.
Or, a more efficient HP is used, that pumps more fluid at the idle.
Another thing to note, is that hydraulics require specific fluid, and are high maintenance.
With age and under harsh operating conditions, the system will inevitably spring leaks, and also vaporise a lot of fluid, requiring topping up at regular intervals.
I have had pipes and leads, and on one occasion, a whole hydraulic ram burst open and been saturated in the hydraulic fluid. It was luke-warm and sticky, and smelt a bit oily, but it did me no harm, so i know it's suitable for operational millitary conditions.
I will have a look in the online Bovington restoration diary about that Tiger, i had a feeling it was electrically oprated, but that seems silly.
I don't know exactly how this relates to tanks, but i think i have a fairly good idea.
The hydraulic system usually has enough pressure built up to maintain operation of the required implements for quite some time after the engine has dropped from operating RPM to idle RPM, but, at the idle the speed and power of those implements will gradually decrease due to the nature of hydraulics.
While more revs CAN be used to speed up hydraulic implements, this is NOT NECCESARY with systems i have experience with.
That is because there are fine tuning levers and the systems are in parallel, not in series, so to speak.
When the fine tuning lever is used, the bulk of the fluid pressure returns to the fluid reservoir, and a small jet fine tunes the implement,
Or, a small valve only opens partially to operate said implement.
In a tank i expect they would adjust the engine idle speed, to ensure the Hydraulic pump was maintaining sufficient pressure to rotate the turret while the engine was at the idle. Simple really, very simple.
Or, a more efficient HP is used, that pumps more fluid at the idle.
Another thing to note, is that hydraulics require specific fluid, and are high maintenance.
With age and under harsh operating conditions, the system will inevitably spring leaks, and also vaporise a lot of fluid, requiring topping up at regular intervals.
I have had pipes and leads, and on one occasion, a whole hydraulic ram burst open and been saturated in the hydraulic fluid. It was luke-warm and sticky, and smelt a bit oily, but it did me no harm, so i know it's suitable for operational millitary conditions.
I will have a look in the online Bovington restoration diary about that Tiger, i had a feeling it was electrically oprated, but that seems silly.
- David Lehmann
- Member
- Posts: 2863
- Joined: 01 Apr 2002, 11:50
- Location: France
Hi,
The Somua S35 and the Renault B1/B1bis have a double differential steering. One track could go in one direction while the other could go in the opposite direction - allowing the tank to "turn on the spot". On the 1940 battlefield, only these French tanks posses this ability. All other tanks had to move forward/backward in some fashion for the ability to turn, and this could cause, in situations such as hull-down or good camouflaged position, to loose that advantage since you did have to move. In some extent there are therefore able to turn the hull faster than most other tanks in 1940, the differential steering allowed a better turn radius "on the spot".
The German tanks in 1940 did not have that feature, thus the two tracks could not rotate in different directions. One track was blocked to turn but this could be bad considering that you could possibly throw a track if your opposite track wasn't on the correct type of ground. The later Panther (and perhaps Tiger ?) tanks did have a kind of differential steering. That gave them a good advantage and a good rotation combined to the turret rotation.
David
The Somua S35 and the Renault B1/B1bis have a double differential steering. One track could go in one direction while the other could go in the opposite direction - allowing the tank to "turn on the spot". On the 1940 battlefield, only these French tanks posses this ability. All other tanks had to move forward/backward in some fashion for the ability to turn, and this could cause, in situations such as hull-down or good camouflaged position, to loose that advantage since you did have to move. In some extent there are therefore able to turn the hull faster than most other tanks in 1940, the differential steering allowed a better turn radius "on the spot".
The German tanks in 1940 did not have that feature, thus the two tracks could not rotate in different directions. One track was blocked to turn but this could be bad considering that you could possibly throw a track if your opposite track wasn't on the correct type of ground. The later Panther (and perhaps Tiger ?) tanks did have a kind of differential steering. That gave them a good advantage and a good rotation combined to the turret rotation.
David
- Warlordimi
- Member
- Posts: 99
- Joined: 14 Dec 2004, 13:50
- Location: Brussels, Belgium
Not to mention that the steering drive in the Char B1 was a hydraulic unit giving it an infinite number of turning radii. It gave the driver the extremely fine control that was necessary for him to aim the hull gun. Very advanced stuff but AFAIK it was somewhat fragile?David Lehmann wrote: Hi,
The Somua S35 and the Renault B1/B1bis have a double differential steering. One track could go in one direction while the other could go in the opposite direction - allowing the tank to "turn on the spot". On the 1940 battlefield, only these French tanks posses this ability. All other tanks had to move forward/backward in some fashion for the ability to turn, and this could cause, in situations such as hull-down or good camouflaged position, to loose that advantage since you did have to move. In some extent there are therefore able to turn the hull faster than most other tanks in 1940, the differential steering allowed a better turn radius "on the spot".
The Panther used a modified version of the geared system found in the ex-Czech Pz.38t (German design, patented in Sweden, exported to Czechoslovakia then finding its way back into German tank design). While the original system was admirably simple, it did not allow for the neutral turn. The modified version in the Panther gave it one radius of turn for each propulsion gear (7 of them) as well as the neutral turn ability.David Lehmann wrote:The German tanks in 1940 did not have that feature, thus the two tracks could not rotate in different directions. One track was blocked to turn but this could be bad considering that you could possibly throw a track if your opposite track wasn't on the correct type of ground. The later Panther (and perhaps Tiger ?) tanks did have a kind of differential steering. That gave them a good advantage and a good rotation combined to the turret rotation.
I think the Tigers steering system was of the double differential type, designed to give two radii of turn for each propulsion gear (8 of those IIRC).
Claus B
Which is a requirement for a hydraulic pump or ram to operate. Try poving a hoist on a forklift any direction but down when the engine is off.Christian Ankerstjerne wrote:The tank's engine would still be on, even though the tank is halted.
Isn't that the same as saying that a ball turret in a B-17 shouldn't have vertical traverse since the pilot might put the aircraft into a nose dive at any second?Christian Ankerstjerne wrote:Furthermore, the driver may for some reason increase the revolations, either as a result of a misunderstanding or by accident, which would suddenly move the turret fast...
Chistian
Since I'm away at University I don't have the luxury of consulting my library, but I'm sure a number of sources in my Library have made statements to the fact that a Tiger I's turret was able to be sped up or slowed down due to the engine RPM's.
This would be characteristic of every machine I've ever used that had hydraulics in it (tractors, forklifts, bulldozers, pay loaders, backhoes, bale wrappers, wood splitters). If you've had the opportunity to use any of these machines you'd realize that fine adjustment of the controls can be achieved even at peak rpm's with a light touch since the controls are analog.
- Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14028
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
I just got a manual on the turret traverse engine for the Pz.Kpfw.IV, so I added an article about it on Panzerworld: <http://www.panzerworld.net/pzkpfwiv.html>.
I think some of the information in quite interesting (such as the 1 hour 15 minutes traverse speed at minimum speed), as well as the seemingly extremely low hp-to-weight ratio. I guess the amount of power required wouldn't be nearly as high as for driving the tank, though.
I'm in doubt about the validity of some of the technical terms, so if anyne spots any errors, please let me know.
Christian
I think some of the information in quite interesting (such as the 1 hour 15 minutes traverse speed at minimum speed), as well as the seemingly extremely low hp-to-weight ratio. I guess the amount of power required wouldn't be nearly as high as for driving the tank, though.
I'm in doubt about the validity of some of the technical terms, so if anyne spots any errors, please let me know.
Christian
I get the impression from you site that the Panzer IV used only one type of engine which could be called either ZW500 or ZW600. In reality, they were two different type of engines and the specifications you present on your site seems to be those for the ZW500 which was introduced with the Panzer IV Ausf. E. The Ausf. A to Ausf. D used the PZW600 which was probably a 600cc engine (hence the name!) based on DKWs engines with a 74mm bore (as opposed to the 68mm bore of the ZW500). The PZW600 seems to have produced about 14hp to 12hp of the ZW500.Christian Ankerstjerne wrote:I just got a manual on the turret traverse engine for the Pz.Kpfw.IV, so I added an article about it on Panzerworld: <http://www.panzerworld.net/pzkpfwiv.html>.
I think some of the information in quite interesting (such as the 1 hour 15 minutes traverse speed at minimum speed), as well as the seemingly extremely low hp-to-weight ratio. I guess the amount of power required wouldn't be nearly as high as for driving the tank, though.
I'm in doubt about the validity of some of the technical terms, so if anyne spots any errors, please let me know.
Christian
This site has some info on the DKW/Auto-Union stationary engines of the period:
http://www.dkw-autounion.de/Stationarmo ... toren.html
As for the technical terms:
Two-act gasoline engine with DKW reverse flushing
This should probably be two-stroke (to-takts på dansk!) and I've got no idea what "reverse flushing" is - what is the term in German?
Drilling would likely be "bohrung" in German which would translate to bore in English.
Claus B
- Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14028
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
-
- Member
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 09 May 2005, 20:38
- Location: Roermond(Netherlands)
- Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14028
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
-
- Member
- Posts: 64
- Joined: 07 May 2005, 00:16
- Location: Copenhagen . Denmark
If i remember right there was a joke that english soldier could kill a Tiger I simply by slowly soundering around the tank when the hydrulick was shot, since the mechanical backup was geared to ½ degree pr turn ergo you have to turn the handle 720 times for a full turn, so if they tried to hit the poor tommy they would die off exhaustion trying to turn the turret fast enough.
- Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14028
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
Re: Tank Destroyer Vs turret fitted tanks. Rotation speed?
Turret Rotation Speed of the :
Panzer II ?
Panzer III ?
38(t) ?
222 ?
232 ?
Firefly ?
Cromwell ?
Daimler ?
Churchill ?
Stuart ?
M8 ?
M18 ?
234/1 ?
234/2 ?
Staghound ?
Souma ?
R-35
H-39
Panhard AC
If anyone knows any of these it would help, data is seemingly hard to find on turret rotation speeds for these vehicles
Panzer II ?
Panzer III ?
38(t) ?
222 ?
232 ?
Firefly ?
Cromwell ?
Daimler ?
Churchill ?
Stuart ?
M8 ?
M18 ?
234/1 ?
234/2 ?
Staghound ?
Souma ?
R-35
H-39
Panhard AC
If anyone knows any of these it would help, data is seemingly hard to find on turret rotation speeds for these vehicles