German armored vehicles/weapons if the war continued?

[T. A. Gardner]

The number one thing the Germans needed in the West in late 1944, and they didn't have, was artillery tubes. 8.1 and 12 cm mortars are no substitute here. They needed lots of artillery tubes, ammunition for those guns, and the communications system in place to make use of them.
Both the US and Commonwealth forces had artillery coming out their ears. Both had excellent communications and control systems that let them pummel German units with artillery fire.
For a German infantry division, it'd be lucky to have most of the on paper issue of 10.5cm howitzers let alone any 15 cm howitzers. Even the shorter ranged infantry guns were in short supply. And, even if they had the guns it's likely they'd have limited ammunition and a shortage of radios and telephones to control the fire over a network with.
Same goes for panzer divisions. It's hard to find a case where the Germans were able to really bring down heavy artillery fire beyond mortars and possibly 8.8 cm guns run by the Luftwaffe firing in a pinch as artillery. The ammunition problem was one of the Luftwaffe's creating by getting priority on flak ammunition over the Wehrmacht and artillery ammunition.
Substitution of who-knows-what antiquated pieces of artillery and captured tubes is a poor substitute as they too have limited ammunition.

Without artillery to counter Allied artillery and to bring down defensive fires for defending infantry the Germans are finished in any case. The mobile divisions can't be everywhere and the leg infantry ones are nearly helpless without artillery support. Sure, they can still win tactical firefights with small arms, but that doesn't equate into winning at the division level where things are really decided.

[Cult Icon]

While your at it, the German 19th Army (Sept 1944) should ask the US army to give back the 1300 + artillery pieces lost in the retreat from Southern France..

Goring should provide 10,000 Jet fighters, the German war economy should provide 5 times more ammunition

[Michael Kenny]

Goring should provide 10,000 Jet fighters, the German war economy should provide 5 times more ammunition

I think an increase in horse collars, horseshoes and blinkers might have been more useful to the German Army

[T. A. Gardner]

Goring should provide 10,000 Jet fighters, the German war economy should provide 5 times more ammunition

I think an increase in horse collars, horseshoes and blinkers might have been more useful to the German Army

You might be onto something there...

[T. A. Gardner]

While your at it, the German 19th Army (Sept 1944) should ask the US army to give back the 1300 + artillery pieces lost in the retreat from Southern France..

What's included in those "1300 + artillery pieces?" Are mortars included, for example?

[Cult Icon]

Going back to the OP,

1. improved Panther tank
2. 150mm Assault Howitzer on Panther chasis
3. troop carrier on tank chasis (good idea but have not seen evidence of this on the German side)
4. improved self-propelled Anti-aircraft tank (I recall seeing "paper panzers" for this and maybe even a prototype(s) ? ).

There is also evidence of a certain affinity for self-propelled FLAK. However I have seen limited evidence for its effectiveness. The most common form of SP AA were on halftracks and trucks, both armored and unarmored. In either case they were too lightly armored.

The 20mm Quad mounted on the Pz IV chasis is accounted for in the SS-PR12 war diary and there are personal accounts of the 1.SS that attest to its effectiveness on certain occasions in both AA and ground actions. The Wirblewind seems to have been the best SP AA unit. However, there were too few Ostwind/Wirblewind issued, and only distributed at platoon and company sizes to support armored units.

The Flak Drilling and other SPW mounted AA were issued in far greater numbers, however I haven't seen evidence of great success of these vehicles. I would wager that they were better for armored calvary type actions, and against ground targets (eg. the triple cannons of the Drilling). Harro's research into this unit argues that the AA component of Panzerbrigade 107 helped the unit repell air attacks.

Bayerlein's FMS has him talking about the "future" Panzer division as having a very large anti-aircraft unit.

[T. A. Gardner]

Well #3, a troop carrier on a tank chassis is best filled by something the Germans were already experimenting with.

http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us/Katzchen.htm

This is a carrier based on the Pz 38d chassis and would be a great start towards what would be a modern (1970's-ish) APC.

[Kingfish]

What exactly would be the advantage of that design over the already proven sd.kfz 251/1?

If better cross country performance, was the 251/1 unable to keep up with the tanks in all terrain?

[Carl Schwamberger]

Goring should provide 10,000 Jet fighters, the German war economy should provide 5 times more ammunition

I think an increase in horse collars, horseshoes and blinkers might have been more useful to the German Army

You might be onto something there...

Are those horses laughing, or cursing?

[Cult Icon]

Are those horses laughing, or cursing?

Antics like this is why the old ACG gang haunts this forum and will until the end of time....

[Cult Icon]

What exactly would be the advantage of that design over the already proven sd.kfz 251/1?

If better cross country performance, was the 251/1 unable to keep up with the tanks in all terrain?

The advantage of the troop transporter with a tank chasis is that it could keep up with the tanks more closely (in all terrain) and deploy infantry close-in. It provided mobility and protection, particularly against a hornet's nest, making it more difficult to pursue the typical tactics of separating/destroying the infantry support from the armor.

In facing heavy defenses, the SPW typically released its infantry in safe areas, and the inf advanced on foot, creating a separation between the tanks.

[Michael Kenny]

Antics like this is why the old ACG gang haunts this forum and will until the end of time....

I saw the writing on the wall at AG and stopped posting about 18 months before the demise. You however kept posting right up to the end.

[T. A. Gardner]

What exactly would be the advantage of that design over the already proven sd.kfz 251/1?

If better cross country performance, was the 251/1 unable to keep up with the tanks in all terrain?

The advantage of the troop transporter with a tank chasis is that it could keep up with the tanks more closely (in all terrain) and deploy infantry close-in. It provided mobility and protection, particularly against a hornet's nest, making it more difficult to pursue the typical tactics of separating/destroying the infantry support from the armor.

In facing heavy defenses, the SPW typically released its infantry in safe areas, and the inf advanced on foot, creating a separation between the tanks.

A more important advantage is doing away with the complexity of constructing the sdkfz 251 and the like. Those half-tracks--really more like three-quarter tracks--were complex designs from the lubricated pin, rubber pad tracks, to the complex steering mechanism, to a complicated transmission. Using something simple like the Pz 38t or d chassis with leaf springs and a simpler drive train along with simple single pin steel tracks makes sense from a production and cost POV as well.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Antics like this is why the old ACG gang haunts this forum and will until the end of time....

I saw the writing on the wall at AG and stopped posting about 18 months before the demise. You however kept posting right up to the end.

It was earlier for me. So many there lacked a sense of humor. But, there were several larger reasons.

[TheMarcksPlan]

Antics like this is why the old ACG gang haunts this forum and will until the end of time....

You would think people would get sick of saying the same tired old things for decades. But we really do have a second infancy, eventually.