This range of military models are excellent quality collectible models of the highest order and detail, and best for true diecast collectors.
The liveries are realistic, as are the decals, and the professional weathering. 

Features.

* Assembled  Cruiser/Cromwell Tank,  

* Professionally applied paint and decals for authentic look, plus factory weathered. 

* Authentic Military markings.

* Hull MG detail

* Turret Turns.

* Gun barrel elevates.

* Great detail externally 

* In 1:50 Scale.

Please note , some items value is such that i prefer to send it to some Countrys only on a Tracked Mail basis.

This specifically includes Italy at the moment, where a much higher than acceptable amount of packages appear to go amiss ?? !!!. but i reserve the right to include others depending on cost of item and which Country.

The Price quoted for Europe is non tracked.

Use the photo enlarge button  above to see close up view

I have more Military Aircraft and Helicopters like this, or similar, plus lots of other great products either already up, or coming soon. Feel free to email if you have a question. 

 

To view them, click on see Sellers other items,  link above.

Also feel free to save me as a Favourite seller, and check back in often

.

If you click on any of the links below in blue, you get much more facts , plus pictures of the cars and history in action.

 

If you click on either the pics or what looks like empty picture box,s, they should open up to full size pictures.

^.

Panther tank

Development and production

Design

The Panther was born out of a project started in 1938 to replace the Panzer III and Panzer IV tanks. The initial requirements of the VK 20 series called for a fully tracked vehicle weighing 20 tonnes and design proposals by Krupp, Daimler Benz and MAN ensued. These designs were abandoned and Krupp dropped out of the competition entirely as the requirements increased to a vehicle weighing 30 tonnes, a direct reaction to the encounters with the Soviet T-34 and KV-1 tanks and against the advice of Wa Pruef 6.^{[Notes 1][6]} The T-34 outclassed the existing models of the Panzer III and IV.^[7][8] At the insistence of General Heinz Guderian, a special tank commission was created to assess the T-34.^[9] Among the features of the Soviet tank considered most significant were the sloping armour, which gave much improved shot deflection and also increased the effective armour thickness against penetration, the wide track, which improved mobility over soft ground, and the 76.2 mm (3.00 in) gun, which had good armour penetration and fired an effective high explosive round. Daimler-Benz (DB), which designed the successful Panzer III and Stug III, and Maschinenfabrik Augsburg-Nürnberg AG (MAN) were given the task of designing a new 30- to 35-tonne tank, designated VK 30.02, by April 1942.

The DB design resembled the T-34 in its hull and turret and was also to be powered by a diesel engine. It was also driven from the rear drive sprocket with the turret situated forward. Incorporation of a diesel engine promised increased operational range, reduced flammability and allowed for more efficient use of petroleum reserves. Hitler himself considered a diesel engine imperative for the new tank.^[10] DB's proposal used an external leaf spring suspension, in contrast to the MAN proposal of twin torsion bars. Wa Pruef 6's opinion was that the leaf spring suspension was a disadvantage and that using torsion bars would allow greater internal hull width. It also opposed the rear drive because of the potential for track fouling. Daimler Benz however still preferred the leaf springs over a torsion bar suspension as it resulted in a silhouette about 200 mm (7.9 in) shorter and rendered complex shock absorbers unnecessary. The employment of a rear drive provided additional crew space and also allowed for a better slope on the front hull, which was considered important in preventing the penetration by armour piercing shells.^[6] On 5 March 1942, Albert Speer reported that Hitler considered the Daimler-Benz design to be superior to MAN's design.^[11]

The MAN design embodied more a conventional configuration, with the transmission and drive sprocket in the front and a centrally mounted turret. It had a petrol engine and eight torsion-bar suspension axles per side. Because of the torsion bar suspension and the drive shaft running under the turret basket, the MAN Panther was higher and had a wider hull than the DB design. The Henschel firm's design concepts for their Tiger I tank's suspension/drive components, using its characteristic Schachtellaufwerk format – large, overlapping, interleaved road wheels with a "slack-track" using no return rollers for the upper run of track, also features shared with almost all German military half-track designs since the late 1930s – were repeated with the MAN design for the Panther. These multiple large, rubber-rimmed steel wheels distributed ground pressure more evenly across the track. The MAN proposal also complimented Rheinmetall's already designed turret modified from that of the VK 45.01 (H),^[12] and used a virtually identical Maybach V12 engine to the Tiger I heavy tank's Maybach HL230 powerplant model.

The two designs were reviewed from January to March 1942. Reichminister Todt, and later, his replacement Albert Speer, both recommended the DB design to Hitler because of its advantages over the initial MAN design. However, at the final submission, MAN refined their design, having learned from the DB proposal apparently through a leak by their former employee in the Wa Pruef 6, senior engineer Heinrich Ernst Kniepkamp and others.^[10] A review by a special commission appointed by Hitler in May 1942 selected the MAN design. Hitler approved this decision after reviewing it overnight. One of the principal reasons given for this decision was that the MAN design used an existing turret designed by Rheinmetall-Borsig, while the DB design would have required a brand new turret and engine to be designed and produced, delaying the commencement of production.^[13] This time-saving measure compromised the subsequent development of the design.^[14]

Albert Speer recounts in his autobiography Inside the Third Reich

Since the Tiger had originally been designed to weigh fifty tons but as a result of Hitler's demands had gone up to fifty seven tons, we decided to develop a new thirty ton tank whose very name, Panther, was to signify greater agility. Though light in weight, its motor was to be the same as the Tiger's, which meant it could develop superior speed. But in the course of a year Hitler once again insisted on clapping so much armor on it, as well as larger guns, that it ultimately reached forty eight tons, the original weight of the Tiger.^[15]

Production

A mild steel prototype of the MAN design was produced by September 1942 and, after testing at Kummersdorf, was officially accepted. It was put into immediate production. The start of production was delayed, however, mainly because of a shortage of specialized machine tools needed for the machining of the hull. Finished tanks were produced in December and suffered from reliability problems as a result. The demand for this tank was so high that the manufacturing was soon expanded beyond MAN to include Daimler-Benz (Berlin-Marienfelde, former DMG plant), Maschinenfabrik Niedersachsen Hanover (MNH, subsidiary of Eisenwerk Wülfel/Hanomag) and Henschel & Sohn in Kassel.

The initial production target was 250 tanks per month at the MAN plant Nuremberg. This was increased to 600 per month in January 1943. Despite determined efforts, this figure was never reached due to disruption by Allied bombing, and manufacturing and resource bottlenecks. Production in 1943 averaged 148 per month. In 1944, it averaged 315 a month (3,777 having been built that year), peaking with 380 in July and ending around the end of March 1945, with at least 6,000 built in total. Front-line combat strength peaked on 1 September 1944 at 2,304 tanks, but that same month a record number of 692 tanks were reported lost.^[1]

Allied bombing was first directed at the common chokepoint for both Panther and Tiger production: the Maybach engine plant. This was bombed the night of 27/28 April 1944 and production was halted for five months. A second factory had already been planned, the Auto Union Siegmar plant (former Wanderer car factory), and this came online in May 1944.^[16] Targeting of Panther factories began with a bombing raid on the DB plant on 6 August 1944, and again on the night of 23/24 August. MAN was struck on 10 September, 3 October and 19 October 1944, and then again on 3 January and 20/21 February 1945. MNH was not attacked until 14 and 28 March 1945.^[17]

In addition to interfering with tank production goals, the bombing forced a steep drop in the production of spare parts. Spare parts as a percentage of tank production dropped from 25–30 percent in 1943, to 8 percent in the autumn of 1944. This compounded the problems with reliability and the numbers of operational Panthers, as tanks in the field had to be cannibalized for parts.^[18]

Production figures

The Panther was the third most produced German armoured fighting vehicle, after the Sturmgeschütz III assault gun/tank destroyer at 9,408 units, and the Panzer IV tank at 8,298 units.

Production by type^{[citation needed]}

Model	Number	Date	Notes
Prototype	2	11/42	Designated V1 and V2
Ausf. D	842	1/43 to 9/43
Ausf. A	2,192	8/43 to 6/44	Sometimes called Ausf. A2
Ausf. G	2,953	3/44 to 4/45
Befehlspanzer Panther	329	5/43 to 2/45	Converted
Beobachtungspanzer Panther	41	44 to 45	Converted
Bergepanther	347	43 to 45

Panther production in 1944 by manufacturer^[19]

Manufacturer	% of total
Maschinenfabrik Augsburg-Nürnberg (M.A.N.)	35%
Daimler-Benz	31%
Maschinenfabrik Niedersachsen-Hannover	31%
Other	3%

Cost

One source has cited the cost of a Panther tank as 117,100 Reichmarks (RM). This compared with 82,500 RM for the StuG III, 96,163 RM for the Panzer III, 103,462 RM for the Panzer IV, and 250,800 RM for the Tiger I. These figures did not include the cost of the armament and radio.^[20][21] Therefore, the Panther tank was one of the most cost-effective^{[citation needed]} of the German armoured fighting vehicles of World War II. Using slave labour on the production lines greatly reduced costs but also greatly increased sabotage. French army studies in 1947 found that many Panthers had been sabotaged during production.^[22] However, these cost figures should be understood in the context in which the various armoured fighting vehicles were first designed, as the Germans increasingly strove for production methods that would allow for higher production rates, and thus steadily reduced the cost of their armoured fighting vehicles. By comparison for example, another source has cited the total cost of the early production Tiger I in 1942–1943 to be as high as 800,000 RM.^[23]

The process of streamlining the production of German armoured fighting vehicles first began after Speer became Reichminister in early 1942, and steadily accelerated through to 1944; production of the Panther tank coincided with this period of increased manufacturing efficiency. At the beginning of the war, German armoured fighting vehicle manufacturers had employed labour-intensive and costly manufacturing methods unsuitable for the needs of mass production; even with streamlined production methods, Germany never approached the efficiency of Allied manufacturing during World War II.^[24]

Design characteristics

The weight of the production model was increased to 45 tonnes from the original plans for a 35 tonne tank. Hitler was briefed thoroughly on the comparison between the MAN and DB designs in the report by Guderian's tank commission. Armour protection appeared to be inadequate, while "the motor mounted on the rear appeared to him correct". He agreed that the "decisive factor was the possibility of quickly getting the tank into production". On the 15 of May 1942, Oberst Fichtner informed MAN that Hitler had decided in favour of the MAN Panther and ordered series production. The upper glacis plate was to be increased from 60 mm (2.4 in) to 80 mm (3.1 in). Hitler demanded that an increase to 100 mm (3.9 in) should be attempted and that at least all vertical surfaces were to be 100 mm (3.9 in); the turret front plate was increased from 80 mm (3.1 in) to 100 mm (3.9 in).^[25]

The Panther was rushed into combat before all of its teething problems had been corrected. Reliability was considerably improved over time, and the Panther did prove to be a very effective fighting vehicle; however, some design flaws, such as its weak final drive units, were never corrected due to raw material shortages.

The crew had five members: driver, radio operator (who also fired the bow machine gun), gunner, loader, and commander.

Engine

The first 250 Panthers were powered by a Maybach HL 210 P30 engine, V-12 petrol engine which delivered 650 metric hp at 3,000 rpm and had three simple air filters.^[26] Starting in May 1943, the Panthers were built using the 700 metric hp (690 hp, 515 kW) at 3,000 rpm, 23.1 litre Maybach HL 230 P30 V-12 petrol engine. To save aluminium, the light alloy block used in the HL 210 was replaced by a cast iron block. Two multistage "cyclone" air filters were used to improve dust removal.^[27][28] In practice, due to the use of low-quality petrol, the engine power output was reduced. With a capacity of 720 litres (160 imperial gallons; 190 US gallons) of fuel, a fully fuelled Panther's range was 97–130 km (60–81 mi) on roads and 64–80 km (40–50 mi) cross country.^[29]

The HL 230 P30 engine was a very compact design, which kept the space between the cylinder walls to a minimum. The crankshaft was composed of seven discs, each with an outer race of roller bearings, and a crankshaft pin between each disc. To reduce the length of the engine further, by one-half a cylinder diameter, the two banks of 6 cylinders of the V-12 were not offset – the "big ends" of the connecting rods of each cylinder pair in the "V" where they mated with the crankpin were thus at the same spot with respect to the engine block's length rather than offset; this required a "fork and blade" matched pair of conrods for each transversely-oriented pair of cylinders. Usually, "V"-form engines have their transversely-paired cylinders' conrods' "big ends" simply placed side by side on the crankpin, with their transverse pairs of cylinders offset to match. This compact arrangement with the connecting rods was the source of considerable problems initially.^[30] Blown head gaskets were another problem, which was corrected with improved seals in September 1943. Improved bearings were introduced in November 1943. An engine governor was also added in November 1943 that reduced the maximum engine speed to 2500 rpm. An eighth crankshaft bearing was added beginning in January 1944 to reduce motor failures.^[31]

The engine compartment space was designed to be watertight so that the Panther could ford water obstacles. The result was that the engine compartment was poorly ventilated and prone to overheating. The fuel connectors in the early models were non-insulated, leading to leakage of fuel fumes into the engine compartment. This led to many engine fires in the early Panthers. Additional ventilation was added to draw off these gases, which only partly solved the problem of engine fires.^[32] Other measures taken to reduce this problem included improving the coolant circulation inside the motor and adding a reinforced membrane spring to the fuel pump.^[33] The Panther had a solid firewall separating the engine compartment and the fighting compartment to keep engine fires from spreading.

Engine reliability improved over time. A French assessment of their stock of captured Normandy Panther A's in 1947 concluded that the engine had an average life of 1,000 km (620 mi) and maximum life of 1,500 km (930 mi).^[34]

Suspension

The suspension consisted of front drive sprockets, rear idlers and eight double-interleaved rubber-rimmed steel road wheels on each side — in the so-called Schachtellaufwerk design, suspended on a dual torsion bar suspension. The dual torsion bar system, designed by Professor Ernst Lehr, allowed for a wide travel stroke and rapid oscillations with high reliability, thus allowing for relatively high speed travel over undulating terrain. However, the extra space required for the bars running across the length of the bottom of the hull, below the turret basket, increased the overall height of the tank and also prevented any chance for a provision for an escape hatch in the hull bottom. When damaged by mines, the torsion bars often required a welding torch for removal.^[35]

The Panther's suspension was overengineered and the Schachtellaufwerk interleaved road wheel system made replacing inner road wheels time consuming (though it could operate with missing or broken wheels). The interleaved wheels also had a tendency to become clogged with mud, rocks and ice, and could freeze solid overnight in the harsh winter weather that followed the autumn rasputitsa mud season on the Eastern Front. Shell damage could cause the road wheels to jam together and become extremely difficult to separate.^[36] Interleaved wheels had long been standard on all German half-tracks. The extra wheels did provide better flotation and stability, and also provided more armour protection for the thin hull sides than smaller wheels or non-interleaved wheel systems, but the complexity meant that no other country ever adopted this design for their tanks.^[37] In September 1944, and again in March/April 1945, M.A.N. built a limited number of Panthers with overlapping, non-interleaved steel-rimmed roadwheels originally designed for the Tiger II and late series Tiger I tanks. Steel-rimmed roadwheels were introduced from chassis number 121052 due to raw material shortages.^[38]

From November 1944 through February 1945, a conversion process began to use sleeve bearings in the Panther tank, as there was a shortage of ball bearings. The sleeve bearings were primarily used in the running gear; plans were also made to convert the transmission to sleeve bearings, but were not carried out due to the ending of Panther production.^[39]

Steering and transmission

Steering was accomplished through a seven-speed AK 7-200 synchromesh gearbox, designed by Zahnradfabrik Friedrichshafen (ZF), and a MAN single radius steering system, operated by steering levers. Each gear had a fixed radius of turning, ranging from 5 m (16 ft) for 1st gear up to 80 m (260 ft) for 7th gear. The driver was expected to judge the sharpness of a turn ahead of time and shift into the appropriate gear to turn the tank. The driver could also engage the brakes on one side to force a sharper turn.^[40] This manual steering was a much simplified design, compared to the sophisticated dual-radius hydraulically controlled steering system of the Tiger tanks.

The AK 7-200 transmission was also capable of pivot turns, but this method of turning could cause failures of the final drive.^[41]

The Panthers' main weakness was its final drive unit. The problems were from several factors. The original MAN proposal had called for the Panther to have an epicyclic gearing (planetary) system in the final drive, similar to that used in the Tiger I.^[42] However, Germany suffered from a shortage of gear-cutting machine tools and, unlike the Tiger tanks, the Panther was intended to be mass-produced. To achieve the goal of higher production rates, numerous simplifications were made to the design and its manufacture. This process was aggressively pushed forward, sometimes against the wishes of designers and army officers, by the Chief Director of Armament and War Production, Karl-Otto Saur (who worked under, and later succeeded, Reichminister Speer). Consequently, the final drive was changed to a double spur system.^[43] Although much simpler to produce, the double spur gears had inherently higher internal impact and stress loads, making them prone to failure under the high torque requirements of the heavy Panther tank. Furthermore, high quality steel intended for the double spur system was not available for mass production, and was replaced by 37MnSi5 tempered steel, which was unsuitable for high-stress gears.^[44] In contrast, both the Tiger II^[45] and the US M4 Sherman tank had double helical (herringbone gears) in their final drives,^[46] a system that reduced internal stress loads and was less complex than planetary geartrains.

Compounding these problems was the fact that the final drive's housing and gear mountings were too weak because of the type of steel used and the tight space allotted for the final drive. The final gear mountings deformed easily under the high torque and stress loads, pushing the gears out of alignment and resulting in failure.^[47] Due to the weakness of the final drives their average fatigue life was only 150 km (93 mi). In Normandy, about half of the abandoned Panthers were found by the French to have broken final drives.^[34] The final gear housing was eventually replaced with a stronger one, while the final gear problem was never solved.^[48]

Plans were made to replace the final drive, either with a version of the original epicyclic gears planned by MAN, or with the final drive of the Tiger II. These plans were intertwined with the planning for the Panther II, which never came to fruition because the tank commission deemed that a temporary drop in production of the Panther due to a merger of Tiger II and Panther II would be unacceptable. It was estimated that building the epicyclic gear final drive would have required 2.2 times more machining work than double spur gears, and this would have affected output.^[49]

Most of the shortcomings were considered acceptable once design flaws were rectified.^[50] Due to the mechanical unreliability of the final gear, the Panther had to be driven with care, a characteristic shared with the Tiger tanks as well as the Jagdtiger. Long road marches would result in a significant number of breakdowns, and so the German Army had to move the tanks by rail as close to the fronts as possible.^[51]

Armour

Initial production Panthers had a face-hardened glacis plate (the main front hull armour piece), but as armour-piercing capped rounds became the standard in all armies (thus defeating the benefits of face-hardening, which caused uncapped rounds to shatter), this requirement was deleted in March 1943. By August 1943, Panthers were being built only with a homogeneous steel glacis plate.^[52] The front hull had 80 mm (3.1 in) of armour angled at 55 degrees from the vertical, welded but also interlocked for strength. The combination of well-sloped and thick armour meant that heavy Allied weapons, such as the Soviet 122 mm A-19, 100 mm BS-3 and US 90 mm M3^[53] were needed to assure penetration of the upper glacis at all combat ranges.^[54]

The armour for the side hull and superstructure (the side sponsons) was much thinner (40–50 mm (1.6–2.0 in)). The thinner side armour was necessary to keep the tanks' weight down, but it made the Panther vulnerable to hits from the side by all Allied tank and anti-tank guns. German tactical doctrine for the use of the Panther emphasized the importance of flank protection.^[55] 5 mm (0.20 in) thick spaced armour, known as Schürzen, intended to provide protection for the lower side hull from Soviet anti-tank rifle fire, was fitted on the hull side. Zimmerit coating against magnetic mines started to be applied at the factory on late Ausf D models beginning in September 1943;^[56] an order for field units to apply Zimmerit to older versions of the Panther was issued in November 1943.^[57] In September 1944, orders to stop all application of Zimmerit were issued, based on false rumours that hits on the Zimmerit had caused vehicle fires.^[58]

Panther crews were aware of the weak side armour and made augmentations by hanging track links or spare roadwheels onto the turret and/or the hull sides.^[59] The rear hull top armour was only 16 mm (0.63 in) thick, and had two radiator fans and four air intake louvres over the engine compartment that were vulnerable to strafing by aircraft.^[60]

As the war progressed, Germany was forced to reduce or no longer use certain critical alloys in the production of armour plate, such as nickel, tungsten, molybdenum, and manganese; this resulted in lower impact resistance levels compared to earlier armour.^[61] Allied bombers struck the Knabe mine in Norway and stopped a key source of molybdenum; supplies from Finland and Japan were also cut off. The loss of molybdenum, and its replacement with other substitutes to maintain hardness, as well as a general loss of quality control resulted in an increased brittleness in German armour plate, which developed a tendency to fracture when struck with a shell. Testing by U.S. Army officers in August 1944 in Isigny, France showed catastrophic cracking of the armour plate on two out of three Panthers examined.^{[62][63][dubious – discuss]}

Armament

The main gun was a Rheinmetall-Borsig 7.5 cm KwK 42 (L/70) with semi-automatic shell ejection and a supply of 79 rounds (82 on Ausf. G). The main gun used three different types of ammunition: APCBC-HE (Pzgr. 39/42), HE (Sprgr. 42) and APCR (Pzgr. 40/42), the last of which was usually in short supply. While it was of a calibre common on Allied tanks, the Panther's gun was one of the most powerful of World War II, due to the large propellant charge and the long barrel, which gave it a very high muzzle velocity and excellent armour-piercing qualities. The flat trajectory also made hitting targets much easier, since accuracy was less sensitive to errors in range estimation and increased the chance of hitting a moving target, though these same attributes made the gun a poor infantry-support weapon using HE ammo. The Panther's 75 mm gun had more penetrating power than the main gun of the Tiger I heavy tank, the 8.8 cm KwK 36 L/56,^[64] although the larger 88 mm projectile might inflict more damage if it did penetrate.^[65]

The tank typically had two MG 34 armoured fighting vehicle variant machine guns featuring an armoured barrel sleeve. An MG 34 machine gun was located co-axially with the main gun on the gun mantlet; an identical MG 34 was located on the glacis plate and fired by the radio operator. Initial Ausf. D and early Ausf. A models used a "letterbox" flap enclosing its underlying thin, vertical arrowslit-like aperture, through which the machine gun was fired.^[66] In later Ausf A and all Ausf G models (starting in late November-early December 1943), a ball mount in the glacis plate with a K.Z.F.2 machine gun sight was installed for the hull machine gun.^[67]

Turret

The front of the turret was a curved 110 mm (4.3 in) thick cast armour mantlet. Its transverse-cylindrical shape meant that it was more likely to deflect shells, but the lower section created a shot trap. If a non-penetrating hit bounced downwards off its lower section, it could penetrate the thin forward hull roof armour, and plunge down into the front hull compartment.^[68] Penetrations of this nature could have catastrophic results, since the compartment housed the driver and radio operator sitting along both sides of the massive gearbox and steering unit. Also, four magazines containing main gun ammunition were located between the driver/radio operator seats and the turret, directly underneath the gun mantlet when the turret was facing forward.^[69]

From September 1944, a slightly redesigned mantlet with a flattened and much thicker lower "chin" design started to be fitted to Panther Ausf G models, the chin being intended to prevent such deflections. Conversion to the "chin" design was gradual, and Panthers continued to be produced to the end of the war with the rounded gun mantlet.^[70]

The Ausf A model introduced a new cast armour commander's cupola, replacing the forged cupola. It featured a steel hoop to which a third MG 34 or either the coaxial or the bow machine gun could be mounted for use in the anti-aircraft role.^[71]

The first Panthers (Ausf D) had a hydraulic motor that could traverse the turret at a maximum rate of one complete revolution in one minute, independent of engine speed. This was improved in the Ausf A model with a hydraulic traverse that varied with engine speed; one full turn taking 46 seconds at an engine speed of 1,000 rpm but only 15 seconds if the engine was running at 3,000 rpm.^[72] This arrangement was a weakness, as traversing the Panther's turret rapidly onto a target required close coordination between the gunner and driver, who had to run the engine to maximum speed. By comparison, the turret of the M4 Sherman turret traversed at up to 360 degrees in 15 seconds and was independent of engine speed, which gave it an advantage over the Panther in close-quarters combat.^[73] A hand traverse wheel was provided for the Panther gunner to make fine adjustment of his aim.^[72]

Ammunition storage

Ammunition storage for the main gun was a weak point. All the ammunition for the main armament was stored in the hull, with a significant amount stored in the sponsons. In the Ausf D and A models, 18 rounds were stored next to the turret on each side, for a total of 36 rounds. In the Ausf G, which had deeper sponsons, 24 rounds were stored on each side of the turret, for a total of 48 rounds. In all models, four rounds were also stored in the left sponson between the driver and the turret. An additional 36 rounds were stored inside the hull of the Ausf D and A models – 27 in the forward hull compartment directly underneath the mantlet. In the Ausf G, the hull ammunition storage was reduced to 27 rounds total, with 18 rounds in the forward hull compartment. For all models, three rounds were kept under the turntable of the turret.^[74] The stowage of 52 rounds of ammunition in the side sponsons made this area the most vulnerable point on the Panther since penetration here usually led to catastrophic ammunition fires.^[75]

The loader was stationed in the right side of the turret. With the turret facing forward, he had access only to the right sponson and hull ammunition,^[76] and so these served as the main ready-ammunition bins.

Combat use

Panthers were supplied to form Panzer Abteilung 51 (Tank Battalion 51) on 9 January, and then Panzer Abteilung 52 on 6 February 1943.^[77]

The first production Panther tanks were plagued with mechanical problems. The engine was dangerously prone to overheating and suffered from connecting rod or bearing failures. Petrol leaks from the fuel pump or carburettor, as well as motor oil leaks from gaskets easily produced fires in the engine compartment; several were destroyed in such fires. Transmission and final drive breakdowns were the most common and difficult to repair. A large list of other problems were detected in these early Panthers, and so from April through May 1943 all Panthers were shipped to Falkensee and Nuernburg for a major rebuilding program. This did not correct all of the problems, so a second program was started at Grafenwoehr and Erlangen in June 1943.

Eastern Front

The Panther tank was seen as a necessary component of Operation Zitadelle, and the attack was delayed several times because of their mechanical problems and to receive more Panthers, with the eventual start date of the battle only six days after the last Panthers had been delivered to the front. This resulted in major problems in Panther units during the Battle of Kursk, as tactical training at the unit level, coordination by radio, and driver training were all seriously deficient.^[78]

It was not until 23–29 June 1943 that a total of 200 rebuilt Panthers were finally issued to Panther Regiment von Lauchert, of the XLVIII Panzer Corps (4 Panzer Army). Two were immediately lost due to motor fires upon disembarking from the trains.^[78] By 5 July, when the Battle of Kursk started, there were only 184 operational Panthers. Within two days, this had dropped to 40.^[78] On 17 July 1943 after Hitler had ordered a stop to the German offensive, Gen. Heinz Guderian sent in the following preliminary assessment of the Panthers:

Due to enemy action and mechanical breakdowns, the combat strength sank rapidly during the first few days. By the evening of 10 July there were only 10 operational Panthers in the front line. 25 Panthers had been lost as total writeoffs (23 were hit and burnt and two had caught fire during the approach march). 100 Panthers were in need of repair (56 were damaged by hits and mines and 44 by mechanical breakdown). 60 percent of the mechanical breakdowns could be easily repaired. Approximately 40 Panthers had already been repaired and were on the way to the front. About 25 still had not been recovered by the repair service ... On the evening of 11 July, 38 Panthers were operational, 31 were total write-offs and 131 were in need of repair. A slow increase in the combat strength is observable. The large number of losses by hits (81 Panthers up to 10 July) attests to the heavy fighting.^[78]

During Zitadelle the Panthers claimed 267 destroyed tanks.^[79]

A later report on 20 July 1943 showed 41 Panthers as operational, 85 as repairable, 16 severely damaged and needing repair in Germany, 56 burnt out (because of enemy action), and two that had been destroyed by motor fires.^[80]

However, before the Germans ended their offensive at Kursk, the Soviets began their counteroffensive, and succeeded in pushing the Germans back into a steady retreat. Thus, a report on 11 August 1943 showed that the numbers of total write-offs in Panthers swelled to 156, with only 9 operational. The German Army was forced into a fighting retreat and increasingly lost Panthers in combat as well as from abandoning and destroying damaged vehicles.^[80]

The Panther demonstrated its capacity to destroy any Soviet armoured fighting vehicle from long distance during the Battle of Kursk, and had a very high overall kill ratio.^[81] However, it constituted less than seven percent of the estimated 2,400–2,700 total armoured fighting vehicles deployed by the Germans in this battle,^[82] and its effectiveness was limited by its mechanical problems and the in-depth layered defence system of the Soviets at Kursk. Its greatest historical role in the battle may have been a highly negative one—its contribution to the decisions to delay the original start of Operation Zitadelle for a total of two months, time which the Soviets used to build up an enormous concentration of minefields, anti-tank guns, trenches and artillery defences.^[83]

After the losses of the Battle of Kursk, the German Army went into a permanent state of retreat against the Red Army. The numbers of Panthers were slowly re-built on the Eastern Front, and the operational percentage increased as its reliability was improved. In March 1944, Guderian reported: "Almost all the bugs have been worked out," although many units continued to report significant mechanical problems, especially with the final drive.^[84] The greatly outnumbered Panthers came to be used as mobile reserves to fight off major attacks.^[85]

The highest total number of operational Panthers on the Eastern Front was achieved in September 1944, when some 522 were listed as operational out of a total of 728. Throughout the rest of the war, Germany continued to keep the great majority of Panther forces on the Eastern Front, where the situation progressively worsened for the Germans. The last recorded status, on 15 March 1945, listed 740 on the Eastern Front with 361 operational.^[86] By this time the Red Army had entered East Prussia and was advancing through Poland.

In August 1944, Panthers were deployed during the Warsaw Uprising as mobile artillery and troop support. At least two of them were captured in the early days of the conflict and used in actions against Germans, including the liberation of the Gęsiówka concentration camp on 5 August, when the soldiers of "Wacek" platoon used the captured Panther (named "Magda") to destroy the bunkers and watchtowers of the camp. Most of the Germans in the camp were killed; the insurgents had lost two people and liberated almost 350 people. After several days they were immobilized due to the lack of fuel and batteries and were set ablaze to prevent them from being re-captured by the German forces.^[87]

Western Front – France

At the time of the invasion of Normandy in June 1944, there were initially only two Panther-equipped Panzer regiments in the Western Front, with a total of 156 Panthers between them. From June through August 1944, an additional seven Panther regiments were sent into France, reaching a maximum strength of 432 in a status report dated 30 July 1944.^[88]

The majority of the German tank forces in Normandy – six and a half divisions, were drawn into the fighting around the town of Caen. Here, they checked the Anglo-Canadian forces of the 21st Army Group. The numerous battles to secure the town became collectively known as the Battle of Caen. While there were sectors of heavy bocage around Caen, there were also many open fields which allowed the Panther to engage the attacking enemy armour at long range. Conversely, by the time of the Normandy Campaign, British Divisional Anti-tank Regiments were well equipped with the excellent 17 pounder gun (the 17pdr also replaced the US gun on some M10 Tank Destroyers in British service), making it equally as perilous for Panthers to attack across these same fields. The British had begun converting regular M4 Shermans to carry the 17 pounder gun (nicknamed Firefly) prior to the D-day landings, and while limited numbers meant that during Normandy not more than one Sherman in four were of the Firefly variant, the lethality of its gun against German armour made them priority targets for German gunners.

US forces in the meantime, facing one and a half German panzer divisions, mainly the Panzer Lehr Division, struggled in the heavy, low-lying bocage terrain west of Caen. Against the M4 Shermans of the Allied tank forces during this time, the Panther tank proved to be most effective when fighting in open country and shooting at long range — its combination of superior armour and firepower allowed it to engage at distances from which the Shermans could not respond.^[89] However, the Panther struggled in the bocage country of Normandy, and was vulnerable to side and close-in attacks in the built-up areas of cities and small towns.^[90] The commander of the Panzer Lehr Division, Gen. Fritz Bayerlein, reported on the difficulties experienced by the Panther tank in the fighting in Normandy:

While the PzKpfw IV could still be used to advantage, the PzKpfw V [Panther] proved ill adapted to the terrain. The Sherman because of its maneuverability and height was good ... [the Panther was] poorly suited for hedgerow terrain because of its width. Long gun barrel and width of tank reduce maneuverability in village and forest fighting. It is very front-heavy and therefore quickly wears out the front final drives, made of low-grade steel. High silhouette. Very sensitive power-train requiring well-trained drivers. Weak side armor; tank top vulnerable to fighter-bombers. Fuel lines of porous material that allow gasoline fumes to escape into the tank interior causing a grave fire hazard. Absence of vision slits makes defense against close attack impossible.^[90]

Through September and October, a series of new Panzerbrigades equipped with Panther tanks were sent into France to try to stop the Allied advance with counterattacks.^[91] This culminated in the Battle of Arracourt (18–29 September 1944), in which the mostly Panther-equipped German forces suffered heavy losses fighting against the 4th Armored Division of Patton's 3rd Army, which were still primarily equipped with 75 mm M4 Sherman tanks and yet came away from the battle with only a few losses. The Panther units were newly formed, poorly trained, and tactically disorganized; most units ended up stumbling into ambushes against seasoned U.S. tank crews.^[92]

Western Front – Ardennes Offensive

A status report on 15 December 1944 listed an all-time high of 471 Panthers assigned to the Western Front, with 336 operational (71 percent). This was one day before the start of the Battle of the Bulge; 400 of the tanks assigned to the Western Front were in units sent into the offensive.^[93]

The Panther once again demonstrated its prowess in open country, where it could hit its targets at long range with near-impunity, and its vulnerability in the close-in fighting of the small towns of the Ardennes, where they suffered heavy losses.^[94] A status report on January 15, 1945 showed only 97 operational Panthers left in the units involved in the operation, out of 282 still in their possession. Total writeoffs were listed as 198.^[95]

The Operation Greif commando mission included five Panthers assigned to Panzerbrigade 150, disguised to look like M10 Tank Destroyers by welding on additional plates, applying US-style camouflage paint and markings.^[93] This was carried out as part of a larger operation that involved soldiers disguised as Americans and to attack US troops from the rear. The disguised Panthers were detected and destroyed.

In February 1945, eight Panzer divisions with a total of 271 Panthers were transferred from the West to the Eastern Front. Only five Panther battalions remained in the west.^[96]

One of the top German Panther commanders was SS-Oberscharführer Ernst Barkmann of the 2nd SS-Panzer Regiment "Das Reich". By the end of the war, he had some 80 tank kills claimed.^[97]

Fortification

From 1943, Panther turrets were mounted in fixed fortifications; some were normal production models, but most were made specifically for the task, with additional roof armour to withstand artillery fire. Two types of turret emplacements were used; (Pantherturm III – Betonsockel — concrete base) and (Pantherturm I – Stahluntersatz — steel sub-base). They housed ammunition storage and fighting compartment along with crew quarters. A total of 182 of these were installed in the fortifications of the Atlantic Wall and Siegfried Line (Westwall), 48 in the Gothic Line and Hitler Line, 36 on the Eastern Front, and two for training and experimentation, for a total of 268 installations by March 1945. They proved to be costly to attack, and difficult to destroy.^[98]

Battalion organization

From September 1943, one Panzer battalion with 96 Panthers constituted the Panzer regiment of a Panzer-Division 43.^[99]

• Battalion Command (composed of Communication and Reconnaissance platoons)
• Communication Platoon – 3 × Befehlswagen Panther SdKfz.267/268
• Reconnaissance Platoon – 5 × Panther
• 1st Company – 22 × Panther
  • Company Command – 2 × Panther
    • 1st Platoon – 5 × Panther
    • 2nd Platoon – 5 × Panther
    • 3rd Platoon – 5 × Panther
    • 4th Platoon – 5 × Panther
• 2nd Company – 22 × Panther (composed as 1st Company)
• 3rd Company – 22 × Panther (composed as 1st Company)
• 4th Company – 22 × Panther (composed as 1st Company)
• Service Platoon – 2 × Bergepanther SdKfz.179

From 3 August 1944, the new Panzer-Division 44 organisation called for a Panzer division to consist of one Panzer regiment with two Panzer battalions – one of 96 Panzer IVs and one of 96 Panthers. Actual strengths tended to differ, and became far lower after losses.^[100]

The Allied response

Soviet

The Tiger I and Panther tanks were German responses to encountering the T-34 in 1941. Soviet firing tests against a captured Tiger in April 1943 showed that the T-34's 76 mm gun could not penetrate the front of the Tiger I and the side only at very close range. An existing Soviet 85 mm anti-aircraft gun, the D-5T, also proved disappointing. Several captured German Tiger I tanks were shipped to Chelyabinsk, where they were subjected to 85 mm fire from various angles. The 85 mm gun could not reliably penetrate the Tiger I except at ranges within the lethal envelope of the Tiger I's own 88 mm gun.^[101] The Soviets had already embarked on the 85 mm gun upgrade path before encountering the Panther tank at the Battle of Kursk.^[102][103]

After much development work, the first T-34-85 tanks entered combat in March 1944. The production version of the T-34's new 85 mm gun had to be aimed at the Panther's turret front and mantlet to penetrate, while the Panther's main gun could penetrate the T-34's glacis from 800 m (870 yd) at 30 degrees.^[104] Although the T-34-85 tank was not quite the equal of the Panther in the anti-tank role, it was much better than the 76.2 mm-armed versions and made up for it with proven reliability, more effective fragmentation shells, better fire control, superior mobility and production in greater quantities than the Panther. New tank destroyers based on the T-34 hull, such as the SU-85 and SU-100, were also developed. A Wa Pruef 1 report dated 5 October 1944 estimated that when set at a 30 degree angle the T-34-85's upper glacis could be penetrated by the Panther's 7.5 cm KwK 42 from 300 m (330 yd), the mantlet from 1,200 m (1,300 yd) and the turret front from 2,000 m (2,200 yd) while the T-34-85's 85 mm ZiS-S-53 could penetrate the Panther's frontal turret from 500 m (550 yd). From the side, the two were equivalent as both tanks could penetrate the other from ranges over 2,000 m (2,200 yd), further than any practical engagement distance.^[105]

The Battle of Kursk convinced the Soviets of the need for even greater firepower. A Soviet analysis of the battle in August 1943 showed that a Corps artillery piece, the A-19 122 mm gun, had done well against the German armoured fighting vehicles in that battle, and so development work on the 122 mm equipped IS-2 began in late 1943. First encounters with enemy tanks revealed that the 122 mm BR-471 shell could punch through the Panther's frontal armour at a range of 600–700 m (660–770 yd).^[106] The early results of the IS-2's combat employment which were confirmed by firing tests in Kubinka 1944 compelled the designers to seek innovate solutions.^[107] According to German tactical instructions a Panther had to close to 600 m (660 yd) to guarantee penetration of the IS-2 frontal armour while the IS-2 could penetrate the Panther at ranges of 1,000 m (1,100 yd).^{[108][Notes 2]}

A Wa Pruef 1 report states that when set an 30 degree angle the glacis plate of the Panther could not be penetrated by the 122 mm D-25T gun, the lower glacis could however be penetrated from 100 m (110 yd), the turret mantlet from 500 m (550 yd) and the turret front from 1,500 m (1,600 yd).^[105] The Panther's 75 mm gun could penetrate the IS-2 model 1943's mantlet from 400 m (440 yd), turret from 800 m (870 yd), and driver's front plate from 600 m (660 yd). From the side, the Panther's armour was penetrable by the 122 mm D-25T from over 3,500 m (3,800 yd).^[105] The Panther carried more ammunition and had a faster firing cycle: for every 1-1.5 shots of the IS-2, the Panther and Tiger could fire 3-4 times. ^[109] With the addition of a semi-automatic drop breech over the previously manual screw, the rate of fire increased to 2-3 rounds per minute.^[110] This breech modification increased the IS-2's rate of fire to 3-4 rounds per minute.^[111]

American and British

The response of the Western Allies to the Panther was confused. The Western Allies were aware of the Panther and had access to technical details through the Soviets, but there was a difference in the American and British camps as to the significance of the tank. After taking two years to catch up with German tank design in Africa, the British were wary of falling behind yet again. They had developed the excellent 17-pounder anti-tank gun, but did not yet have a vehicle in service that could fit this large gun into its turret. For its part, the U.S. Army did not believe the Panther would be a significant problem, and did not foresee their armoured forces having to fight pitched engagements against the Panther. The Panther was not seen in combat by the Western Allies until early 1944 at Anzio in Italy, where Panthers were employed in small numbers. Until just before D-Day (6 June 1944), the Panther was thought to be another heavy tank that would not be built in large numbers.

Shortly before D-Day, Allied intelligence reported that large numbers of Panthers were being used in the panzer divisions, and an attempt was made to investigate Panther production. Using a statistical analysis of the serial numbers on the road wheels on two captured tanks, U.S. intelligence estimated Panther production for February 1944 to be 270 units, much greater than what had been anticipated.^{[Notes 3]} This estimate was very accurate, especially compared to previous methods, as German records after the war showed production of Panthers for the month of February 1944 was 276. This indicated the Panther would be encountered in much larger numbers than had previously been thought.^[112] In the planning for the Battle of Normandy, the U.S. Army expected to face a handful of German heavy tanks alongside large numbers of Panzer IVs. At this point it was too late to prepare to face the Panther. As it turned out, 38% of the German tanks in Normandy were Panthers, whose frontal armour could not be penetrated by the 75 mm guns of the US M4 Sherman.

The British were more astute in their recognition of the danger posed by the increasing armour strength of German tanks. Work on a more powerful anti-tank gun had started in 1941, and the tanks to use it in 1942. When these programmes were delayed, a stop-gap solution was found. The 17-pdr could through modifications be fitted to a Sherman, and orders for this Sherman Firefly were placed in 1943. By the time of the Normandy invasion 340 Sherman Fireflies were available to the Commonwealth armoured divisions. The British lobbied for American production lines to be modified to produce Fireflies, but these suggestions were ignored by the U.S. Army, in part due to the poor performance of British tank designs in North Africa.^[113] There were also 200 interim Challenger tanks with the 17-pounder and other improved tank designs were under development. British and Commonwealth tank units in Normandy were initially equipped at the rate of one Firefly in a troop with three Shermans or Cromwells. This ratio increased until, by the end of the war, half of the British Shermans were Fireflies. The Comet with a gun similar to the 17-pounder had also replaced the 75 mm gun Sherman in some British units. The 17-pounder with APCBC shot was more or less equivalent in performance to the Panther's 75 mm gun, but superior with APDS shot.^[114]

At the time, U.S. armour doctrine was dominated by the head of Army Ground Forces, Gen. Lesley McNair. An artilleryman by trade, he believed that tanks should concentrate on infantry support and exploitation roles and avoid enemy tanks, leaving them to be dealt with by the tank destroyer force, which were a mix of towed anti-tank guns and lightly armoured fighting vehicles with open top turrets with 3-inch (76.2 mm) (M10 tank destroyer), 76 mm (M18 Hellcat) or later, 90 mm (M36 tank destroyer) guns. This doctrine led to a lack of urgency in the U.S. Army to upgrade the armour and firepower of the M4 Sherman tank, which had previously done well against the most common German tanks – Panzer IIIs and Panzer IVs – in Africa and Italy. As with the Soviets, the German adoption of thicker armour and the 7.5 cm KwK 40 in their standard armoured fighting vehicles prompted the U.S. Army to develop the more powerful 76 mm version of the M4 Sherman tank in April 1944. Development of a heavier tank, the M26 Pershing, was delayed mainly by McNair's insistence on "battle need" and emphasis on producing only reliable, well-tested weapons, a reflection of America's 3,000 mi (4,800 km) supply line to Europe.^[115]

An AGF (Armored Ground Forces) policy statement of November 1943 concluded the following:

The recommendation of a limited proportion of tanks carrying a 90mm gun is not concurred in for the following reasons: The M4 tank has been hailed widely as the best tank of the battlefield today....There appears to be no fear on the part of our forces of the German Mark VI (Tiger) tank. There can be no basis for the T26 tank other than the conception of a tank-vs.-tank duel-which is believed to be unsound and unnecessary. Both British and American battle experience has demonstrated that the antitank gun in suitable numbers is the master of the tank....There has been no indication that the 76mm antitank gun is inadequate against German Mark VI tank.^[116]

U.S. awareness of the inadequacies of their tanks grew only slowly. All U.S. M4 Shermans that landed in Normandy in June 1944 had the 75 mm gun. The 75 mm M4 gun could not penetrate the Panther from the front at all, although it could penetrate various parts of the Panther from the side at ranges from 400 to 2,600 m (440 to 2,840 yd). The 76 mm gun could also not penetrate the front hull armour of the Panther, but could penetrate the Panther turret mantlet at very close range.^[117] In August 1944, the HVAP (high velocity armour-piercing) 76 mm round was introduced to improve the performance of the 76 mm M4 Shermans. With a tungsten core, this round could still not penetrate the Panther glacis plate, but could punch through the Panther mantlet at 730 to 910 m (800 to 1,000 yd), instead of the usual 91 m (100 yd) for the normal 76 mm round. However, tungsten production shortages meant that this round was always in short supply, with only a few rounds available per tank, and some M4 Sherman units never received any.^[118]

Whereas Sherman tanks used a high flash powder, making it easier for German tankers to spot them, German tanks used a low flash powder, making it harder for Allied crews to spot them.^[113] Shermans, even though they were around 15 tons lighter than Panthers, had worse cross country mobility due to their narrower tracks. A US corporal stated:

I saw where some MkV tanks crossed a muddy field without sinking the tracks over five inches, where we in the M4 started across the same field the same day and bogged down.^{[119][page needed]}

The 90 mm M36 tank destroyer was introduced in September 1944; the 90 mm round also proved to have difficulty penetrating the Panther's glacis plate, and it was not until an HVAP version of the round was developed that it could effectively penetrate it from combat range. It was very effective against the Panther's front turret and from the side, however.^[120]

The high U.S. tank losses in the Battle of the Bulge against a force largely of Panther tanks brought about a clamour for better armour and firepower. At General Eisenhower's request, only 76 mm gun-armed M4 Shermans were shipped to Europe for the remainder of the war. Small numbers of the M26 Pershing were also rushed into combat in late February 1945.^[121] A dramatic newsreel film was recorded by a U.S. Signal Corps cameraman of an M26 stalking and then blowing up a Panther in the city of Cologne, after the Panther had knocked out two M4 Shermans.^[122]

Production of Panther tanks and other German tanks dropped off sharply after January 1945, and eight of the Panther regiments still on the Western Front were transferred to the Eastern Front in February 1945. The result was that for the rest of the war during 1945, the greatest threats to the tanks of the Western Allies were no longer German tanks, but infantry anti-tank weapons such as the Panzerschreck and Panzerfaust, and infantry anti-tank guns such as the ubiquitous 7.5 cm Pak 40, and tank destroyers such as the Marder, StuG III, StuG IV, and Jagdpanzer. A German Army status report dated 15 March 1945 showed 117 Panthers left in the entire Western Front, of which only 49 were operational.^[123]

Further development

Panther II

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2009)

The early impetus for upgrading the Panther came from the concern of Hitler and others that it lacked sufficient armour. Hitler had already insisted on an increase in its armour once, early in its design process in 1942. Discussions involving Hitler in January 1943 called further increased armour; initially referred to as Panther 2 (it became the Panther II after April 1943). This upgrade increased the thickness of the glacis plate to 100 mm (3.9 in), the side armour to 60 mm (2.4 in), and the top armour to 30 mm (1.2 in). Production of the Panther 2 was slated to begin in September 1943.

In a meeting on 10 February 1943, further design changes were proposed – including changes to the steering gears and final drives. Another meeting on 17 February 1943 focused on sharing and standardizing parts between the Tiger II tank and the Panther 2, such as the transmission, all-steel roadwheels, and running gear. Additional meetings in February began to outline the various components, including a suggestion to use the 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 gun, however it was ultimately decided to use the 7.5 cm KwK 42 L/70.^[124] In March 1943, MAN indicated that the first prototype would be completed by August 1943. A number of engines were under consideration, among them the new Maybach HL 234 fuel-injected engine (900 hp operated by an 8-speed hydraulic transmission) and the BMW 003 aviation turbojet-derived, GT 101 gas turbine, planned to be of some 1,150 shaft horsepower output.

Thus, plans to replace the original Panther design with the Panther II were already underway before the first Panther had even seen combat. But from May to June 1943, work on the Panther II ceased as the focus was shifted to expanding production of the original Panther tank. It is not clear if there was ever an official cancellation – this may have been because the Panther II upgrade pathway was originally started at Hitler's insistence. The direction that the design was headed would not have been consistent with Germany's need for a mass-produced tank, which was the goal of the Reich Ministry of Armament and War Production.

One Panther II chassis was completed and eventually captured by the U.S.; it is now on display at the Patton Museum in Fort Knox. An Ausf G turret is mounted on this chassis.^[125][126]

Panther Ausf. F

After the Panther II project died, a more limited upgrade of the Panther was planned, centred around a re-designed turret. The Ausf F variant was slated for production in April 1945, but the war ended these plans.

The earliest known redesign of the turret was dated 7 November 1943 and featured a narrow gun mantlet behind a 120 mm (4.7 in) thick turret front plate. Another design drawing by Rheinmetall dated 1 March 1944 reduced the width of the turret front even further; this was the Turm-Panther (Schmale Blende) (Panther with narrow gun mantlet).^[127]

Several experimental Schmaltürme (literally: "narrow turrets") were built in 1944 with modified versions of the 7.5 cm KwK 42 L/70, which were given the designation of KwK 44/1. A few were captured and shipped back to the U.S. and Britain. One badly damaged vehicle is on display at the Bovington Tank Museum. It had been used as a post-war range target until its historical significance was recognised.

The Schmalturm had a much narrower front face of 120 mm (4.7 in) armour sloped at 20 degrees; side turret armour was increased to 60 mm (2.4 in) from 45 mm (1.8 in); roof turret armour increased to 40 mm (1.6 in) from 16 mm (0.63 in); and a bell shaped gun mantlet similar to that of the Tiger II was used. This increased armour protection also had a slight weight saving due to the overall smaller size of the turret.^[128]

The Panther Ausf F would have had the Schmalturm, with its better ballistic protection, and an extended front hull roof which was slightly thicker. The Ausf F's Schmalturm was to have a built-in stereoscopic rangefinder and lower weight than the original turrets. A number of Ausf F hulls were built at Daimler-Benz and Ruhrstahl-Hattingen steelworks; however there is no evidence that any completed Ausf F saw service before the end of the war.

Proposals to equip the Schmalturm with the 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 were made from January through March 1945. These would have likely equipped future German tanks but none were built, as the war ended.^[129]

E-50

The E series of tanks — E-10, E-25, E-50, E-75, E-100 (the numbers designated their weight class) – was proposed to further streamline production with an even greater sharing of common parts and simplification of design. In this scheme, the Panther tank would have evolved into the E-50. A conical spring system was proposed to replace the complex and costly dual torsion bar system. The Schmalturm would have been used, likely with a variant of the 8.8 cm L/71 gun.^[130]

Derived vehicles

• Jagdpanther – heavy tank destroyer with the 8.8 cm L/71
• Befehlspanzer Panther – command tank with additional radio equipment
• Beobachtungspanzer Panther – artillery observation tank; dummy gun; armed with only two MG 34
• Bergepanther – armoured recovery vehicle
• Flakpanzer Coelian – self-propelled anti-aircraft gun project, planned to be armed with twin Flak 43 37 mm AA guns in an armoured turret ^[131]

Postwar and foreign use

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2009)

Although a technologically sophisticated vehicle, the Panther's design had a very limited influence on postwar tank development. The French postwar AMX 50 tank prototype was indirectly influenced by it through the Entwicklung series, but never entered series production. It is claimed that the Panther was arguably a "forebearer" to the modern main battle tank.^[132]

The Panther itself also saw some limited use outside the German military, both before and after 1945.

During the war, the Red Army employed a number of captured Panthers. These were repainted with prominent Soviet emblems and tactical markings to avoid friendly fire incidents. The Red Army still used a few Panthers as late as spring 1945.^{[citation needed]} Unlike captured Panzer IVs and StuGs the Soviets generally only used Panthers and Tigers that had been captured intact and used them until they broke down, as they were too complex and difficult to transport for repair. Panzer IVs and StuGs, on the other hand, were so numerous in terms of spare parts and easy to repair that they could be used over a much longer period in combat conditions.

During March–April 1945 Bulgaria received 15 Panthers of various makes (D, A and G's) from captured and overhauled Soviet stocks; they only saw limited (training) service use. They were dug down, with automotive components removed, as pillboxes along the Bulgarian-Turkish border as early as the late 1940s. The final fate of these pillbox Panthers is unknown, but sources indicate that they were replaced and scrapped in the 1950s.

In May 1946, Romania received 13 Panther tanks from the USSR. They were initially used by the 1st Armoured Brigade, but in 1947 the equipment was ceded to the Soviet-organized "Tudor Vladimirescu Division" which was transformed from a volunteer infantry division into an armoured one. The Panther tank was officially known as T-5 in the army inventory. These tanks were in poor shape and remained in service until about 1950, by which time the Romanian Army had received T-34-85 tanks. All of the tanks were scrapped by 1954. The tanks were different models: Ausf A, Ausf D and Ausf G.^[133] They were shown to the public in 1948, during the 1st of May parade in Bucharest, painted with Romanian markings. Until 1950, the T-5 was the heaviest tank available to the Romanian Army.

One captured vehicle (named "Cuckoo") also saw service with the British Coldstream Guards for some time.^[134]

Germany sold Japan a single Panther along with a Tiger in September 1943 however by the time it was ready in 1944 it was impossible to ship due to Allied Naval interdiction.^[135]

After the war, France was able to recover enough operable vehicles and components to equip the French Army's 503e Régiment de Chars de Combat with a force of fifty Panthers. These remained in service until about 1950, by which time they had all been replaced by French-built ARL 44 heavy tanks.

In 1946, Sweden sent a delegation to France to examine surviving specimens of German military vehicles. During their visit, the delegates found a few surviving Panthers and had one shipped to Sweden for further testing and evaluation. Testing continued until 1961. The tank is currently on display in the Deutsches Panzermuseum in Munster.^[136]

The last 'production' Panthers were produced at the factory by German staff just after the end of World War II under the supervision of the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (REME) using available components. A complete Panther and a complete Jagdpanther produced this way were shipped back to Britain for post-war trials. Both vehicles are now at the Bovington Tank Museum, Dorset, with brass plates on them, explaining their history.

1947 French assessment

The French army used captured Panther tanks from 1944 to 1947 making it the operator with the longest experience with the vehicles. They were used by the 501st and 503rd Tank Regiments. In 1947 the French War Ministry wrote an evaluation of them entitled Le Panther 1947. The Panther was not considered a strategic tank by the French because of its high rate of breakdown.^[137]

Some excerpts from the report:^[4]

• The turret traverse drive is not strong enough to either turn the turret or hold it in place when the Panther is on an incline of more than 20 degrees. The Panther is therefore not capable of firing when driving cross-country.
• Elevating the gun is normally simple, but made difficult if the pneumatic assist operated by compressed nitrogen has lost pressure.
• The clarity and ranging reticles of the periscope gun sight was excellent and more effective than of the allied counterpart, the Sherman. Aside from his periscope gun sight, the gunner has no other type of observation device. He is therefore practically blind, one of the greatest shortcomings of the Panther.
• The commander's cupola with its 7 periscopes provides a nearly perfect all-round visibility. Periscopes damaged by shells can be replaced very quickly.
• A scissors periscope with large magnification power was affixed to a bracket in the commander's cupola.
• The gunsight with two magnification stages is remarkably clear and has its field of view clear in the centre. The gunsight enables observation of a target and shells out to over 3,000 m (3,300 yd).
• Once the commander has located a target, it takes between 20 and 30 seconds until the gunner can open fire. This data, which is significantly greater than that of the Sherman, stems from the absence of a periscope for the gunner.
• A smoke grenade thrown onto the rear deck or the vent openings of the engine will start a fire.
• The running gear is sensitive to HE shells. Calibres 105 mm and greater can render the vehicle immobile (Rammersmatt, 8 December 1944).
• Fragmentation shells or 75 mm rounds which strike in the same spot on the front plate can penetrate it or cause the weld seams to break (Miinsingen, 1946).

The major drawback of the vehicle was its mechanical unreliability. The Panther was supposed to last for 5,000 km (3,100 mi), but many of the parts did not last that long. The tracks and running gear had a life of 2,000–3,000 km (1,200–1,900 mi). The engine on average only lasted 1,000 km (620 mi). Most importantly the final drive only had a life of 150 km (93 mi). Half of the Panthers found in Normandy were abandoned due to their final drives breaking down. For that reason the Germans tried to move the Panthers by train as much as possible even for short journeys of 25 km (16 mi).^[137]

The French paper put into question the claim that the Panther tank was one of the best of World War II. It was well suited for the defensive battles that the Germans found themselves in from 1944-45 where its thick frontal armour and long range gun could be put to good use. However it was not well suited for close range engagements because the gunner took so long in acquiring his target after the commander identified it. More importantly, its mechanical drawbacks meant that it could not carry out any sustained offensive operations like the German Panzer IV, the Soviet T-34, the American Sherman or the British Cromwell.^[4]

Gallery

• 

  Panthers, already with brush camouflage attached, being transported by rail to the front in France.

• 

  Panther with full Schürzen spaced armour attached, intended to supplement the side armour above the large wheels.

• 

  Panther with Schürzen partially attached. They were difficult to maintain in place when travelling through heavy brush.

• 

  Showing the Panther turret's rear access hatch.

• 

  Road gantry Strabokran, which was indispensable to maintain the Panther tank in the field.

Surviving vehicles

In working order.^[138]

• Military Vehicle Technology Foundation, USA. Ausf. A
• Musée des Blindés, France. Ausf. A
• Deutsches Panzermuseum, Munster, Germany. Ausf. A Command Tank
• Wehrtechnische Studiensammlung, Koblenz, Germany. Ausf. G. Completed after the war in the Panther factory under supervision by UK REME engineers, used for tests
• Friedrich Christian Flick Private Collection, Germany. Ausf. G. Completed after the war in the Panther factory under supervision by UK REME engineers, used for tests
• Kubinka Tank Museum, Russia. Ausf.G

Not running, more or less complete.^[138]

• Wilhelmina park, Breda, The Netherlands. The only known complete surviving Ausf. D. This tank was donated by the Polish 1st Armored Division after liberating Breda. It was restored in 2004–2005 for static display by Kevin Wheatcroft in exchange for its automotive components.
• Panzermuseum Thun, Thun, Switzerland. Advertised as an Ausf. D/G hybrid, with a D hull and G turret. There are many questions surrounding this vehicle. The turret has a replacement sheet metal mantlet, vaguely resembling a late Ausf. G mantlet, with no ports for gunners sight or coaxial MG. The pistol port on the turret rear indicates an Ausf. An or early Ausf G. The hull with the "letterbox" MG slot indicates an Ausf. D or early Ausf. A. The turret and hull numbers could help identify the correct model designation for the hybrid but neither of the numbers have been made public.
• The Wheatcroft Collection, private collector, UK. The collection has three Panthers, one being restored. Early Ausf. A (DEMAG production).

• Canadian War Museum. In January 2008 a partially restored Panther Ausf. A was put on display. It had been donated to the museum from CFB Borden, which acquired it following V-E celebrations in May 1945. It had spent two years in restoration prior to being put on public display.^[136]
• Rex & Rod Cadman Collection, UK. Ausf. A
• Sinsheim Auto & Technik Museum, Sinsheim, Germany. Ausf. A
• Musée des Blindés, Saumur, France. Ausf. A, Ausf. G
• Mourmelon-le-Grand, France. Ausf. A
• Bovington Tank Museum, UK. Ausf. G. Completed after the war in the Panther factory under supervision by UK REME engineers, used for tests.^[139]

• Houffalize in the Ardennes region of Belgium. A Panther Ausf. G can be found in the village. It fell into the river during the Battle of the Bulge and was later retrieved as a memorial.
• The National War and Resistance Museum, Overloon, in the Netherlands, has an Ausf. G that was knocked out by a PIAT projectile during the battle of Overloon.
• U.S. Army's National Armor & Cavalry Museum, Fort Benning, GA, USA, collection consists of the following 4 Panthers: Pz V Ausf. A; Pz V Ausf. G; Pz V Ausf. G with chin; & Panther II. Several of these were part of the Ordnance collection that was at Aberdeen, MD

Wrecks.^[138]

• Sinsheim Auto & Technik Museum, Sinsheim, Germany. Ausf. A
• Overlord Museum, Colleville-sur-Mer (ex-Falaise August 1944 museum), France. Ausf. A. Will be cosmetically restored and displayed in the new museum in a diorama representing a field repair unit of the Wehrmacht, along with a Strabo Fries gantry.^[140]
• Kevin Wheatcroft, private collector, UK. Two Ausf. A, one to be restored and one to be restored to Ausf. D
• Grandmenil, Belgium. Ausf. G
• Celles, Houyet, Belgium. Ausf. G

Detailed specifications

Crew: 5 Dimensions Length including gun: 8.66 m (28 ft 5 in) hull only: 6.87 m (22 ft 6 in) Width: hull: 3.27 m (10 ft 9 in) with skirt plates: 3.42 m (11 ft 3 in) Height: 2.99 m (9 ft 10 in) Combat weight: Ausf. D 43.0 tonnes Ausf. A 45.5 tonnes Ausf. G 44.8 tonnes (46.58 tonnes with steel road wheels) Performance Road speed: 55 km/h (34 mph) at 3,000 rpm (46 km/h (29 mph) at 2,500 rpm) Road range: 200 km (120 mi)

Obstacle crossing Vertical obstacle: 0.9 m (2 ft 11 in) Trench crossing: 1.9 m (6 ft 3 in) Fording: 1.7 m (5 ft 7 in) Suspension and tracks type: dual torsion-bar Shock absorbers: on 2nd and 7th swing arms on either side Track type: Kgs 64/660/150 dual centre guide Track width: 660 mm (26 in) Ground contact length: 3.92 m (12 ft 10 in) Track links: 86 Ground pressure: 0.88 kg/cm²

Engine and transmission Maybach HL 230 P30 V-12, four-stroke internal combustion Displacement: 23.095 litres (5.080 imp gal; 6.101 US gal) Compression ratio: 6.8:1 Fuel: petrol, 74 octane Power: 700 PS at 3,000 rpm, 600 PS at 2,500 rpm Fuel consumption (road): 3.5 l/km (0.81 mpg-imp; 0.67 mpg-US) Fuel capacity: 720 l (160 imp gal; 190 US gal) Transmission: ZF AK 7-200 synchromesh manual Gears: 7 forward, 1 reverse Steering: MAN single-radius clutch-brake Main clutch: Fichtel & Sachs LAG 3/70H Steering ratio: 1:1.5

Armament Main gun: 7.5 cm Kwk 42 L/70 Breech: semiautomatic Traverse: 360°, 24°/second Elevation: +18°/-8° Rounds carried: 79; Ausf. G: 82 Primary gun sight: Leitz TZF 12; Ausf. A and G: TZF 12a Magnification: 2.5×/5× Field of view: 28°/14° Radio equipment Fu 5 transmitter/receiver Fu 2 receiver

armour

All angles from horizontal.

• Hull front, lower: 60 mm (2.4 in) at 35°; upper: 80 mm (3.1 in) at 35°
• Hull side, lower: 40 mm (1.6 in) at 90°; upper: 40 mm (1.6 in) at 50°; Ausf. G: 50 mm (2.0 in) at 60°
• Hull rear: 40 mm (1.6 in) at 60°
• Turret front: 80 mm (3.1 in) at 78°; Ausf. A: 110 mm (4.3 in) at 78°; Ausf. G: 100 mm (3.9 in) at 80°
• Turret side: 45 mm (1.8 in) at 65°
• Turret rear: 45 mm (1.8 in) at 65°
• Turret, top: 16 mm (0.63 in) at 5°; Ausf. G: 30 mm (1.2 in) at 5°
• Gun mantlet: 100 mm (3.9 in) rounded

See also

• German tank problem

References

Notes

Tiger I


 is the common name of a German heavy tank developed in 1942 and used in World War II. The final official German designation was Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger Ausf.E, often shortened to Tiger. The Tiger I gave the Wehrmacht its first tank which mounted the 88 mm gun in its first armoured fighting vehicle-dedicated version: the KwK 36. During the course of the war, the Tiger I saw combat on all German battlefronts. It was usually deployed in independent tank battalions, which proved highly effective.

While the Tiger I has been called an outstanding design^[5] it was over-engineered,^[6] using expensive materials and labour-intensive production methods. Only 1,347 were built between August 1942 and August 1944. The Tiger was prone to certain types of track failures and breakdowns, and limited in range by its high fuel consumption. It was expensive to maintain, but generally mechanically reliable. It was also difficult to transport, and vulnerable to immobilization when mud, ice and snow froze between its overlapping and interleaved Schachtellaufwerk-pattern road wheels in both rasputitsa and succeeding winter weather conditions, often jamming them solid. In 1944, production was phased out in favour of the Tiger II.

The tank was given its nickname "Tiger" by Ferdinand Porsche, and the Roman numeral was added after the later Tiger II entered production. The initial official German designation was Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausführung H (‘Panzer VI version H’, abbreviated PzKpfw VI Ausf. H), with ordnance inventory designation SdKfz 182, but the tank was redesignated as PzKpfw VI Ausf. E in March 1943, with ordnance inventory designation SdKfz 181.

Today, only a handful of Tigers survive in museums and exhibitions worldwide. The Bovington Tank Museum's Tiger 131 is currently the only one restored to running order.

Contents

• 1 Design history
• 2 Design
  • 2.1 Armour
  • 2.2 Gun
  • 2.3 Engine and drive
  • 2.4 Suspension
  • 2.5 Fording system
  • 2.6 Crew compartment
  • 2.7 Cost
• 3 Production history
• 4 Variants
• 5 Designations
• 6 Combat history
  • 6.1 Gun and armour performance
  • 6.2 First actions
  • 6.3 Mobility and reliability
  • 6.4 Tactical organization
  • 6.5 Notable "aces"
• 7 Allied response
• 8 Operators
• 9 Survivors
  • 9.1 Tiger 131
  • 9.2 Others
• 10 See also
  • 10.1 Tanks of comparable role, performance and era
• 11 Notes
• 12 References
• 13 Further reading
• 14 External links

Design history

Henschel & Sohn began development of a large tank design in January 1937 when the Waffenamt requested Henschel to develop a Durchbruchwagen ("breakthrough vehicle") in the 30-33 tonne range.^[7] Only one prototype hull was ever built and it was never built with a turret. The Durchbruchwagen DW.I general shape and suspension resembled the Panzer III while the turret resembled the early Panzer IVC turret with the short barrelled 7.5 cm L/24 cannon.

Before Durchbruchwagen I was completed, a request was issued for a heavier 30 tonne class vehicle with thicker armour; this was the Durchbruchwagen II, which would have had 50 mm (2 inches) of frontal armour and mounted a Panzer IV turret with a short-barrelled 7.5 cm L/24 gun. Overall weight would have been 36 tonnes. Only one hull was built and no turret fitted. Development of this vehicle was dropped in 1938 in favour of the larger and better armoured VK 30.01 (H) and VK 36.01 (H) designs.^[8] Both the Durchbruchwagen I and II prototype hulls were used as test vehicles until 1941.

The VK 30.01 (H) medium tank and the VK 36.01 (H) heavy tank designs, pioneered the Schachtellaufwerk - already common on German half-tracks such as the SdKfz 7 - overlapping and interleaved main road wheels for tank use.

The VK 30.01 (H) was intended to mount a low velocity 7.5 cm L/24 infantry support gun, a 7.5 cm L/40 dual purpose anti-tank gun, or a 10.5 cm L/28 field gun in a Krupp turret. Overall weight was to be 33 tonnes. The armour was designed to be 50 mm on frontal surfaces and 30 mm on the side surfaces. Four prototype hulls were completed for testing. Two of these were later modified to build the "Sturer Emil" (12.8 cm Selbstfahrlafette L/61) self-propelled anti-tank gun.

The VK 36.01 (H) was intended to weigh 40 tonnes, with 100 mm (4 inches) of armour on front surfaces, 80 mm on turret sides and 60 mm on the hull sides. The VK 36.01 (H) was intended to carry a 7.5 cm L/24, or a 7.5 cm L/43, or a 7.5 cm L/70, or a 12.8 cm L/28 cannon in a Krupp turret that looked similar to an enlarged Panzer IVC turret. The hull for one prototype was built, followed later by five more. The six turrets built were never fitted and were used as part of the Atlantic Wall. The VK 36.01 (H) project was discontinued in early 1942 in favour of the VK 45.01 project.

Combat experience against the French Somua S35 cavalry tank and Char B1 heavy tank, and the British Matilda II infantry tanks during the Battle of France in June 1940 showed that the German Army needed better armed and armoured tanks.^[9]


The Porsche prototype

On 26 May 1941, Henschel and Ferdinand Porsche were asked to submit designs for a 45 tonne heavy tank, to be ready by June 1942.^[10] Porsche worked on an updated version of their VK 30.01 (P) Leopard tank prototype while Henschel worked on an improved VK 36.01 (H) tank. Henschel built two prototypes: a VK 45.01 (H) H1 with a 88 mm L/56 cannon, and a VK 45.01 (H) H2 with a 75 mm L/70 cannon.

On 22 June 1941, Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the Soviet Union. The Germans were shocked to encounter Soviet T-34 medium and KV-1 heavy tanks that completely outclassed anything the Germans were currently fielding.^[11] According to Henschel designer Erwin Aders: "There was great consternation when it was discovered that the Soviet tanks were superior to anything available to the Heer."^[12] The T-34 was almost immune from the front to every gun in German service except the 88 mm Flak gun. Panzer IIIs with the 5 cm KwK 38 L/42 main armament could penetrate the sides of a T-34, but only at short range. The KV-1 was immune to all but the 8.8 cm Flak guns.

An immediate weight increase to 45 tonnes and an increase in gun calibre to 88 mm was ordered. The due date for the new prototypes was set for 20 April 1942, Adolf Hitler's birthday. Unlike the Panther tank, the designs did not incorporate sloping armour, an innovation taken from the T-34.

Porsche and Henschel submitted prototype designs, each making use of the Krupp-designed turret. They were demonstrated at Rastenburg in front of Hitler. The Henschel design was accepted, mainly because the Porsche design used a troubled gasoline-electric hybrid power unit which needed large quantities of copper, a strategic war material that Germany had limited supplies of.^[13] Production of the Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf. H began in August 1942. Expecting an order for his tank, Porsche built 100 chassis. After losing the contract, they were used for a new turretless, casemate-style tank destroyer; ninety-one hulls were converted into the Panzerjäger Tiger (P) in the spring of 1943.

The Tiger was still at the prototype stage when it was first hurried into service, and therefore changes both large and small were made throughout the production run. A redesigned turret with a lower cupola was the most significant change. To cut costs, the submersion capability and an external air-filtration system were dropped.

Design

The Tiger differed from earlier German tanks principally in its design philosophy. Its predecessors balanced mobility, armour and firepower, and were sometimes outgunned by their opponents.

The Tiger I represented a new approach that emphasised firepower and armour. While heavy, this tank was not slower than the best of its opponents. However, at over 50 tonnes dead weight, the suspension, gearboxes, and other such items had clearly reached their design limits and breakdowns were frequent.

Although the general design and layout were broadly similar to the previous medium tank, the Panzer IV, the Tiger weighed more than twice as much. This was due to its substantially thicker armour, the larger main gun, greater volume of fuel and ammunition storage, larger engine, and more solidly built transmission and suspension.

Armour


The Tiger I's armour was up to 120 mm on the mantlet. This tank is assigned to the schwere SS-Panzer-Abteilung 101 operating in northern France in 1944.

The Tiger I had frontal hull armour 100 mm (3.9 in) thick, frontal turret armour of 100 mm (3.9 in) and a 120 mm (4.7 in) thick gun mantlet.^[14] The Tiger had 60 mm (2.4 in) thick hull side plates and 80 mm armour on the side superstructure/sponsons, while turret sides and rear were 80 mm. The top and bottom armour was 25 mm (1 in) thick; from March 1944, the turret roof was thickened to 40 mm (1.6 in).^[3] Armour plates were mostly flat, with interlocking construction. The armour joints were of high quality, being stepped and welded rather than riveted and were made of maraging steel. This made the Tiger immune to the front from the 75mm gun of the American M4 Sherman tank.




Gun


Turmzielfernrohr TZF 9c gun sight
Main article: 8.8 cm KwK 36

The 56-calibre long 88 mm KwK 36 was chosen for the Tiger. It was, along with the Tiger II's 71-calibre long 88 mm KwK 43, one of the most formidable tank guns of World War II.

A combination of a flat trajectory from the high muzzle velocity and precision Leitz Turmzielfernrohr TZF 9b sight (later replaced^[why?] by the monocular TZF 9c) made it very accurate.

In British wartime firing trials, five successive hits were scored on a 410 by 460 mm (16 by 18 in) target at a range of 1,100 metres (3,600 ft).^[12]

Tigers were reported to have knocked out enemy tanks at ranges of more than 4.0 kilometres (2.5 mi).


Loading ammunition

The ammunition for the Tiger had electrically fired primers. Four types of ammunition were available but not all were fully available; the PzGr 40 shell used tungsten which was in short supply as the war progressed.

• PzGr. 39 (armour-piercing, capped, ballistic cap)
• PzGr. 40 (armour-piercing, composite rigid)
• Hl. Gr. 39 (high explosive anti-tank)
• sch. Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (incendiary shrapnel)

Engine and drive


Crew working on the engine through the hatch on the rear hull roof

The rear of the tank held an engine compartment flanked by two separate rear compartments each containing a fuel tank, radiator and fans. The Germans had not developed an adequate diesel engine, so a petrol (gasoline) powerplant had to be used instead. The original engine utilised was a 21.35-litre (1303 cu.in.) 12-cylinder Maybach HL 210 P45 developing 485 kW (650 hp) at 3,000 rpm. Although a good engine, it was underpowered for the vehicle. From the 251st Tiger onwards, it was replaced by the upgraded HL 230 P45, a 23.095 litre (1409 cu.in.) engine developing 521 kW (700 hp) at 3,000 rpm.^[15] The main difference between these engines was that the original Maybach HL 210 used an aluminium engine block while the Maybach HL 230 used a cast-iron engine block. The cast-iron block allowed for larger cylinders (and thus, greater displacement) which increased the power output to 521 kW (700 hp). The engine was in V-form, with two cylinder banks set at 60 degrees. An inertial starter was mounted on its right side, driven via chain gears through a port in the rear wall. The engine could be lifted out through a hatch on the rear hull roof.

The engine drove front sprockets, which were mounted quite low. The Krupp-designed 11-tonne turret had a hydraulic motor whose pump was powered by mechanical drive from the engine. A full rotation took about a minute.

Another new feature was the Maybach-Olvar hydraulically controlled semi-automatic pre-selector gearbox. The extreme weight of the tank also required a new steering system. The clutch-and-brake system, typical for lighter vehicles, was retained only for emergencies. Normally, steering depended on a double differential, Henschel's development of the British Merritt-Brown system.^[16] The vehicle had an eight-speed gearbox, and the steering offered two fixed radii of turns on each gear, thus the Tiger had sixteen different radii of turn. In first gear, at a speed of a few km/h, the minimal turning radius was 3.44 m (11 ft 3 in). In neutral gear, the tracks could be turned in opposite directions, so the Tiger I pivoted in place.^[17] There was a steering wheel instead of a tiller or levers and the steering system was easy to use and ahead of its time.^[16]

Suspension


Clear view of the Tiger I's Schachtellaufwerk overlapping and interleaved road wheels during production

The suspension used sixteen torsion bars, with eight suspension arms per side. To save space, the swing arms were leading on one side and trailing on the other. There were three road wheels (one of them double, closest to the track's centre) on each arm, in a so-called Schachtellaufwerk overlapping and interleaved arrangement, similar to that pioneered on German half-tracked military vehicles of the pre-World War II era, with the Tiger I being the first all-tracked German AFV built in quantity to use such a road wheel arrangement. The wheels had a diameter of 800 mm (31 in) in the Schachtellaufwerk arrangement for the Tiger I's suspension, providing a high uniform distribution of the load onto the track, at the cost of increased maintenance. Removing an inner wheel that had lost its solid rubber tire (a common occurrence) required the removal of up to nine other wheels first. During the rainy period that brought on the autumn rasputitsa mud season and onwards into the Russian winter conditions on the Eastern front, the roadwheels of a Schachtellaufwerk-equipped vehicle could also become packed with mud or snow that could then freeze. Presumably, German engineers, based on the experience of the half tracks, felt that the improvement in off road performance, track and wheel life, mobility with wheels missing or damaged, plus additional protection from enemy fire was worth the maintenance difficulties of a complex system vulnerable to mud and ice. This approach was carried on, in various forms, to the Panther and Tiger II. Eventually, a new 'steel' wheel design, closely resembling those on the Tiger II, with an internally sprung steel-rim tire was substituted, and which like the Tiger II, were only overlapped and not interleaved.


Tiger at the Henschel plant is loaded onto a special rail car. The outer road wheels have been removed and narrow tracks put in place to decrease vehicle width.

To support the considerable weight of the Tiger, the tracks were 725 mm (2 ft 4.5 in) wide. To meet rail-freight size restrictions, the outermost roadwheel on each axle (16 total) could be unbolted from a flange ^[18] and narrower 520 mm (20 in) wide 'transport' tracks (Verladeketten) installed.^[19][16][20] The track replacement and wheel removal took 30 minutes for each side of the tank.^[21] However, in service Tigers were frequently transported by rail with their combat tracks fitted, despite this practice being strictly forbidden.^[22]

Fording system

The Tiger tank was too heavy for small bridges, so it was designed to ford four-metre deep water. This required unusual mechanisms for ventilation and cooling when underwater. At least 30 minutes of set-up time was required, with the turret and gun being locked in the forward position, and a large snorkel tube raised at the rear. The two rear compartments (each containing a fuel tank, radiator and fans) were floodable. Only the first 495 units were fitted with this deep fording system; all later models were capable of fording only two metres.

Crew compartment

The internal layout was typical of German tanks. Forward was an open crew compartment, with the driver and radio-operator seated at the front on either side of the gearbox. Behind them the turret floor was surrounded by panels forming a continuous level surface. This helped the loader to retrieve the ammunition, which was mostly stowed above the tracks. Three men were seated in the turret; the loader to the right of the gun facing to the rear, the gunner to the left of the gun, and the commander behind him. There was also a folding seat on the right for the loader. The turret had a full circular floor and 157 cm headroom.

Cost

The main problem with the Tiger was that it required considerable resources in terms of manpower and material. This in part was responsible for the low quantity produced: 1,347 of the Tiger I and 492^[23] of the Tiger II. The German designs were expensive in terms of unit build time, raw materials and reichsmarks, the Tiger I costing over twice as much as a Panzer IV and four times as much as a StuG III assault gun.^[24] The closest counterpart to the Tiger from the United States was the M26 Pershing (around 200 deployed to the European Theater of Operations (ETO) during the war^[25]) and IS-2 from the USSR (about 3,800 built during the conflict).

Although an excellent design, the low number produced, shortages in qualified crew and the considerable fuel requirement in a context of ever shrinking resources prevented the Tiger from having a real impact on the war.

Production history


Installing the turret

Production of the Tiger I began in August 1942, and 1,355 were built by August 1944 when production ceased. Production started at a rate of 25 per month and peaked in April 1944 at 104 per month. Deployed Tiger I's peaked at 671 on 1 July 1944.^[26] It took about twice as long to build a Tiger I as another German tank of the period. When the improved Tiger II began production in January 1944, the Tiger I was soon phased out.

In 1943, Japan bought several specimens of German tank designs for study. A single Tiger I was apparently purchased along with one Panther and two Panzer IIIs, but only the Panzer IIIs were actually delivered.^[27] The undelivered Tiger was loaned to the German Wehrmacht by the Japanese government.

Many modifications were introduced during the production run to improve automotive performance, firepower and protection. Simplification of the design was implemented, along with cuts due to raw material shortages. In 1942 alone, at least six revisions were made, starting with the removal of the Vorpanzer (frontal armour shield) from the pre-production models in April. In May, mudguards bolted onto the side of the pre-production run were added, while removable mudguards saw full incorporation in September. Smoke discharge canisters, three on each side of the turret, were added in August 1942. In later years, similar changes and updates were added, such as the addition of Zimmerit (a non-magnetic anti-mine coating), in late 1943.^[28][29][30] Due to slow production rates at the factories, incorporation of the new modifications could take several months.

The humorous and somewhat racy crew manual, the Tigerfibel, was the first of its kind for the German Army and its success resulted in more unorthodox manuals that attempted to emulate its style.

Variants

Among other variants of the Tiger, a citadel, heavily armoured self-propelled rocket projector, today commonly known as Sturmtiger, was built. A tank recovery version of the Porsche Tiger I, and one Porsche Tiger I, was issued to the 654th Heavy Tank Destroyer Battalion which was equipped with the Ferdinand/Elephant. In Italy, a demolition carrier version of the Tiger I without a main gun was built by maintenance crews in an effort to find a way to clear minefields. It is often misidentified as a BergeTiger recovery vehicle. As many as three may have been built. It carried a demolition charge on a small crane on the turret in place of the main gun. It was to move up to a minefield and drop the charge, back away, and then set the charge off to clear the minefield. There is no verification of any being used in combat.

Designations


Tigers under construction. This hull rests on a jig (1944)

Assembly line; the vehicles are fitted with the narrower transport tracks (1943)

Tigers being built(1944)

Designation	Reference	Date
Prototypes
VK 45.01	Henschel	28 July 1941
Pz.Kpfw. VI Ausf. H1 (VK 4501)	Wa Prüf 6[Notes 2]	21 October 1941
VK 4501 (H)	Wa J Rue (WuG 6)[Notes 3]	5 January 1942
Tiger H1 (VK 4501 - Aufbau fur 8,8 cm Kw.K.Krup-Turm)	Wa Prüf 6	February 1942
Pz.Kpfw. VI (VK 4501/H Ausf. H1 (Tiger)	Wa Prüf 6	2 March 1942
Pz.Kpfw. "Tiger" H	Wa J Rue (WuG 6)	20 June 1942
Pz.Kpfw. VI VK 4501 (H) Tiger (H) Krupp-Turm mit 8.8 cm Kw.K. L/56 fur Ausf. H1	Wa Prüf 6	1 July 1942
Production
Panzerkampfwagen VI H (Sd.Kfz. 182)	KStN 1150d[31]	15 August 1942
Tiger I	Wa Prüf 6	15 October 1942
Pz.Kpfw. VI H Ausf. H1 (Tiger H1)	-	1 December 1942
Panzerkampfwagen VI H Ausf. H1 Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. E	D656/21+ (Tank manual)	March 1943
Pz.Kpfw. Tiger (8,8 cm L/56) (Sd.Kfz. 181)	KStN 1176e[32]	5 March 1943
Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. E (Sd.Kfz. 181) Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. E	D656/22 (Tank manual)	7 September 1944

Hitler's order, dated 27 February 1944, abolished the designation Panzerkampfwagen VI and ratified Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. E, which was the official designation until the end of the war.^[14] For common use it was frequently shortened to Tiger.


Combat history

Gun and armour performance


German soldiers inspect a non-penetrating hit to the Tiger's armour

A report prepared by the Waffenamt-Prüfwesen 1 gave the calculated probability of perforation at range, on which various adversaries could be defeated reliably. It was estimated that the Tiger's 88 mm gun would be capable of penetrating the differential case of an American M4 Sherman from 2,100 m (1.3 mi) and the turret front from 1,800 m (1.1 mi), but if the Sherman was angled 30 degrees from the Tiger's 88 mm gun it would not penetrate the upper glacis plate at any range.^[33] The M4 Sherman's 75 mm gun would not penetrate the Tiger frontally at any range, and needed to be within 100 m to achieve a side penetration against the 80 mm upper hull superstructure.^[33] The Sherman's upgraded 76 mm gun would have the possibility to penetrate the Tiger's driver's front plate from 600 m, the nose from 400 m and the turret front from 700 m.^[33] The M3 90 mm cannon used as a towed anti-aircraft and anti-tank gun, and later mounted in the M36 tank destroyer and finally the late-war M26 Pershing, could penetrate the Tiger's front plate at a range of 1,000 m using standard ammunition, and from beyond 2,000 m when using HVAP.^{[34][dead link]}

Soviet ground trial testing conducted in May 1943 determined that the 88mm KwK 36 gun could pierce the T-34-76 frontal beam nose of 140 mm thickness from 1500 m at 75 degrees, and the front hull from 1500 m at 70 degrees. A hit to the drivers hatch would force it to collapse inward and break apart.^{[35][36][Notes 4]} According to the WaPrüf, the Soviet T-34-85's upper glacis and turret front armour would be defeated between 100 and 1,400 m (0.062 and 0.870 mi), while the T-34's 85 mm gun would penetrate the front of a Tiger between 200 and 500 m (0.12 and 0.31 mi).^[33] The 120 mm hull armour of the Soviet IS-2 model 1943 would be defeated between 100 and 300 m (0.062 and 0.186 mi) at the driver's front plate and nose.^[33] The IS-2's 122 mm gun would penetrate the Tiger's front armour between 500 and 1,500 m (0.31 and 0.93 mi).^[33] However according to Steven Zaloga, the IS-2 and Tiger I could each knock the other out in normal combat distances below 1,000 m.^[37] At longer ranges the performance of each respective tank against each other was dependent on the crew and combat situation.^[38]

The British Churchill IV would be vulnerable to the Tiger between 1,100 and 1,700 m (0.68 and 1.06 mi), its strongest point being the nose and its weakest the turret. According to an STT document dated April 1944, it was estimated that the British 17-pounder as used on the Sherman Firefly, firing its normal APCBC ammunition, would penetrate the turret front and driver's vizor plate of the Tiger out to 1900 yards.^[33]

When engaging targets Tiger crews were encouraged to angle the hull position 45 degrees to the Mahlzeit Stellung of 10 ½ or 1 ½ o'clock. This would maximize the effective front hull to 180mm and side hull armour to 140mm and making it impervious to any allied gun up to 152 mm.^[39][40] Unlike the lighter Panzer IV and Panther tanks, the Tiger's thick side armour allowed a degree of confidence of immunity from attack from flanking threats. The tank was also immune from Soviet anti-tank rifle fire to the sides and rear. Its large caliber 8.8 cm provided superior fragmentation and high explosive content over the 7.5 cm KwK 42 gun. Therefore comparing the Tiger with the Panther, for supporting the infantry and destroying fortifications the Tiger offered superior firepower. It was also key to dealing with the greatest threat to any tank, towed antitank guns.^{[citation needed]}

The destruction of an antitank gun was often accepted as nothing special by lay people and soldiers from other branches. Only the destruction of other tanks counted as a success. On the other hand, antitank guns counted twice as much to the experienced tanker. They were much more dangerous to us. The antitank cannon waited in ambush, well camouflaged, and magnificently set up in the terrain. Because of that, it was very difficult to identify. It was also very difficult to hit because of its low height. Usually, we didn't make out the antitank guns until they had fired the first shot. We were often hit right away, if the antitank crew was on top of things, because we had run into a wall of antitank guns. It was then advisable to keep as cool as possible and take care of the enemy, before the second aimed shot was fired.

—Otto Carius, Tigers in the Mud, page 118

First actions


A Tiger I deployed to supplement the Afrika Korps operating in Tunisia, January 1943

Eager to make use of the powerful new weapon, Hitler ordered the vehicle be pressed into service months earlier than planned.^[41] A platoon of four Tigers was put into action on 23 September 1942 near Leningrad.^[42] Operating in swampy, forested terrain their movement was largely confined to roads and tracks, making defense against them far easier. Many of these early models were plagued by problems with the transmission, which had difficulty handling the heavy weight of the vehicle if pushed too hard. It took time for drivers to learn how to avoid over taxing the engine and transmission, and many broke down. The most significant event from this engagement was that one of the Tigers became stuck in swampy ground and had to be abandoned. Captured largely intact, it allowed the Soviets to study the design and prepare countermeasures.^[43]

A battalion of Tigers was deployed to the Don Front in the autumn of 1942, but arrived too late to participate in the attack to relieve Stalingrad, (Operation Winter Storm). It was subsequently engaged in heavy defensive fighting in the Rostov-on-Don and adjacent sectors in January and February 1943.

In the North African theatre, the Tiger first saw action during the Tunisia Campaign on 1 December 1942 east of Tebourba.^[44] The first loss to an Allied gun was on 20 January 1943 near Robaa^[45] when a battery of the British 72nd Anti-tank Regiment knocked out two Tigers with their 6-pounder (57 mm) anti-tank guns. The failed attack on Béja at the end of February saw seven Tigers lost in the "Panzer Graveyard".^[46]

Mobility and reliability

The tank's weight significantly limited its use of bridges. For this reason the Tiger was built with water tight hatches and a snorkel device that allowed it to ford water obstacles 4 metres deep. The tank's weight also made driving through buildings risky, as the presence of a cellar could result in a sudden drop. Another weakness was the slow traverse of the hydraulically operated turret. Due to reliability problems of the Maybach HL 210 TRM P45, which was delivered within the first production batch of 250 Tigers, performance for its maximum power output at high gear ratio could not be fulfilled.^[47] Though the Maybach engines had a maximum of 3,000 rpm, crews were told in the Tigerfibel not to exceed 2,600 rpm. The engine limitation was alleviated only by the adoption of the Maybach HL 230.^[47] A British Army test report showed that the turret on the Tiger E tank turned 360 degrees in nineteen seconds with its power traverse system set at high ratio and with the engine speed at 2000 revolutions per minute (rpm).^[48] The turret could also be traversed manually, but this option was rarely used, except for very small adjustments.^[49]

Early Tigers had a top speed of about 45 kilometres per hour (28 mph) over optimal terrain. This was not recommended for normal operation, and was discouraged in training. An engine governor was subsequently installed, capping the engine at 2,600 rpm and the Tiger's maximum speed to about 38 kilometres per hour (24 mph). However medium tanks of the time, such as the Sherman or T-34, had an average a top speed of about 45 kilometres per hour (28 mph). Thus, despite the Tiger being nearly twice as heavy, its speed was comparatively respectable.^[50]


A Tiger undergoing engine repairs

With the tank's very wide tracks, a design feature borrowed from the Soviet T-34, the Tiger had a lower ground pressure than many smaller tanks, such as the M4 Sherman.

The Tiger had reliability problems throughout its service life. Tiger units often entered combat understrength due to breakdowns. More importantly, the tank's fuel consumption meant that it had a limited operational range.


Tiger I towed by two Sd.Kfz. 9

Tiger tanks needed a high degree of support. It required three of the standard German Sd.Kfz. 9 Famo heavy recovery half-track tractors to tow it. Tiger crews often resorted to using another Tiger to tow the damaged vehicle, but this was not recommended as this often caused overheating and engine breakdown. The low-mounted sprocket limited the obstacle clearance height. The tracks also had a tendency to override the rear sprocket, resulting in immobilisation. If a track overrode and jammed, two Tigers were normally needed to tow the tank. The jammed track was also a big problem itself, since due to high tension, it was often impossible to split the track by removing the track pins. The track sometimes had to be blown apart with a small explosive charge.

Tactical organization

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2010)


A Tiger I camouflaged in a static defensive position

Tigers were usually employed in separate heavy tank battalions (schwere Panzer-Abteilung) under army command. These battalions would be deployed to critical sectors, either for breakthrough operations or, more typically, counter-attacks. A few favoured divisions, such as the Grossdeutschland, and the 1st SS Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler, 2nd SS Das Reich, and 3rd SS Totenkopf Panzergrenadier Divisions at Kursk, had a Tiger company in their tank regiments. The Grossdeutschland Division had its Tiger company increased to a battalion as the III Panzer Battalion of the Panzer Regiment Grossdeutschland. 3rd SS Totenkopf retained its Tiger I company through the entire war. 1st SS and 2nd SS had their Tiger companies taken away and incorporated into the 101st SS Tiger Battalion, which was part of 1st SS Panzer Corps.^[51]

The Tiger was originally designed to be an offensive breakthrough weapon, but by the time they went into action, the military situation had changed dramatically, and their main use was on the defensive, as mobile anti-tank and infantry gun support weapons.^[51] Tactically, this also meant moving the Tiger units constantly to parry breakthroughs, causing excessive mechanical wear. As a result, there are almost no instances where a Tiger battalion went into combat at anything close to full strength.

Some Tiger units exceeded the 10:1 kill ratio, including 13. Kompanie/Panzer-Regiment Großdeutschland (16.67:1), schwere SS-Panzer-Abteilung 103 (12.82:1) and schwere Panzer-Abteilung 502 (13.08:1). Against the Soviet and Western Allied production numbers, even a 10:1 kill ratio was not sufficient. These numbers must be set against the opportunity cost of the expensive Tiger. Every Tiger cost as much as four Sturmgeschütz III assault guns to build.

Notable "aces"


Tiger engaging a target at the Battle of Kursk

On 7 July 1943, a single Tiger tank commanded by SS-Oberscharführer Franz Staudegger from the 2nd Platoon, 13th Panzer Company, 1st SS Panzer Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler engaged a group of about 50 T-34s around Psyolknee (the southern sector of the German salient in the Battle of Kursk). Staudegger used all his ammunition and claimed the destruction of 22 Soviet tanks, while the rest retreated. For this, he was awarded the Knight's Cross.^[52]

The Tiger is particularly associated with SS-Hauptsturmführer Michael Wittmann of schwere SS-Panzerabteilung 101. He worked his way up, commanding various vehicles and finally a Tiger I. In the Battle of Villers-Bocage, his platoon destroyed over two dozen Allied vehicles, including several tanks. However in the afternoon a second attack into the town with Tigers met a British ambush and at least three were knocked out or immobilized by anti-tank guns and PIAT infantry weapons.^[53]

Several Tiger tank commanders claimed over 100 vehicle kills each, including Kurt Knispel with 168, Otto Carius with 150+, Johannes Bölter with 139+, and Michael Wittmann with 138.^[54]

Allied response


A Tiger captured by US forces in Tunis, 1943

The US Army hesitated to place the 76 mm M1 gun in action even when they were already available, as combat through early 1944 indicated that the 75 mm M3 was more than adequate for handling the German tank threat.^[55] This conclusion was partly based on the incorrect estimate that the Tiger would be encountered in relatively small numbers and could be knocked out by anti-tank gun fire as they were in Tunisia and Sicily.^[56]

In contrast, the more experienced British had observed the gradual increase in German AFV armour and firepower since 1940 and had anticipated the need for more powerful anti-tank guns. Work on the Ordnance QF 17 pounder had begun in late 1940 and in 1942 100 early-production guns were rushed to North Africa to help counter the new Tiger threat. The gun carriage had not yet been developed, and the guns were mounted on the carriages of 25-pounder gun/howitzers.


Tiger I that knocked out the first M26 Pershing in combat. It then backed into a pile of rubble and became stuck, leading to the crew abandoning it

Efforts were hastened to get cruiser tanks armed with 17-pounder guns into operation. The A30 Challenger was already at the prototype stage in 1942,^[57] but this tank was relatively unprotected, having a front hull thickness of 64 mm, and in the end was fielded in only limited numbers (around 200 were ordered in 1943), though crews liked it for its high speed. The Sherman Firefly, armed with the 17-pounder, was a notable success even though it was only intended to be a stopgap design. Fireflies were successfully used against Tigers; (in one engagement, a single Firefly destroyed three Tigers in 12 minutes with five rounds)^[58] over 2,000 were built during the war. Five different 17-pounder-armed British designs saw combat during the war: the A30 Challenger, the A34 Comet, the Sherman Firefly, the 17pdr SP Achilles, and the 17pdr SP Archer self-propelled gun, while one more, the A41 Centurion, was about to enter production at the end of the war. In 1944 the British introduced an APDS round for the 17-pounder, which increased penetration performance considerably.


Marshal Georgy Zhukov inspecting a Tiger captured by the Red Army in 1943

The initial Soviet response was to restart production of the 57 mm ZiS-2 anti-tank gun (production was stopped in 1941 in favour of cheaper and more versatile alternatives - e.g. the ZiS-3 - as the gun's performance was excessive for early German armour). The ZiS-2 had better armour penetration than the 76 mm F-34 tank gun used by most Red Army tanks, or the ZiS-3 76 mm divisional cannon, but was still inadequate against Tigers. A small number of T-34s were again fitted with a tank version of the ZiS-2, the ZiS-4 but it could not fire an adequate high-explosive round, making it an unsuitable tank gun. Firing trials of the new 85 mm D-5T also had proved disappointing. Several captured German Tiger I tanks were shipped to Chelyabinsk, where they were subjected to 85 mm fire from various angles. The 85 mm gun could not reliably penetrate Tiger I except at ranges within the lethal envelope of the Tiger I's own 88 mm gun.^[59] It was still initially used on the SU-85 self-propelled gun (based on a T-34 chassis) from August 1943. The production of KV heavy tanks armed with the 85 mm D-5T in an IS-85 turret was also started. There was a short production run of 148 KV-85 tanks, which were sent to the front beginning in September 1943 with production ending by December 1943.^[60] By the spring of 1944, the T-34/85 appeared; this up-gunned T-34 matched the SU-85's firepower, but with the advantage of mounting the gun in a turret. It also matched the firepower of the heavier IS-85 tank in a more cost effective package resulting in a repeat of the events which heralded the decline of KV-1 production. The IS was subsequently rearmed with the 122 mm D-25T, which with BR–471 AP rounds was capable of going through the Tiger's armour from 1,200 m ^[61] and with the improved BR–471B APHEBC rounds ^{[Notes 5]} at over 2,000 m.^[62] The redundant SU-85 was replaced by the SU-100, mounting a 100 mm D-10 tank gun, that could penetrate 149 mm of vertical armour plate at 1,000 m,^[63] and was thus able to defeat the Tiger's frontal armour at normal combat ranges, while also being highly effective in the infantry support role.

In May 1943, the Red Army deployed the SU-152, replaced in 1944 by the ISU-152. These self-propelled guns both mounted the large, 152 mm howitzer-gun. The SU-152 was intended to be a close-support gun for use against German fortifications rather than armour; but, both it and the later ISU-152 were found to be very effective against German heavy tanks, and were nicknamed Zveroboy (commonly translated as "beast killer" or "animal hunter") because of this. The 152 mm armour-piercing shells weighed over 45 kilograms (99 lb) and could penetrate a Tiger's frontal armour from 1,000 metres (1,100 yd). Even the high-explosive rounds were powerful enough to cause significant damage to a tank, occasionally ripping the turret off outright. However, the size and weight of the ammunition meant both vehicles had a low rate of fire and each could carry only 20 rounds.

Operators

•  Nazi Germany - The main operator.
•  Kingdom of Hungary - 13 examples given by Germany.^[64]

Survivors


Tiger 131, Bovington Tank Museum, United Kingdom

Tiger Colmar, Musée des Blindés, Saumur, France

the Vimoutiers Tiger tank in Vimoutiers, Normandy, France

Lenino-Snegiri Military Historical Museum, Russia

Kubinka Tank Museum, Russia

Tiger 131

Main article: Tiger 131

On 21 April 1943, a Tiger I of the 504th German heavy tank battalion, with turret number 131, was captured on a hill called Djebel Djaffa in Tunisia. A 6-pounder solid shot from a Churchill tank of the British 48th Royal Tank Regiment hit the Tiger's gun barrel and ricocheted into its turret ring, jamming its traverse and wounding the commander. The crew bailed out and the tank was captured.^{[Notes 6][65][page needed]}. After repairs, the tank was sent to England for a thorough inspection.

The captured tank was officially handed over to the Bovington Tank Museum by the British Ministry of Supply on 25 September 1951. In June 1990, the tank was removed from display at the museum and work began on its restoration. This was carried out both by the museum and the Army Base Repair Organisation and involved an almost complete disassembly of the tank. The Maybach HL230 engine from the museum's Tiger II was installed (the Tiger's original Maybach HL210 had been sectioned for display^[66]), along with a modern fire-suppressant system in the engine compartment. In December 2003, Tiger 131 returned to the museum, restored and in running condition. This Tiger was used in the film Fury, the first time an original, fully mechanically operable Tiger I has appeared in a movie since World War II.^[67]

Others

Given the low number of just over 1,300 Tiger I's produced during World War II, very few survived the war and the post-war scrap drives. Many large components have been salvaged over the years, but the discovery of a (more or less) complete vehicle has so far eluded enthusiasts and collectors. In addition to Tiger 131, six other Tiger tanks survive as of June 2013, at the following locations:

• Musée des Blindés in Saumur, France. Indoor exhibit in good condition. Mid 1944 version with overlapping roadwheels adopted from the Tiger II, fitted with narrow transport tracks. This Tiger was part of the 2nd company of the SS Heavy Panzer Battalion 102, fought in the Cauville sector, and was abandoned by her crew after a mechanical breakdown. She was recommissioned as Colmar with the 2nd squadron of the 6th Cuirassier Regiment, fighting all the way back to Germany.
• Vimoutiers, Normandy France : The "Vimoutiers Tiger tank". Abandoned by its crew in August 1944. Outdoor monument. In bad condition, due to the time effect and the elements.
• Kubinka Tank Museum, Moscow, Russia, in good condition. Displayed as an indoor exhibit.
• Military-historical Museum of Lenino-Snegiri, Russia. In very bad condition. As a former firing range target it is badly shot and cut up. Displayed as an outdoor exhibit.
• Tiger 712[250031] of the 501st Heavy Panzer Battalion is part of the United States Army Armor & Cavalry Museum, Fort Benning, Georgia. In good condition. The left side of the hull and turret were cut-away in the late 1940s for interior training and display purposes.
• German Panzer Museum, Munster has a Tiger I now on display.^[68] This tank was reconstructed by Mr Hoebig in Germany, using parts found in the Trun scrapyard in Normandy ^[69] and some parts found in Kurland (Latvia).

See also

Tank portal

Tanks of comparable role, performance and era

• Soviet KV-85 or IS-1
• United States M26 Pershing
• British Churchill tank - with thicker armour (up to 152 mm) but a smaller gun (57 mm or 75 mm)

Notes

1. 
   
1. Although 1,350 is a common figure, World War II magazine reported the figure of 1,355 in their January 1994 edition (p.16). Jentz gives a revised number of 1,347, including the prototype, the result of the most detailed investigation of the primary sources ever undertaken.^[2]
2. 
   
3. Waffenamt Prüfwesen 6 – Panzer and Motorized Equipment Branch of the Heereswaffenamt (Army Weapons Department)
4. 
   
5. Wa J Ru-WuG 6--Panzerkraftwagen und Zugkraftwagenabteilung – Tanks and Tractors Branch of Amtsgruppe fur Industrielle Rustung--Waffen und Gerat, the Group for Weapons and Equipment Manufacture
6. 
   
7. The data used here is from the Soviet Military Intelligence Service. With the capture of an intact Tiger at Lake Lagoda the Soviets obtained data regarding the Tiger's technical and tactical capabilities. By test firing the 8.8 cm gun against a T-34 hull, data was obtained that lead to several improvements of the T-34 and development of the IS II as a new breakthrough tank. By increasing the thickness of the armour and mounting it with a very heavy 122 mm gun, the Soviet IS II became a very difficult tank to deal with.
8. 
   
9. The Br-471B projectile was ordered in spring 1945, but arrived to late to be issued for combat in Europe. David R. Higgins, King Tiger Vs IS-2: Operation Solstice 1945 p. 26
10. 
    
6. The conservators have kept the damage caused by the ricochet unpainted, it can be observed at the Bovington Tank museum.

References

Citations

1. 
   
11. Zetterling 2000, p. 61.
12. 
    
13. Jentz and Doyle 1993, pp. 11–13.
14. 
    
15. Jentz 1993, pp. 8, 16.
16. 
    
17. Hart 2007, p. 17.
18. 
    
19. Bishop, Chris (2002). "1". The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II. London: Metrobooks. p. 9. ISBN 1-58663-762-2.
20. 
    
21. Tucker-Jones, Anthony (2012). "Introduction". Tiger I and Tiger II. Barnsley: Pen & Sword Military. p. 7. ISBN 978-1-78159-030-0.
22. 
    
23. B T white German Tanks and Armoured Vehicles, 1914-1945 p69-70
24. 
    
25. VK from the German Voll Ketten meaning "fully tracked", H for Henschel
26. 
    
27. Green 2008, pp. 12-13.
28. 
    
29. Green 2008, p. 13.
30. 
    
31. Green 2008, p. 14.
32. 
    
33. Carruthers, Bob Tiger I in Combat, Chapter; Design features^{[page needed]}
34. 
    
35. Jentz 1993, p. 6.
36. 
    
37. Fabio Prado. "Pzkpfw Vi Tiger I". Armorsite. Retrieved 2010-04-30.
38. 
    
39. Green 2008, p. 41.
40. 
    
41. Green 2008, p. 44.
42. 
    
43. Green 2008, p. 46.
44. 
    
45. Jentz 2000, p. 35.
46. 
    
47. Jentz 2000, p. 36.
48. 
    
49. Wilbeck 2004.
50. 
    
51. Anderson 2013, p. 69.
52. 
    
53. Anderson 2013, p. 71.
54. 
    
55. Jentz 1996, p. 288.
56. 
    
57. Panzer Statistics achtungpanzer.com
58. 
    
59. R.P. Hunnicutt (1971): Pershing: A History of the Medium Tank T20 Series
60. 
    
61. Jentz and Doyle 1993, p. 13.
62. 
    
63. Zaloga, Steven (2007). Japanese Tanks 1939-45. Osprey Publishing Ltd. p. 17. ISBN 9781846030918.
64. 
    
65. Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger Ausf. E Sd. Kfz. 181 achtungpanzer.com
66. 
    
67. Crawford 2000, p. 41.
68. 
    
69. Jentz and Doyle 1993, p. 12.
70. 
    
71. Table of Organisation, KStN 1150d
72. 
    
73. Table of Organisation, KStN 1176e
74. 
    
75. Jentz and Doyle 1993, pp. 19–20.
76. 
    
77. "USA Guns 90mm calibre". Gva.freeweb.hu. Retrieved 2010-04-30.
78. 
    
79. Baryatinsky, Mikhail (2008). The T-34 in Combat. Jauza, Moscow. pp. 29–30. ISBN 978-5-699-26709-5.
80. 
    
81. Kolomiets, Maxim (2013), "Тигры" на Огненной Дуге ["Tiger Tierra del Arc"] (in Russian), KM Strategy, p. 92, ISBN 978-5-699-65932-6
82. 
    
83. Zaloga, Steven (1994). IS-2 Heavy Tank 1944-73. Osprey Publishing. p. 12.
84. 
    
85. Zaloga, Steven (1994). IS-2 Heavy Tank 1944-73. Osprey Publishing. p. 13.
86. 
    
87. Tigerfibel p84-85
88. 
    
89. Bird, Lorrin Rexford; Livingston, Robert D. (2001). WWII Ballistics - Armor and Gunnery. Overmatch Press. p. 83.
90. 
    
91. Guderian 1952, p. 280.
92. 
    
93. Showalter 2013, p. 48.
94. 
    
95. Glantz 2005, p. 201.
96. 
    
97. Schneider 2000, p. 41.
98. 
    
99. Schneider 2000, p. 42.
100. 
     
101. Schneider 2000, p. 43.
102. 
     
103. "Tiger I Information Center - The Maybach Engine". alanhamby.com.
104. 
     
105. Green, Michael. Tiger Tanks at War. MBI Publishing Company. p. 86.
106. 
     
107. Carruthers, Bob. Tigers in Combat. Coda Books Ltd.
108. 
     
109. Carruthers, Bob. Tigers in Combat. Coda Books Ltd.
110. 
     
111. Wilbeck 2004, pp25, 99
112. 
     
113. Agte 2006, pp. 103-105.
114. 
     
115. Forty, George (2004). Villers Bocage. Battle Zone Normandy. Sutton Publishing. 0-7509-3012-8.
116. 
     
117. Tiger Aces alanhamby.com
118. 
     
119. Zaloga, Steven (2003). M4 (76mm) Sherman Medium Tank 1943-65. Osprey. p. 13.
120. 
     
121. Zaloga 2003, p. 14.
122. 
     
123. The 17 Pounder Anti-Tank Gun David Boyd, wwiiequipment.com
124. 
     
125. Hart 2007, p. 65.
126. 
     
127. Zaloga, Steven (1994). IS-2 Heavy Tanks 1944-73. Osprey Publishing. pp. 6–7. ISBN 1855323966.
128. 
     
129. Boldyrev, Eugeni. "KV-85 Heavy Tank". http://english.battlefield.ru/. Retrieved 20 October 2014.
130. 
     
131. Potapov, Valeri. "Development History of the JS-1/JS-2". The Russian Battlefield. Retrieved 21 January 2015.
132. 
     
133. Specification and Armor Penetration
134. 
     
135. Zaloga, Steven (1984). Soviet Tanks and Combat Vehicles of World War Two. Arms and Armour Press. p. 225. ISBN 0853686068.
136. 
     
137. Kliment, C.K. and Bernád, D. (2007): Maďarská armáda 1919–1945 (n.b.- The source mentions that perhaps 15 vehicles had been delivered but only 13 are accounted for in the Hungarian Army sources)
138. 
     
139. Carruthers, Bob (2000). German Tanks at War. London: Cassell. ISBN 978-0-304-35394-1.
140. 
     
141. The Tiger Tank Restoration project - "Our Tiger" Journal
142. 
     
143. "BBC News - 'Last' WW2 Tiger tank to be used in Brad Pitt film". BBC News.
144. 
     
145. Deutsches Panzermuseum Munster: Die schwerste Katze aller Zeiten
146. 
     

will always leave Feedback once Feedback has been left, but please give it some time as i do mine once weekly. Please feel free to E-mail me and ask questions on this model, or any others i may have,  but do allow time to do this. My auctions are always nearly for 10 days to allow for this. Last minute questions might not get answered. Terms & Conditions.   The boring bit : Please read the terms and conditions before bidding. Remember you are entering into a contract with me when you place a bid.   Preferred method of payment is Paypal .. I always get certificate of posting to prove proof of posting Shipping I post items daily from the UK .All orders are usually dispatched within 24 hours , but the actual delivery, and time taken to deliver is the responsibility of the Courier, usually the Royal Mail. I do everything there is relating to these items, Except actually deliver myself. Usually its approx 1 to 3 days for 1st class post, and 2-5 days for 2nd class post,but all post can take up to a week,  or more at peak times like Christmas.  Worldwide shipping is available and its noted the Royal Mail has increased UK and Overseas Post prices considerably. The best way round this is, if you can, is to combine with other items. We try to make sure that our postage charges are as fair and accurate as possible and we do not make a profit on the postage but there is a small nominal charge for materials like Box, Bubble, Packing,  Brown Paper, fuel to Post Office  etc  ( Normal P+ P ) . This is a normal small charge applied by most sellers, and in our case its lower than most, as we do realise that with the Royal Mails  ever increasing their postal costs, that its a concern for all buyers . One thing to realise is that recent  Postal changes within the UK, means that all items up to 750 Gramms now cost exactly the same rate.  Therefore ,  4 items at 150 gramms each, goes at exactly the same fee as  1 item at 150 Gramms.   You will receive an email to inform you when the items have been posted. Returns We operate a full refund policy if there is a problem with your item.  Also if you purchase an item on a buy now format,most of these are covered under the Distance Selling Regulations, which give consumer buyers the right to cancel the purchase within 7 working days after the day they receive the item. This statement covers my legal obligation  to inform you,  the consumers about your right of cancellation before the purchase. You must notify us before returning item, and we will not pay for return postage except in the  unlikely event that you have received the wrong product or other reason that is our fault.   The refund will not be given until we have received the items. Thanks for looking. We hope you've found what you need. Payment should be made within 10 days please , as after that period, ebay may start sending out automated non payment policy letters,  which could result in you having a strike held against you. Items will be posted as securely as possible, and marked clearly,   THANKS FOR LOOKING AND GOOD LUCK IN BIDDING. More great items listed on a daily basis.Be sure to add me to your favourites list! Check out my other items!

 

 

 

---