Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 6154
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by Michael Kenny » 08 Sep 2019 21:00

The fact they do not test a Panther (by July 1944) is another indication it was in the USA.

Avalancheon
Member
Posts: 193
Joined: 23 Apr 2017 06:01
Location: Canada

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by Avalancheon » 09 Sep 2019 00:43

Michael Kenny wrote:
02 Sep 2019 03:26
Image
What the hell happened to the nose plate of that Tiger? Was it cut out with a blowtorch, or did it just fracture from shellfire?

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 521
Joined: 12 Jan 2005 20:45
Location: Glendale, CA

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by Mobius » 09 Sep 2019 01:40

Avalancheon wrote:
09 Sep 2019 00:43
What the hell happened to the nose plate of that Tiger? Was it cut out with a blowtorch, or did it just fracture from shellfire?
Fracture and drop off.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

delete013
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:41
Location: Germany

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by delete013 » 18 Dec 2019 17:01

Mobius wrote:
01 Sep 2019 01:14
I had thought this was calculated values:
http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/sing ... 2327/rec/2

But this explains more clearly they are test results.
http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/sing ... 4556/rec/6
So this would be tested penetrations.
76mm vs Tiger I.jpg

Not that anyone would care when the thread drifts away from the topic so ppl. can state their favorite prejudices.
Remarkable find, thank you.

I think both reports are actually based on empirical evidence. First report is from July 1944 and the second from August probably compiling data from several tests (?). The difference is that the first report includes distinction between 0 and 25 degree angles of impact and the second only 25 degrees (probably showing the worst result up to 25 degrees). Hence, the second image is also in the first report.

1000 yards:
0 degrees
25 degrees

Despite this, it is hard to make any conclusions based on this data because most of engagements in France in 1944 were below 700m. A 500m test would be most enlightening, imo. Anyone has it?

delete013
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:41
Location: Germany

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by delete013 » 18 Dec 2019 18:08

histan wrote:
09 Jan 2019 01:44
The poster knows this to incorrect and other numbers have not been given to him because he will deliberately misuse them, as he has done here.
The poster has no idea what the quoted numbers represent - how they were obtained and the statements that they contained obvious double, sometimes triple and even quadruple counting as multiple units were reporting the same tank that they had found and assessed the reason for its destruction.
...far from over-claiming they hadn't actually been bothered to keep a proper count!
...that they had found when they passed through an area and the reason they attributed to the destruction.
...these figures represent campaign claims by VIII Corps is untrue.
Well, bloody hell, is it just me? I always wondered where the numbers are coming from. Somehow I couldn't believe it was the average Joe that would blow them out of proportions. But now you are saying that US claims are pure bogus? That US claims are based on wrecks they "drove past"? That this has been mentioned couple of times already?

Jesus Christ! If I'm not mistaken are there multiple books and academic papers written, quoting these numbers as more or less reliable indicator of battle performance and I have never seen a single correction or warning issued. Further you don't want to disclose more info for a fear that some ChristianMunich will abuse it? If what you mentioned is true, wouldn't that mean a massive damage for the historiography of ww2?

histan
Member
Posts: 1512
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 17:22
Location: England

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by histan » 18 Dec 2019 19:31

Hi delete013

Read my posts. Find the relevant document and read it - not difficult to find in the usual place to look for downloadable versions of primary US Army sources.

When you do you will find that the consolidated figures at Army, Corps, and Division level do not represent claims by those formations during the course of the European Campaign.

Reliable historians will have found, looked at the numbers, and understood what they mean, so no massive damage done.

These days historians look at outcomes rather than outputs and tend not to refer to numbers "claimed". As an example, look at two versions by the USAAF of ground attack operations and the Normandy campaign. The earlier of the two quotes some "claim" numbers. The later one, based on the knowledge that the "claims" were unreliable, barely mentions "claims" at all.

Regards

John

delete013
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 21 Aug 2018 11:41
Location: Germany

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by delete013 » 20 Dec 2019 10:17

histan wrote:
18 Dec 2019 19:31
Hi delete013

...
Okay, I'm just a bit shocked that I never read about this issue in any book, academic article or official report I went through (that of course doesn't mean I went through many). So what sources are representative? Do they exist? The unit diaries of some US armoured divisions include quite 'optimistic' claim numbers that Germans couldn't have lost even if wanted.

seppw
Member
Posts: 100
Joined: 24 Dec 2017 00:49
Location: Central Europe

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by seppw » 20 Dec 2019 16:13

histan wrote:
09 Jan 2019 01:44


The poster knows this to incorrect and other numbers have not been given to him because he will deliberately misuse them, as he has done here.

The poster has no idea what the quoted numbers represent - how they were obtained and the statements that they contained obvious double, sometimes triple and even quadruple counting as multiple units were reporting the same tank that they had found and assessed the reason for its destruction.

Who?

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 6154
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by Michael Kenny » 20 Dec 2019 18:02

I believe this is convoluted way of asking for the online source without directly asking for it. Check back and see who was originally complaining that no one would give him the link.
Beware!

histan
Member
Posts: 1512
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 17:22
Location: England

Re: Tiger I versus 76mm ( US )

Post by histan » 20 Dec 2019 20:10

Hi Michael

My first reply to "who" was going to be ChistianMunich

Regards

John

PS I have no intention of giving anything to posters who have not shown themselves to be serious researchers who have provided some the results of their own research. Quite a small number number!

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