Electric-powered turrets

[Byrden]

Interesting thread...

I'm not aware of any version of the Pz.3 having a powered traverse. But does anybody know about the special turret of the Pz.3 Ausf.K ?

The Pz.4 had a separate exhaust for the small motor, visible on the rear hull.

The traverse motor on the Tiger E was mechanically powered from a shaft in the hull. It had a hydraulic gearbox on the turret floor. I'm not sure how to classify it.
In all my photos, I don't see any obvious difference between early and late Tigers in this area.

David

[Yoozername]

Just wondering, how many axis tanks used electric-powered turrets like thee one on the Sherman.?

The standard sherman used a Oil Gear system that is not similar to any German turret traverse I know of. Basically an electric motor is running a hydraulic pump, which drove a hydraulic motor. This electric motor system was driven by the alternator/batteries, and variable control.

The Homelite generator was an auxiliary single piston unit that charged the batteries. Very different than the Panzer IV system.

http://www.theshermantank.com/about/she ... k-turrets/

The sherman also had a substitute standard all electric system. Not as well liked but apparently the demand for Oil Gear systems was great.

Hydraulic systems could generally give good initial movement to the turret, but would run out of 'steam' quickly. All electric gave slower initial starts, but could get up to a quicker speed. The sherman sort of had the best of both worlds overall. Supposedly even slewing the turret and bringing the target on in smooth fashion.

[Yoozername]

Tiger

http://tiger1.info/EN/Turret-hydraulic-gearbox.html

In these systems, the driver has to have the motor at a high rpm. Obviously, when moving, this is not easily obtained (unless down-shifting). But when stationary, the AFV would be in neutral, and the accelerator would be depressed for max allowable RPM. Not ideal IMO. I suppose just pointing the hull, in conjunction with turret rotation, would be a better method. I believe that is what the SOP was.

I am surprised the Germans did not integrate an electric motor onto this system.

[Contender]

What are the Sources for the Tiger I turn rate ?
And were certain its ~ 60 sec pre 43 and 40-48 sec after 43 ?

At this point it is a pretty common piece of trivia for tank enthusiasts tbh, any detailed publication on the Tiger I E & its development should mention turret traverse.
The maximum turret speed comes down to rpms & operating regulations. Krupp chose an engine rpm of 1750 for the Tiger I E to fulfill the turret traverse requirement of 8°/ second which is ~45 seconds for full turret traverse. The Tiger I E was capable of up to 3000 rpms (with Maybach 230) therefore its more than possible for an even faster traverse rate than the "official target requirement".

[Contender]

except the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.J

According to British testing the Panzer IV's hand traverse was faster than the electric powered traverse up to 12.5°(4 seconds for 12.5° ) & only marginally slower up to to 30 ° .

[Yoozername]

https://panzerworld.com/pz-kpfw-iv

If the data above is true, the hand crank would be about 8.5 turns per second to match the electric rate. But as I mentioned above, electric motors ramp up to speed. So short angular moves would be best done by hand. Another factor is being on a side slope. Cranking a turret 'uphill' would be very slow and perhaps impossible.

An old thread.... Panthers really needed the engine running.

viewtopic.php?t=54727

[Contender]

Cranking a turret 'uphill' would be very slow and perhaps impossible.

It depends on the slope angle of the terrain, if its steep enough ~30°+ ,I believe this is the rule of thumb for the better vehicles of the ww2 era it would be impossible even for powered traverse as well.