German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1787
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Yoozername » 14 Sep 2018 20:00

Michael Kenny wrote:
14 Sep 2018 18:21
Yoozername wrote:
12 Sep 2018 22:45


The structure of the Panther formation during the attack must be very wide, in order to prevent attacks on the flanks of the attack center.
In case of being attacked, the vehicles must position themselves frontally to the enemy fire..................
The disproportionate high casualty figures per enemy action reflect the harshness of the fighting.

Analysis Of German Tank Casualties In France 6 June to August 31 1944, Table V shows 75% of all hits on a Panther penetrated.
The quote I posted was from the eastern front (Kursk era). Generally considered to be an open battlefield. Your statistic is from what is generally considered a closed terrain battlefield. You don't bother to mention where on the Panthers the penetrations occurred?

Perhaps citing something like this might shed more light? A claim like "30% of the penetrations were on the front of the shermans" Can then be said and illustrated? Someone might note that the majority were not on the front also.

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent ... ontext=cmh

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 434
Joined: 12 Jan 2005 20:45
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Mobius » 14 Sep 2018 20:25

Michael Kenny wrote:
14 Sep 2018 18:21
Yoozername wrote:
12 Sep 2018 22:45


The structure of the Panther formation during the attack must be very wide, in order to prevent attacks on the flanks of the attack center.
In case of being attacked, the vehicles must position themselves frontally to the enemy fire..................
The disproportionate high casualty figures per enemy action reflect the harshness of the fighting.

Analysis Of German Tank Casualties In France 6 June to August 31 1944, Table V shows 75% of all hits on a Panther penetrated.
Hence there were casualties.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 5871
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Michael Kenny » 14 Sep 2018 20:54

Yoozername wrote:
14 Sep 2018 20:00
You don't bother to mention where on the Panthers the penetrations occurred?

Perhaps citing something like this might shed more light? A claim like "30% of the penetrations were on the front of the shermans" Can then be said and illustrated? Someone might note that the majority were not on the front also.

It is a simple fact. 75% of all hits on a Panther 'PENETRATED'. I leave it to others to start the
but....but.....but..............
The survey is no different to the oft-referenced one done on Shermans but (it seems) not many noticed the rather high number of Panthers penetrated when hit.

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 434
Joined: 12 Jan 2005 20:45
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Mobius » 14 Sep 2018 21:16

Michael Kenny wrote:
14 Sep 2018 20:54
Yoozername wrote:
14 Sep 2018 20:00
You don't bother to mention where on the Panthers the penetrations occurred?

Perhaps citing something like this might shed more light? A claim like "30% of the penetrations were on the front of the shermans" Can then be said and illustrated? Someone might note that the majority were not on the front also.

It is a simple fact. 75% of all hits on a Panther 'PENETRATED'. I leave it to others to start the
but....but.....but..............
The survey is no different to the oft-referenced one done on Shermans but (it seems) not many noticed the rather high number of Panthers penetrated when hit.
Do you have a count of all Panthers that were hit and not lost? Penetrated or not?
It has the logic of the Korean war survey that showed many soldiers were not firing their weapons in combat. Why? Because the survey was taken of the survivors of the battle and the survivors were doing something in order to not get shot. Mainly not firing their weapons.
Last edited by Mobius on 14 Sep 2018 21:22, edited 1 time in total.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 5871
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Michael Kenny » 14 Sep 2018 21:35

Mobius wrote:
14 Sep 2018 21:16

Do you have a count of all Panthers that were hit and not lost? Penetrated or not?
It has the logic of the Korean war survey that showed many soldiers were not firing their weapons in combat. Why? Because the survey was taken of the survivors of the battle and the survivors were doing something in order to not get shot. Mainly not firing their weapons.
It was a survey of Panthers known (because the gunners who KOd the Panthers were interviewed) to have been struck by AP. Common sense would tell you that any tanks hit but able to make it back too safety would not be available for inspection. Fact is that of all the hits counted on these hulks 75% penetrated. 3 out of every 4 went in.
Why does no one ever gets this picky over the Sherman survey done by the same people?

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 434
Joined: 12 Jan 2005 20:45
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Mobius » 14 Sep 2018 21:47

Michael Kenny wrote:
14 Sep 2018 21:35
Why does no one ever gets this picky over the Sherman survey done by the same people?
Because all the hit tanks counted by the Sherman people are on hand. They didn't retreat back to their shops to take the dents out. Do you see the difference?

We see in the Canadian study that 3 of 53 75mm shells failed to penetrate. That is 5.6%. Unlike the panthers where 25% failed to penetrate.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 5871
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Michael Kenny » 14 Sep 2018 22:20

Mobius wrote:
14 Sep 2018 21:47
Because all the hit tanks counted by the Sherman people are on hand. They didn't retreat back to their shops to take the dents out. Do you see the difference?
No.
The survey just counts holes in total loss tanks and divides the number of holes by tanks to get an average. You hope a large number of retreating Panther casualties MIGHT have a higher number of non penetrating hits (that would dilute the 75% rate)but you have no evidence for it at all. You just think the 75% penetration number is wrong and are looking for reasons to disparage it.
32% of the knocked out Panthers had one penetration and 28% had two. That is 60% with just 2 hits max.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 5871
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Michael Kenny » 14 Sep 2018 22:35

Mobius wrote:
14 Sep 2018 21:47


We see in the Canadian study that 3 of 53 75mm shells failed to penetrate. That is 5.6%. Unlike the panthers where 25% failed to penetrate.
It still means 75% of strikes on the Panther went in. If you accept it then what is the argument?

The 1945 'Post Rhine Crossing' survey of UK tank casualties is much more detailed and found 148 AP penetrations in 135 tanks and 119 'scoops/deflections'. That is a 40% failure/scoop rate. I suspect this is because the 1945 survey far more detailed than anything the OR Teams ever did.
Tables 3 & 4 (pgs 17-18) of WO205/1165 'A Survey Of Tank Casualties Amongst Armoured Units In North West Europe 1945

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1787
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Yoozername » 15 Sep 2018 00:16

Anyway, from another website.... I do wonder what the Germans thought of these self reported stats...clearly, the Tiger I was out, and the Tiger II was having issues and being slowly produced (and bombed), the mediums were being lost at a rate hovering around the production rate. I would assume that tankers were being killed/wounded/captured also. I look at these numbers and wonder how Germany stayed Nazi for another half year?
As far as write-offs, and the September reckoning, look at Jentz Panzertruppen II, and see the actual Tiger write-offs in June/July/Aug/Sept (July being the worst), compare to the Panzer IV and Panther. While September is a great write-off, corresponding to many loss of AFV, Many more Tiger I were written off in June+July+Aug than September. The Tiger I fleet certainly crashed. So, I would think they were keeping honest books. Considering the production had stopped in August, it was over for the Tiger I battalions. Ironic that June 44 was the month with the greatest Ready for issue+Rebuilt numbers.

The Panzer IV and Panther write-offs
June 270 138
July 426 373
Aug 368 290
Sep 752 692
Oct 141 294
Total 1957 1787
These numbers are from all fronts. Considering the massive onslaught in the east on June 22, 1944, as well as the collapse in the West, this may be a massive lag in paperwork catching up with the accountants 'upstairs'. Posted by the great Arturo Vandelay

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 434
Joined: 12 Jan 2005 20:45
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Mobius » 15 Sep 2018 00:50

You can't gather anything from just one study. In the Canadian study only 4.6% the shell hits failed to penetrate Shermans. if you combine both 75mm and 88mm shell hits. Yet in the 'Analysis of 75 mm Sherman Tank Casualties Suffered Between 6th June and 10th July 1944 Report No. 12' 44% of the hits on Shermans failed to penetrate. Is there something wrong with Canadian Shermans?

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 434
Joined: 12 Jan 2005 20:45
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Mobius » 15 Sep 2018 02:45

Oh right, it is 182 penetrations. My bad didn't add the turret. 140 scoops vs 322 total hits is a failure rate of 43.5%.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 5871
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Michael Kenny » 15 Sep 2018 03:38

The turret hits (37+40=77) and hull hits (111+79=190) are listed separately and then again broken down by aspect but are all added together to get the 148+119=267 AP strikes

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 1787
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Yoozername » 15 Sep 2018 21:25

Another report maybe also badly translated in some areas...
This document was presented together with 'Annex 1' in a report of the Inspector General of the Armed Forces dated on 07.17.1943. This report lists the technical defects of the Panther Ausf. D appeared after his baptism of fire during 'Operation Zitadelle'.
Individual experiences on operations with the Panthers
Armament:
Cannon Its aim and its power are good. Until 10.07. 140 enemy tanks have been destroyed. The average distance has been between 1500 - 2000 m. It has managed to destroy a T-34 at 3000 m.

Due to impacts of anti-tank rifle in the tube, some guns have been knocked out (bulging inside the tube).

the vision of the commander from the third shot is made difficult by the gases of the powder, because these make him cry the eyes (the observation tubes were not yet available!). The necessary supply with cannon tubes including spare mantle can not be covered with vehicles put out of combat. Supply is required.

Machine guns : They have generally worked very well. Occasionally and due to the stretching of the cables 'Bowden' have blocked. Apparently the material of the 'Bowden' cables is not good. Sometimes the guide plate of the ammunition belts for the machine guns has been bent.

Fog boats : It has been demonstrated that they are totally useless, because they are easily destroyed by enemy fire. The development of a useful fog system has to be accelerated.
Armor:
The front area of ​​the Panther has not yet been pierced by enemy anti-tank weapons. Projectiles of 7.62 KwK that have reached the mantlet vertically have not managed to pierce it either.

The sides of the Panther have been perforated at distances greater than 1000 m. Both the turret and the sloping sides and the lateral vertical zones of the armor have been perforated by 7.62 PaK and KwK. In most of these cases the Panther has burned down, probably due to the large amount of powder contained in the transported projectiles.

Proposal: Quickly reinforce the lateral shielding in the series; whenever it is possible by means of a later reinforcement even in the already delivered vehicles.

The Panther is largely resistant to artillery fire. Only direct impacts on the roof of the chassis and the turret with a gauge greater than 15 cm have had sequels to partially penetrate and deform the armor. Impacts of smaller caliber against the commander's dome as well as the roof armor have not had consequences.
Weak points:
The plugs for MG have been reached (probably projectiles of 4.5 cm) and projected towards the interior of the turret, killing the commander and the loader. Its closing cone must be reinforced.

The round door on the left side of the turret has been fragmented after being directly hit (probably 7.62 Pz.Gr.) leaving the crew out of combat.

It is feared that an anti-tank gun projectile hitting the underside of the mantlet could deviate downward, pierce the roof and penetrate the combat compartment. Reinforcement of the roof of the compartment should be studied.
Effect of the mines:
During the first days approximately 40 Panthers were lost due to the effect of enemy mines. Generally 4 - 6 chain links as well as 2 - 4 wheels have been damaged. In some vehicles oscillating arms have been bent. In some cases the traction wheels or the tensioners have been damaged. On isolated occasions the ammunition transported under the turret floor has caught fire, producing a flare that has caused the entire vehicle to fire. We must find a solution to this problem. For all these reasons : We must continue working on the development of useful means for the cleaning of mines or their neutralization.
Turret equipment:
There have been difficulties to close the commander's dome when the vehicle is tilted and to open it when the vehicle has burned down. In order to avoid casualties, we must find a better solution. The hatches of the driver and the radiotelegraphist have also become stuck in such a way that it has not been possible for these crew members to leave the vehicle.

The linear guides of the optics have generally endured. Only in one case has it been reported that the guide has been deformed. A cleanser for the optics is absolutely necessary as dismantling it in combat lasts too long. Transmission of oil to the turning system as well as the telescopic viewfinders of the turret have to be ' nachgeschoben '.
Technical defects of the chassis:
The vast majority of technical defects have been caused by defective gasoline pumps (within Pz.Abt.52 and only up to 8.7 a total of 20 casualties). Probably it is a failure in the material. Due to leaks in the gasoline pump a puddle (fuel) forms on the floor of the engine compartment, which in three cases has caused a fire and the total loss of the vehicles. The Panther easily catches fire when it is extremely tilted. In most cases the fire has been extinguished or the automatic extinguishing system has been activated.
Engine failures:
The number of engine faults is currently extremely high. Inside the Pz.Abt. 52 and only up to 8.7 have been counted 12 damaged engines. After several days of operations the number of faults has decreased, which is why it is believed that the engines have not been sufficiently rolled.
Gearbox:
There have been no serious breakdowns in the gearboxes. The modifications made in Grafenwöhr have apparently had success. Until 8.7 inside the Pz.Abt. 52 have been counted 5 damaged boxes.
Concluding observations:
The defects listed here have been reported to the Minister of Armaments and Ammunition ( Reichsminister für Bewaffnung und Munition ) as well as to the Armament Agency ( Waffenamt ).

Solutions have been promised.

critical mass
Member
Posts: 479
Joined: 13 Jun 2017 14:53
Location: central Europe

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by critical mass » 16 Sep 2018 17:50

From ORG report NW Europe, June 1944-July 1945.

Chapter 10.

Distribution of hits of PANTHER and M4 tanke, respectively.

Sample sizes:
PANTHER: 56 hits on 22 tank casualties studied
M4: 65 hits on 40 tank casualties studied

notice that turret includes all aspects (front/mantlet, sides and rear).
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 5871
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: German opinions on Panther tank or crew experience.

Post by Michael Kenny » 16 Sep 2018 18:06

critical mass wrote:
16 Sep 2018 17:50
From ORG report NW Europe, June 1944-July 1945.

Chapter 10.

Distribution of hits of PANTHER and M4 tanke, respectively.

Sample sizes:
PANTHER: 56 hits on 22 tank casualties studied
M4: 65 hits on 40 tank casualties studied

This is the 2 reports used earlier in this thread made into a 'third' report.

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”