Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Some facts on the Panzer V Panther

Every time I read in a forum that the Panther tank was too heavy ,slow ,expensive and it broke down all the time I lose IQ points.Now I’m close to zero so please take a look at the data and stop burning my brain cells.


Type
Pz IV H-J
Pz V D-G
T-34/76
T-34/85
M4 Medium (75mm)
Combat Weight (tons)
25
44.8-45.5
26.3
30
30.4
Maximum Speed (km/h)
38
55
47
47
40.2
Power (hp)
300
700
500
500
400
Power/Weight (HP/ton)
10.6
15.5
19
17
13.2
Ground Pressure (kg/cm2)
0.89
0.73-0.75
0.64
0.87
0.96
Range on Road (km)
235
200
455
300
193
Range cross country (km)
120
100
260
160












Data is from ‘’Panzertruppen vol 2: 1943-1945’’ by Jentz p292-295

So was the Panther heavy? Compared to the Pz IV and the Allied medium tanks it was.

Was it slow ? Table says no.

Was it too expensive ? Regarding cost : From ‘Kursk 1943: A Statistical Analysis’’ p61 the price of the tanks without a gun and radio : Pz IV – 103.462 RM ,Pz V – 117.100 RM .

From "Waffen und Geheimwaffen des Deutschen Heeres 1933-1945" p41 price of Pz IV F2 – 115.962 RM , p46 Pz V – 117.000 without gun ,however in p52 the price of kwk 42 is given as 12.000 RM.

From ’Panther & Its Variants’’ by Spielberger p144 batch price for period starting 1 June’44 : chassis – 62.000 RM ,superstructure -14.000 RM ,total – 76.000 RM .

Regarding manhours : from ‘’Panther & Its Variants’’ by Spielberger p244 ‘’It took a total of 2.000 working hours to produce a single complete Panther’’.I don’t know if ‘’working hours’’ are different from manhours.

Considering that the Panther had superior frontal protection compared to the Tiger plus its Kwk 42 gun had better armour piercing capability it’s price is very low.

Now the last issue is the most important one. Did it break down all the time? During it’s service it saw a huge number of improvements both by the factories and by units in the field. Just an example :
 


Source : ‘’Germanys Panther Tank: The Quest for Combat Supremacy’’ by Jentz.

The result :

Percentage Operational At The Front:
EASTERN FRONT
WESTERN FRONT
 Pz IV
Panther
Tiger
 Pz IV
Panther
Tiger
31-May-44
84
77
79
88
82
87
14-Sep-44
65
72
70
80
74
98
30-Sep-44
65
60
81
50
57
67
31-Oct-44
52
53
54
74
85
88
15-Nov-44
72
66
61
78
71
81
30-Nov-44
78
67
72
76
71
45
15-Dec-44
79
69
79
78
71
64
30-Dec-44
72
61
80
63
53
50
15-Jan-45
71
60
73
56
45
58
15-Mar-45
54
49
53
44
32
36
Average
68
62
70
71
65
65
Source: Jentz "Tiger I and II combat tactics' (from tanknet forum)

Although in it's first year of service it suffered from mechanical problems it should be kept in mind that it had to operate in the unforgiving environment of the Eastern front ,with mud damaging vehicles of all kinds.From '44 operational rates are very close to the Pz IV and Tiger.Lack of spare parts should also be investigated when looking into the serviceability of vehicles
Posted by at
Labels: , , ,

6 comments:

  1. Anonymous7/26/16, 5:36 PM

    Christos, do you perhaps know why the British/French reports immediately after WW2 were so negative? https://tankandafvnews.com/2015/10/02/from-the-vault-british-report-on-captured-panther-tank/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Christos T.7/26/16, 11:26 PM

      You don’t need to be a genius to figure it out. The tank was damaged, abandoned by the Germans and captured by the Soviets.

      Look at the report:
      ‘Panther No. 213101 was received at F.V.P.E. from S.T.T. for these trials. The tank had originally been sent to this country from Russia. On receipt, the engine and steering system were found to be defective, and were repaired and tested in F.V.P.E. Workshops report No. W.S.413.’
      ‘The engine was observed to be misfiring badly’
      ‘3rd gear, however, was still defective and was not used on this trial.’

      There was another British report based on their own manufacture of the Panther. They found parts in a demolished factory, put them together without any plans and created a ‘Panther’. Then they drove it around town and finally it was shipped to the UK.

      As for the French report I’ve read it. The French Panthers were vehicles abandoned by the Germans during 1944. As you can understand they were in poor condition and it is difficult to see how the French could have restored them to working order. Supposedly they used German pow technicians but where would the spare parts come from?

      Think of this next time you read similar articles on the Panther. Or you can go to world of tanks forum to read how poor the Panther was and how superior the T-34 was.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous7/30/16, 12:06 PM

      very likely and I assume that the T34 sent to Aberdeen was actually a new model.

      Delete
    3. Christos T.7/30/16, 11:32 PM

      From Journal of Slavic Military Studies article ‘Once Again About the T-34’:

      On 3 June 1942 lieutenant-colonel Kozyrev, who was a military representative at the Ural Tank Factory (UTF) in Nizhny Tagil, received a written order from Moscow to prepare three T-34 tanks for shipment within a month.
      One of the tanks was going to be sent to the United States. The destination of the others had to be determined later (TsAMO D. 936, pp. 52–53). That the UTF was selected as the supplier was in no way by chance. At that time it was namely this factory that was producing T-34s with noticeably better quality than all other tank makers. The fact that in autumn 1941 the Kharkov Locomotive Factory—the cradle of the T-34—had been evacuated to Nizhny Tagil and combined with the local train car factory contributed to this in no small way. The UTF arose on this solid base, inheriting its number (183) from the Kharkovites. The factory, of course, did not want to lose face before its allies and picked three of the best tanks out of those that successfully passed the acceptance test. They belonged to the latest production batch with all the changes and improvements made by that time. Particular attention was paid to their preparation for a future long journey. Vehicles were thoroughly cleaned inside and out, filled with fuel and fresh oil. To prevent corrosion they were coated with three layers of paint. Spots on the bottom portion where water could get into were protected with a thick layer of grease, and all hatches, holes, and chinks were thoroughly sealed. Gauze bags with desiccant were placed inside. Each of the three T-34s was furnished with detailed operating and maintenance instructions. They were added with separate manuals on the engine, armament, and the radio set, as well as a full set of assembly drawings, spare parts, and tool kits. At the end of August 1942 one of these T-34s, along with a KV heavy tank, was sent to the US.
      Another, also paired with a KV, was shipped to England from Arkhangelsk in June 1943, after a 10-month delay (TsAMO D. 1744, pp. 58, 64). The last one remained at the disposal of the People’s Commissariat of the Tank Industry (Narodnyi komissariat tankovoi promyshlennosti or NKTP). Today it can be seen in the courtyard of the Central Armed Forces Museum in Moscow.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous7/31/16, 6:55 PM

      Thanks, though I have seen some statements that the evaluations have only been delivered nuncupative (to the engineer/mechanics who were present). With that said, I shouldn't spam this section any further, it does not belong here

      http://blogoguru.com/t-34-mice-vs-cats-part-6/

      Delete
    5. Christos T.7/31/16, 10:49 PM

      It’s true that the report ‘Evaluation of T-34 and KV tanks by workers of the Aberdeen proving grounds’ is a preliminary examination of the US tests. The actual report was prepared and sent to the Soviet Union but it has not been released to the public.
      Again from Journal of Slavic Military Studies article ‘Once Again About the T-34’:

      Testing began in the United States on 29 November 1942 and continued for a year. They were conducted in Maryland, just north of Baltimore, at the Aberdeen Proving Ground, the best testing area at that time in the US Army. A KV that had been produced at the Chelyabinsk Tractor Factory was also tested there. After tests on both tanks were completed voluminous reports were made, copies of which the USSR received. The Brits also sent a copy of their T-34 testing report. Unfortunately, however, these materials have not yet been published in their entirety. There is only fragmentary information about their content. The most widely disseminated among armored vehicles’ dabblers was ‘Assessment of T-34 and KV Tanks by Workers from the US Aberdeen Proving Ground, Business Representatives, Officers, and Members of Military Committees Who Conducted Tests of the Tanks’, signed by General-Major of Tank Troops V. E. Khlopov, Chief of the 2nd Directorate of the Red Army’s Main Intelligence Directorate (Glavnoe razvedyvatel’noe upravlenie or GRU), in August 1943 (TsAMO D. 1712, pp. 91-99). Many accept this document as a brief summary of the results of the testing of the Soviet tanks in America, but this is not so. From the text and the responsibilities of the man who attested to it, it is immediately obvious that this is not at all an American report, not even the extracts from it. After all, at the time the ‘Assessment’ appeared, tests had still not been finished. So what is it, really? This question was clarified by General-Lieutenant I. I. Il’ichev, Provisional Chief of the GRU, who distributed copies of the ‘Assessment’ to Stalin, Head of the NKTP V. A. Malyshev, and General- Colonel Ia. N. Fedorenko, Commander of the Red Army’s Armor and Mechanized Forces. In an accompanying letter Il’ichev reported to the addressees that the attached document was a summary of a conversation between a GRU officer and one of the workers from the Aberdeen Proving Ground. This American expressed not only his personal opinion, but also assessments by others of his colleagues, as well as those of officers, specialists, members of military committees, and representatives of concerned US companies he had heard during the tests (TsAMO D. 1712, p. 90a).

      If you think the report is unfair check:

      https://www.scribd.com/document/230672358/ENGINEERING-ANALYSIS-OF-THE-RUSSIAN-T34-85-TANK

      This is a complete report. It mentions the same problems word for word.

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)