pzkw 3,4,5,6

[Tirta]

Hi Cliff and Charlie,

Thanks a lot for a little "schurzen" history.
I really like to read it, I think it is very interesting.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

One more question:
If schurzen were introduced on pzkw 3L or M, then why don't all pzkw 4 use it?
Pzkw 4 comes after pzkw 3, right?

regards,

Tirta

 

[MacHine13of13]

FREE Idea?

I had looked at the downloads of other sites and came accross this link;

http://www.terra.dti.ne.jp/~yoshidom/index.html

It's posted in the "Lost Internet" part of the forums.

The models are nice from what I can tell, but they are 1/72.

Good luck; I'm new, too...

 

[nebeltex]

"If schurzen were introduced on pzkw 3L or M, then why don't all pzkw 4 use it?
Pzkw 4 comes after pzkw 3, right?"

wrong. the pz4 was developed as an "infantry" tank, first produced with the short 75mm (L24). there is not a huge difference in size between the 3 and 4. the pz4 actually started into production first. the pz3 was not able to be "up-gunned" as the pz4 was. late in the war, most pz3 tanks were utilized as command tanks (panzerbefehlwagen). good question though.... cheers, c.b.

 

[MacHine13of13]

Tirta,

If I can suggest a few that you could download...

This is marked as 2 of 5 stars as to complexity and is marked as a Jagdpanzer IV;

http://www.recortecole.com.br/JagdPanzer/jagdpanzerE.htm

Then, this one is marked as a 4 of 5 complexity and is marked as a Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausf. D (I think I read it's 1:25 scale)

http://www.pluto.dti.ne.jp/~naka/download.html

Finally, don't forget this fella, as he has a few 1:72 scale models listed, even one with an "upgrade"

http://www.terra.dti.ne.jp/~yoshidom/

Either way... they are free, except for your time, paper, printer, patience...

 

[charliec]

wrong. the pz4 was developed as an "infantry" tank, first produced with the short 75mm (L24). there is not a huge difference in size between the 3 and 4. the pz4 actually started into production first. the pz3 was not able to be "up-gunned" as the pz4 was. late in the war, most pz3 tanks were utilized as command tanks (panzerbefehlwagen). good question though.... cheers, c.b.

Quite right - but a lot of the PzIII s were recycled as infantry support tanks (PzIIIN) with the 75mm L24 gun ex-early model Pz IVs. The command tank version was a separate strand of development - the command version was also very popular with the Red Army who used a lot of captured Pz IIIs. The Russians liked it because it gave a more comfortable ride , had good radios and was ergonomically better than their own tanks.

The Pz III was designed to be up-gunned - the original gun was a 37mm this was increased to 50mm L42 and eventually the L60 gun. The problem was that the Pz III turret couldn't be refiitted with the 75mm L43/L48 gun which was the minimum gun needed to take on the T-34s and KVs of the Russians. the Pz IV upgrades stopped at the L48 gun - the turret couldn't accept the 75mm L70 gun the Panther had.

Regards,

Charlie

ps. For those who are now saying what's an "L48" mean - guns are quoted by their calibre e.g. 75mm, and the length of barrel (L) expressed as a multiple of the calibre. So an 75mm L48 gun has a barrel 3.6M long. In general the longer the barrel the higher the muzzle velocity of the gun is
which translates either into longer projectile range or greater armour penetration.

 

[Tirta]

Charlie and C.B.,

Thanks for sharing your tank knowledge.

Command tanks, infantry tanks,
how many tank roles is it in the german army during WW2?

what is the definition of infantry tanks? tanks for shooting infantry?



MacHine13of13,

Thanks for the links.


Regards,

Tirta

 

[nebeltex]

i could be wrong about this but it is my understanding that the "L" designation for the weapons indicate the length of the shell (propellent behind the "slug"), not the barrel.

the "infantry" tanks were developed to support infantry, as opposed to a vehicle intended to counter other tanks. despite the PzKw. designation, most tanks had a SdKfz. number. the SdKfz. roughly translates as "special purpose vehicle".

 

[charliec]

Charlie and C.B.,

Thanks for sharing your tank knowledge.

Command tanks, infantry tanks,
how many tank roles is it in the german army during WW2?

what is the definition of infantry tanks? tanks for shooting infantry?

People have made careers out of trying to figure out the varieties of German armour and their modifications. I don't claim great expertise in this but:

All German AFVs accepted for production were allocated a SdKfz number.
e.g. the Kettenrad half-track motorcycle was SdKfz 2, the Panzer III was SdKfz 141.

Whenever a modification was approved to an existing design it was indicated by an Ausfuehrung (Ausf.) letter. e.g. SdKfz 141 Ausf G - is the official version of the Pz IIIG. Also major subtypes may be indicated by a slash and number e.g. the Jagdpanzer IV with the L/70 gun was the Sd.Kfz 162/1.

As well as this there was usually an offical name to go with the Sd designation. This could be quite complicated such as Sturmgescheutz Panther (8.8 cm StuK 43 (L/71)) (Sd.Kfz.172) aka JagdPanther.

There was also a naming system which mapped to the official designations which referred to the role of the vehicle like:

Panzerkampfwagen (tank) - Pz.Kpfw - followed by a type like Pz.Kpfw III
Sturmgescheutz (assault gun) - StuG - e.g StuG III
Sturmhaubitze (assault howitzer) - StuH
JagdPanzer (tank destroyer)
Panzerbefehlswagen - armoured command vehicle

(These are just the main roles there were lots of others)

Many German vehicles also were given common names as well these are probably the best known names like Tiger, Panther, etc. There were also names used by the front line troops as well e.g Guderian Ente (Guderian's duck) for the Jagdpanzer IV

Confused yet? The bottom line is that a single German vehicle might be known by at least 3 different names. As an example the tank destroyer deployed in 1944 based on the Panzer IV hull with a 75mm L/48 gun could be known as:

Sd. Kfz. 162
Sturmgeschütz neuer Art mit 7.5cm PaK L/48 auf Fahrgestell PzKpfw IV
Jagdpanzer IV
(no official name)
Guderian Ente

I bet you're sorry you asked now

I think we have caused confusion by referring to the Pz IIIN as an infantry support tank. The Wehrmacht didn't use it's armour like the Allies did in the early part of WW2. There wasn't distinction between tanks which accompanied infantry attacks and tackled fortifications and strong points to clear the way for infantry advance and tanks which operated independently.
However, many German infantry divisions acquired their own armoured units to support infantry operations. The tanks used were often captured or modified versions of older tanks - the Pz IIIN was a good example. I've probably just added to the confusion - sigh...

Regards,

Charlie

 

[MacHine13of13]

Titra,

This link has a great founding history of the tank:

http://www.answers.com/topic/tank

While this link should better answer what "infantry" tanks are supposed to be about:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infantry_tank

Now, anyone see any good FREE WWI tanks (Little Willie, Mark I, MarkII, Schneider CA1, A7V, ect.), or better yet, any experimental tanks (Flying Elephant, Tsar Tank, Großkampfwagen, Char 2C, ect.)

 

[charliec]

There is a Lebedenko (Tsar) tank model is at:

http://home.1asphost.com/homespunmagixx/TzarTank/tzar.htm

It's not free but like shareware - build and send a photo will cost you $5
otherwise $10.

There are free models of Mk IV, FT-17, A7V available at:
http://www.hal-pc.org/~mccullou/cards/ppzhome.htm
You might have to be patient though...

Regards,

Charlie

 

[MacHine13of13]

Thanks, Charlie... Heading for link...

 

[Tirta]

Hi Charlie,

Thanks for the lengthy explanation,
I think I learn a lot more about german tanks now after reading it.
What I do not really understand is why they make 2 different tanks: pzkw3 and 4, if they do not
really differentate their roles.
It would be saving a lot of time and resources if they concentrate on one kind of tank for each
role.


Hi MacHine13of13,

Thanks a lot for the links,
I am going to check it out right away.
There also some osprey books about pzkw 3 and 4.
Are these good?

regards,

Tirta

 

[charliec]

Hi Charlie,

Thanks for the lengthy explanation,
I think I learn a lot more about german tanks now after reading it.
What I do not really understand is why they make 2 different tanks: pzkw3 and 4, if they do not
really differentate their roles.
It would be saving a lot of time and resources if they concentrate on one kind of tank for each
role.


Hi MacHine13of13,

Thanks a lot for the links,
I am going to check it out right away.
There also some osprey books about pzkw 3 and 4.
Are these good?

regards,

Tirta

It's probably better to quote from www.achtungpanzer.com:

"As early as 1934/35, General Heinz Guderian envisioned two basic types to act as the most numerous equipment for the future German Panzer Divisions. The first vehicle was to be armed with anti-tank gun and two machine guns and second one was to be a support vehicle armed with a larger caliber gun. The first one eventually became known as Panzerkampfwagen III, which was to be a standard tank for the three light companies of a tank battalion. The second one became known as Panzerkampfwagen IV. "

There were different roles for Pz III and IV at the start of WW2. As it turned out the Pz IV design turned out to be more able to evolve to combat T-34s so it remained in production.

There are a lot of websites around with Pz III & IV information - unfortunately some of the best is in Russian so you have to use machine translators for the text. Suggest http://armor.kiev.ua and http://mk-armour.narod.ru.

Regards,

Charlie

 

[Tirta]

Hi Charlie,

So which one is considered the better tank between the two?
Is it Pz IV ? because it remained in production?

Thanks a lot for the links.
I am going to check them out.

Best regards,

Tirta

 

[ramatoto]

Hi Tirta,

you can only say "this one is better", if both are used and developed for the same purpose.

I Think the reason for further production of IV was the ability to carry more armor and heavier guns, what was not possible by III.

Both tanks were good, by the time they were developed and for theyr purpose.

Ralf

 

[Stev0]

I'd have to say anything sporting the dreaded 88 was worth having.

Facing Shermans doesnt call for the P4's 88 where as facing WW2's best tank the T34 would require a more formidable cannon to pierce it's sloped armor.

 

[charliec]

I'd have to say anything sporting the dreaded 88 was worth having.

Facing Shermans doesnt call for the P4's 88 where as facing WW2's best tank the T34 would require a more formidable cannon to pierce it's sloped armor.

Umm... not quite - the Panzer IV tank only ever got to a 75mm L48 gun - this was adequate for taking on T-34s and simply overwhelmed the Shermans. The
Wehrmacht didn't call the Shermans "Ronson - lights first time" for nothing.

The 75mm L70 gun on the Panther actually had greater armour penetrating power than the 88mm L56 on the Tiger I so caliber doesn't say everything about the capability of a gun. T-34 crews were shocked when they were engaged by Panthers at 2000m ranges.

The Russians liked the Panzer III more than the Panzer IV because it gave a more comfortable ride and was faster the Pz IV. I think the only reason the Pz IV remained in production was that it was easier and cheaper to produce than the Panther and in service was reliable and easy to maintain.

I think it's a mistake to think about tanks in terms of just armour and guns - there's not much point in having a super tank if it breaks down before it gets into action or the crew is exhausted because the ride is very rough. I think the Russians learned that lesson with the KV tanks and the British with the Crusaders - on paper - great tanks - in service - another story. Unfortunately a lot of authors concentrate on the guns/armour of WW2 tanks and ignore the other important factors.

Regards,

Charlie

 

[MacHine13of13]

Charlie,

I do agree about other important factors; the larger the tank, the slower, usually and this made for not only a slower moving target for the attack aircraft, but, also, a very much larger target.

I'd wonder how many Shermans were killed by air, versus the best of the other combatants.

I understand that the Sherman was a gasoline fueled tank, were any of the others?

I bet Rommel would have liked a tank powered by C-stoff (Sp)!

 

[charliec]

Charlie,

I do agree about other important factors; the larger the tank, the slower, usually and this made for not only a slower moving target for the attack aircraft, but, also, a very much larger target.

I'd wonder how many Shermans were killed by air, versus the best of the other combatants.

I understand that the Sherman was a gasoline fueled tank, were any of the others?

I bet Rommel would have liked a tank powered by C-stoff (Sp)!

It depends which Sherman you're referring to - there was one type M3A2 (I think) which was diesel powered - most of these went to the Russians. All the rest were gasoline fueled. Just about all the German and British tanks were
gasoline engines. The Red Army used diesel fueled tanks except for their light tanks.

I don't know how many Shermans were destroyed by air attack - the Luftwaffe was pretty impotent by the time the Shermans were deployed in Europe. I believe a favourite Luftwaffe tactic was to attack tank parks with air-burst containers around sunset to cause maximum casualties among the tank crews.

I think Rommel would have preferred a reliable supply chain to any particular tank.

Regards,

Charlie

 

[Tirta]

Hi Guys,

could you recommend some good movies which have these pzkw3,4,5 and 6s in action?

Regards,

Tirta