Bergpanzer Tiger myth right?

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
User avatar
bryson109
Member
Posts: 1899
Joined: 03 May 2004 18:08
Location: Canada

Bergpanzer Tiger myth right?

Post by bryson109 » 02 Jun 2004 23:41

There was no recovery version of the Tiger, rather the s.Pz.Abt. 508 modified one of their Tigers with a crane capable of placing explosive charges. The Tiger was abandoned and found by the Allies who assumed it was arecovery tank. Is this correct?

User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 13462
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:07
Location: Denmark

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 02 Jun 2004 23:53

There was a conversion, but no photographs exists. Three Tigers were converted by s.Pz.Abt. 509, and later turned over to s.Pz.Abt. 501 when the s.Pz.Abt. 509 refitted with Tiger IIs.

Christian

User avatar
bryson109
Member
Posts: 1899
Joined: 03 May 2004 18:08
Location: Canada

Post by bryson109 » 03 Jun 2004 00:00

But the modified Tiger of the 508 is not a Bergpanzer Tiger right? And did the three converstions have their turrets removed, as typical of Bergpanzers?

User avatar
Johan Elisson
Member
Posts: 281
Joined: 13 Mar 2002 13:47
Location: Göteborg, Sweden

Post by Johan Elisson » 03 Jun 2004 00:02

Christian Ankerstjerne wrote:There was a conversion, but no photographs exists. Three Tigers were converted by s.Pz.Abt. 509, and later turned over to s.Pz.Abt. 501 when the s.Pz.Abt. 509 refitted with Tiger IIs.

Christian


What about the two pictures in the Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two (Chamberlain and Doyle) that are supposed to show a Bergepanzer Tiger Ausf E? The text says three converted in 1944, by removing main armament (but not turret), and adding a tubular crane.

There are also two pictures in Der Panzerkampfwagen Tiger und seine Abarten (Spielberger) on page 179 showing the turret with crane.

/Johan

User avatar
bryson109
Member
Posts: 1899
Joined: 03 May 2004 18:08
Location: Canada

Post by bryson109 » 03 Jun 2004 00:06

The pics in that book is of the Tank used by the s.Pz.Abt. 508, the Tank keep its turret and had a small crane. The 3 conversions are a different machine.

User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 13462
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:07
Location: Denmark

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 03 Jun 2004 00:08

bryson109 wrote:But the modified Tiger of the 508 is not a Bergpanzer Tiger right? And did the three converstions have their turrets removed, as typical of Bergpanzers?


Correct. Their purpose was, as you described, to place explosives.

Johan Elisson wrote:What about the two pictures in the Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two (Chamberlain and Doyle) that are supposed to show a Bergepanzer Tiger Ausf E? The text says three converted in 1944, by removing main armament (but not turret), and adding a tubular crane.

/Johan


Those are the Tigers which were converted to place explosives.

Christian

Patrice
Member
Posts: 722
Joined: 03 May 2004 16:44
Location: Liège Belgium

Bergetiger?

Post by Patrice » 03 Jun 2004 00:18

Hello.
This Tiger is a unique transformation due to the workschops of
the sPz Abt 508 between the 1st and 5 March 1944.
The name of BergeTiger is due to bad interpretation of the Britisch Forces
who Find a calcined and destoyed Tiger.
There is Picure (Five) in the Steel Master n°23.
This pictures are now at the Tank Museun of Bovington.
On this Picture we can see the remainders of a crane who is to ligth to be useful has a breakdown service,and must be a explosive charge layer.
On an other picture we can see a "scble" who run along side the hull
to who seem be a box on the rear of the Tiger.
The only variant of Tiger I was the Sturmtiger.
Patrice

User avatar
bryson109
Member
Posts: 1899
Joined: 03 May 2004 18:08
Location: Canada

Post by bryson109 » 03 Jun 2004 00:18

There are also two pictures in Der Panzerkampfwagen Tiger und seine Abarten (Spielberger) on page 179 showing the turret with crane.


I imagine that the Tiger is the one used by s.Pz.Abt 508 to place explosives. All Bergpanzers I know of had the turret removed, not just the main gun.

Patrice
Member
Posts: 722
Joined: 03 May 2004 16:44
Location: Liège Belgium

Bergetiger?

Post by Patrice » 03 Jun 2004 00:32

I find some Pictures the N°1 and N° 3 Find on tripod and the N°2 on
http://Klub.chip.pl/
Patrice
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 13462
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:07
Location: Denmark

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 03 Jun 2004 00:44

Yes, that is the convesion to the explosives charge layer.

Christian

User avatar
bryson109
Member
Posts: 1899
Joined: 03 May 2004 18:08
Location: Canada

Post by bryson109 » 03 Jun 2004 01:08

Thanks, I have never seen pic no.2 before. :D

User avatar
AikinutNY
Member
Posts: 210
Joined: 12 Dec 2004 19:05
Location: Three Mile Bay, New York, USA

Tiger recovery vehicles

Post by AikinutNY » 04 Jan 2005 21:39

What did they use to recover Tigers during combat? Other Tigers? Or wait to secure the area and use Famos? Would they have used Bergepanzer IV or Bergpanthers? Could they have moved a Tiger bogged down in mud?

User avatar
bryson109
Member
Posts: 1899
Joined: 03 May 2004 18:08
Location: Canada

Re: Tiger recovery vehicles

Post by bryson109 » 04 Jan 2005 21:51

AikinutNY wrote:What did they use to recover Tigers during combat? Other Tigers? Or wait to secure the area and use Famos? Would they have used Bergepanzer IV or Bergpanthers? Could they have moved a Tiger bogged down in mud?


Early on 3 FAMOs were needed to recovery a Tiger. Other Tigers could be used (and were used - photo evidence supports it) but this practice was banned. When the Bergpanther entered service it was used to help recover Tigers.

User avatar
MaisAlto
Member
Posts: 180
Joined: 11 Nov 2002 00:38
Location: Lisbon - Portugal

Post by MaisAlto » 05 Jan 2005 00:30

What would be the reason to use a running tTiger, even if gunless, to place explosives charges that could be placed by any other armoured vehicule or even by hand..?

User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 13462
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:07
Location: Denmark

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 05 Jan 2005 01:04

If the turret was damaged and couldn't be imidiately repaired, it would be quite suitable, due to its thick armour.

Christian

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