This post is the continuation of Q&A session with H. L. Doyle, well-known German WWII military exert. See previous post. Doyle's replies are bolded (just in case).
And for a starter - JT's pics from Kubinka as promised some time ago.
To the interview:
11. What where the German armies views on the Soviet 122mm and 152mm guns?
The Germans saw the 122mm as powerful and dangerous but the many elements affecting the outcome of battles are complex. For anyone interested in such matters I would recommend reading two outstanding books edited by my colleague Tom Jentz, namely, “Panzertruppen” Volume 1 and Volume 2. Chapter 30 in Volume 2 “The last year on the Eastern Front” contains 27 pages of original German reports which reflect their views at this period.
I will just mention a few things:
... the Tiger (with the arrival of 122mm guns) can no longer disregard the (tactical) principles that apply to other types of Panzers...
... statements like “invulnerable” must be wiped out...
On the other hand
... IS tanks usually only engage in a fire fight at long range (2000m)... (where their frontal armour cannot be penetrated)
... the slow rate of fire of IS tanks (must be exploited)
... (Russian) antitank guns are the main opponent of Panzers
I have not seen mention of the 152mm so it was probably considered comparable to other Artillery weapons of a similar calibre.
12. Were there any performed test on the Jagdtiger armour, and results?
Prof. Dr. Rau was responsible for German armour design, development and application. His department set the standards and had very clear procedure for testing armour to ensure it meet the requirements. No Panzer was produced with armour that did not meet the requirements.
As the war progressed the highest specification armour was reserved for Panzers. Armour of a lesser specification could be produced to give protection against shrapnel and small arms fire to less important weapons such as self-propelled guns.
Test (by all countries) were carried out using their own guns.
13. Was there ever a design push to move the drive assembly (transmission) of German tanks to the rear, as was found in their Russian counterparts?
Yes, at least at the “experimental” level designers were considering rear mounted final drives as part of “power pack concept” to simplify maintenance. However, front drive was seen as being a good solution no decision had been taken.
Advanced design of this feature can be seen in the E-10, E-25 projects. “Project B Antrieb” was the name of drive train project that would have combined a 1200 horsepower Maybach engine with a Mekydro 8-speed combined transmission and steering unit for rear drive in the E-100 but this would have involved moving the motor compartment forward and necessitated an entirely new hull shape.
14. As we know most German tanks used the Maybach engine series. These petrol engines originally designed for planes. Did the Germans/Maybach (MTU Today’s) company made any alternative engines for specifically tank usage during the war? If they did why they didn’t implemented them?
Dr. Maybach designed high performance engines for many purposes. Before the War Germany decided to standardise on Petrol rather than Diesel to simplify logistics. Because Maybach produced a range of engines with a high performance to weight ratio they were appointed at the supplier of engines for all special Military vehicles such as halftracks and Panzers.
A specific benefit of Maybach V motors was their exceptionally short length. This was due to the patented roller bearing system used on the crank shaft. This compact design meant that the motor compartment could be smaller and the weight of armour needed to protect it was less.
The Maybach HL 230 P30 motor was progressively becoming more reliable despite problems with raw materials. It delivered 700 horsepower. Maybach had test versions of a HL234 with fuel injection and other improvements which would have yielded 900 horsepower with no increase in size.
After the War the French employed Maybach to develop the HL295, 1060 horsepower, for their AMX-50.
During the war other German motor manufacturers constantly tried to break the Maybach monopoly without much success.
15. Can you give any additional info about Gas Turbine engine development of Germany in WW2?
Once the power of jet engines had been recognised by German aircraft designers it was inevitable that this new form of motor would be proposed for Panzers. Some sketches were made showing a turbine in a Tiger II but there is little evidence that this project proceeded. When I worked with the late Walter Spielberger we published the available sketches of ideas for mounting a jet engine in Tiger in the Motorbuch Verlag book “Der Panzer-Kampfwagen Tiger und seine Abarten” This book is available in English a “Tigers I and II” from Schiffer Publications.
16. Why did the Germans used welded armour instead of the more effective cast armour (Sherman turret and front hull, some Russian Turrets and hulls) The German engineers couldn't/didn't know the technology how to manufacturing it?
I have not seen any proof that cast armour was any more effective than rolled armour plate. German welding technology was more advanced than that of any of the Allies and this allowed them to effectively weld rolled plates to create flexible designs. Of course, cast armour was also used when ever complex shapes were involved, e.g. gun mantlets, the front plate of the Jagdtiger fighting compartment.
17. What info can you give us on the gun penetration tables of German tanks? Which ones do you consider the most reliable?
This is not an area that I personally have paid attention to during my research. Many such tables were produced by the Germans for different calibre guns and for modifications as they were introduced. There were tables for different types of ammunition. From time to time we have included simplified penetration information in our publications but for sure this is subject would be worthy of a well researched dedicated book.
The 7.5cm K.w.K 42 L/70 was the exceptional gun of the period. It had several good features. It had very good penetration capability, it was more accurate than most guns of that period and it had a high rate of fire. The ammunition was not too bulky of heavy. With a well trained crew there was a higher chance of the important first round hit. The 8.8cm of course had better penetration but was less accurate and took longer to reload.
18. Which was the Turret which would be most likely built on top of the built E100 chassis?
http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/1-Vehicles/Axis/1-Germany/03-sPanzers/E-100/E-100%282%29.htm or
http://www.nast-sonderfahrzeuge.de/fotosammlung/displayimage.php?pid=2552&fullsize=1
Or something else
A turret was designed by Krupp for the E-100. This was a lighter version, with thinner armour, of the one designed for the Maus II. I prepared drawings of these turrets for our Panzer Tracts No.6-1 “schwere Panzerkampfwagen Maus and E-100”. No examples of these turrets were constructed.
The vehicles at these sites are fictional creations for entertainment, although the drawings of so-called Jaguar II (E25), Hetzer II (E10) and Jagdpanther II are all based on my published drawings of proposals that had at least reached the drawing board.
19. Same goes for the Jagdpanzer E100 If such a tank would have been manufactured, what kind of gun would it become, what would its specs be (weight/ armour/ place for the on-top casemate = more likely to be close to Jagdtiger, Ferdinand or Jagdpanther?
If such a project occurred I believe the outcome would have been similar to the Jagdtiger or possibly Jagdpanther as this would have allowed clear access to the motor compartment. Krupp proposed a Jagdpanther with a 12.8cm gun but to accommodate such a large gun they proposed a fighting compartment at the rear. I have wondered if removal of the motor would have had to be preceded by dismounting of the gun. The Ferdinand had two Maybach HL120 that could be removed either side of the gun.
20. Would it be possible for E-75 and E-50 to have rear transmissions?
Yes, but a lot of design and development work would have been needed. See my answer to Question 13.
To be continued ...
PS. Latest poll results (votes / %):
Rate 8.0 Update for WoT!
Good - 885 (38%)
Excellent - 861 (37%)
Ok - 336 (14%)
Poor - 117 (5%)
Bad - 102 (4%)
The new poll is up.
And for a starter - JT's pics from Kubinka as promised some time ago.
11. What where the German armies views on the Soviet 122mm and 152mm guns?
The Germans saw the 122mm as powerful and dangerous but the many elements affecting the outcome of battles are complex. For anyone interested in such matters I would recommend reading two outstanding books edited by my colleague Tom Jentz, namely, “Panzertruppen” Volume 1 and Volume 2. Chapter 30 in Volume 2 “The last year on the Eastern Front” contains 27 pages of original German reports which reflect their views at this period.
I will just mention a few things:
... the Tiger (with the arrival of 122mm guns) can no longer disregard the (tactical) principles that apply to other types of Panzers...
... statements like “invulnerable” must be wiped out...
On the other hand
... IS tanks usually only engage in a fire fight at long range (2000m)... (where their frontal armour cannot be penetrated)
... the slow rate of fire of IS tanks (must be exploited)
... (Russian) antitank guns are the main opponent of Panzers
I have not seen mention of the 152mm so it was probably considered comparable to other Artillery weapons of a similar calibre.
12. Were there any performed test on the Jagdtiger armour, and results?
Prof. Dr. Rau was responsible for German armour design, development and application. His department set the standards and had very clear procedure for testing armour to ensure it meet the requirements. No Panzer was produced with armour that did not meet the requirements.
As the war progressed the highest specification armour was reserved for Panzers. Armour of a lesser specification could be produced to give protection against shrapnel and small arms fire to less important weapons such as self-propelled guns.
Test (by all countries) were carried out using their own guns.
13. Was there ever a design push to move the drive assembly (transmission) of German tanks to the rear, as was found in their Russian counterparts?
Yes, at least at the “experimental” level designers were considering rear mounted final drives as part of “power pack concept” to simplify maintenance. However, front drive was seen as being a good solution no decision had been taken.
Advanced design of this feature can be seen in the E-10, E-25 projects. “Project B Antrieb” was the name of drive train project that would have combined a 1200 horsepower Maybach engine with a Mekydro 8-speed combined transmission and steering unit for rear drive in the E-100 but this would have involved moving the motor compartment forward and necessitated an entirely new hull shape.
14. As we know most German tanks used the Maybach engine series. These petrol engines originally designed for planes. Did the Germans/Maybach (MTU Today’s) company made any alternative engines for specifically tank usage during the war? If they did why they didn’t implemented them?
Dr. Maybach designed high performance engines for many purposes. Before the War Germany decided to standardise on Petrol rather than Diesel to simplify logistics. Because Maybach produced a range of engines with a high performance to weight ratio they were appointed at the supplier of engines for all special Military vehicles such as halftracks and Panzers.
A specific benefit of Maybach V motors was their exceptionally short length. This was due to the patented roller bearing system used on the crank shaft. This compact design meant that the motor compartment could be smaller and the weight of armour needed to protect it was less.
The Maybach HL 230 P30 motor was progressively becoming more reliable despite problems with raw materials. It delivered 700 horsepower. Maybach had test versions of a HL234 with fuel injection and other improvements which would have yielded 900 horsepower with no increase in size.
After the War the French employed Maybach to develop the HL295, 1060 horsepower, for their AMX-50.
During the war other German motor manufacturers constantly tried to break the Maybach monopoly without much success.
15. Can you give any additional info about Gas Turbine engine development of Germany in WW2?
Once the power of jet engines had been recognised by German aircraft designers it was inevitable that this new form of motor would be proposed for Panzers. Some sketches were made showing a turbine in a Tiger II but there is little evidence that this project proceeded. When I worked with the late Walter Spielberger we published the available sketches of ideas for mounting a jet engine in Tiger in the Motorbuch Verlag book “Der Panzer-Kampfwagen Tiger und seine Abarten” This book is available in English a “Tigers I and II” from Schiffer Publications.
16. Why did the Germans used welded armour instead of the more effective cast armour (Sherman turret and front hull, some Russian Turrets and hulls) The German engineers couldn't/didn't know the technology how to manufacturing it?
I have not seen any proof that cast armour was any more effective than rolled armour plate. German welding technology was more advanced than that of any of the Allies and this allowed them to effectively weld rolled plates to create flexible designs. Of course, cast armour was also used when ever complex shapes were involved, e.g. gun mantlets, the front plate of the Jagdtiger fighting compartment.
17. What info can you give us on the gun penetration tables of German tanks? Which ones do you consider the most reliable?
This is not an area that I personally have paid attention to during my research. Many such tables were produced by the Germans for different calibre guns and for modifications as they were introduced. There were tables for different types of ammunition. From time to time we have included simplified penetration information in our publications but for sure this is subject would be worthy of a well researched dedicated book.
The 7.5cm K.w.K 42 L/70 was the exceptional gun of the period. It had several good features. It had very good penetration capability, it was more accurate than most guns of that period and it had a high rate of fire. The ammunition was not too bulky of heavy. With a well trained crew there was a higher chance of the important first round hit. The 8.8cm of course had better penetration but was less accurate and took longer to reload.
18. Which was the Turret which would be most likely built on top of the built E100 chassis?
http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/1-Vehicles/Axis/1-Germany/03-sPanzers/E-100/E-100%282%29.htm or
http://www.nast-sonderfahrzeuge.de/fotosammlung/displayimage.php?pid=2552&fullsize=1
Or something else
A turret was designed by Krupp for the E-100. This was a lighter version, with thinner armour, of the one designed for the Maus II. I prepared drawings of these turrets for our Panzer Tracts No.6-1 “schwere Panzerkampfwagen Maus and E-100”. No examples of these turrets were constructed.
The vehicles at these sites are fictional creations for entertainment, although the drawings of so-called Jaguar II (E25), Hetzer II (E10) and Jagdpanther II are all based on my published drawings of proposals that had at least reached the drawing board.
19. Same goes for the Jagdpanzer E100 If such a tank would have been manufactured, what kind of gun would it become, what would its specs be (weight/ armour/ place for the on-top casemate = more likely to be close to Jagdtiger, Ferdinand or Jagdpanther?
If such a project occurred I believe the outcome would have been similar to the Jagdtiger or possibly Jagdpanther as this would have allowed clear access to the motor compartment. Krupp proposed a Jagdpanther with a 12.8cm gun but to accommodate such a large gun they proposed a fighting compartment at the rear. I have wondered if removal of the motor would have had to be preceded by dismounting of the gun. The Ferdinand had two Maybach HL120 that could be removed either side of the gun.
20. Would it be possible for E-75 and E-50 to have rear transmissions?
Yes, but a lot of design and development work would have been needed. See my answer to Question 13.
To be continued ...
PS. Latest poll results (votes / %):
Rate 8.0 Update for WoT!
Good - 885 (38%)
Excellent - 861 (37%)
Ok - 336 (14%)
Poor - 117 (5%)
Bad - 102 (4%)
The new poll is up.
"The 8.8cm of course had better penetration but was less accurate and took longer to reload."
ReplyDeleteSo uh, buff to 88mm L/56 soon?
No.
Deletecome on verlord, the short 88 is really underperforming,,, it should be more like the americna 90mm ....
DeleteFirst of all, we don't have anything to indicate in this post if Mr. Doyle was referring to the 8.8cm L/56 or L/71. The 8.8cm L/71 still clearly out penetrates the L.5cm L/70 in the game.
DeleteAdditionally the 8.8cm L/56's problems with penetration in game compared to what is expected from historical records are in a large part caused by the ammo used. The standard anti-tank shell used by the Panzerwaffe would be the equivilent of the gold APCR in game. Use that ammo and I doubt you'll have many problems with the gun. Most people in game though use the regular AP. Which, if you read the Chieftan's 2 part article on the Tiger, you will find is a shell that performed so poorly German command refused to adopt the gun until the higher performing APCR was developed. (This is why the stock Tiger has the 7.5cm L/70.)
By the same logic, the D-25T should have ~140mm penetration (in WoT it uses slightly buffed post-war ammo)
Delete@Blizzard36
DeleteI would not argue the point You make, if not for a tiny tidbit: according to Mr Jentz L56 penetrated 130mm of steel at 90 degrees... from 500m. And that using PanzerGranate 39.
Many thanks - fascinating series of articles :-)
ReplyDeleteYes, thanks!
ReplyDeleteI always love to hear the thinking behind the game. :)
You made my day Overlord, thanks for the Jagdtiger pictures and for answering the question regarding the armor :D
ReplyDeleteCould Mr. Doyle do some articles on German tanks on your blog someday?
Hi Overlord,
ReplyDelete1) Thx for the article!
2) Are there going to be some more higher (7/8) tier premium meds besides the Panther M-10, with a "medium" type of playstyle, ie agile?
thx
richmi
Yes, sure thing.
DeleteIs there a tier 8 British premium tank in the wind soon? Would be nice to have a new moneymaker. Is so, any hints on it being med or heavy?
Delete(The MatildaBP is an ok tank, but its so slow that you sometimes have problems getting into the battel before its over.. any stats on how its preforming, havent seen many of them.)
Any hints? ;)
DeleteVery interesting and fascinating reading. Maybe the short 88 will be much more fun with premium ammo bought with credits. Can't wait to read more :-) Thx
ReplyDeleteBtw your polls lack options... I've bought camouflage for a very select few of my tanks but holding seriously back for anything else.
ReplyDelete"A turret was designed by Krupp for the E-100. This was a lighter version, with thinner armour, of the one designed for the Maus II."
ReplyDeleteWhats the name of the turret the E100 has right now and which turret is the Maus 2 turret?
Do you have any pictures overlord?
There were two turrets for Maus - first, with roundy frontal plate which is in use on Maus and second with flat frontal plate which is in use on E-100 now. For purposes of new E-100 tank, new turret - lighter version of that second turret, was developed. It has 200 mm at front, 80 mm at sides and 150 mm at rear. So, sorry there is no fantasy adler turret.
ReplyDelete(personally I could live with that lighter turret if e100 could have 150/67 on it :))
About new brits:
I think that med line needs to be redesigned, I think that Centurion MkIII fits Tier 10 med better than FV4202, so Centurion MkI should be Tier 9 med, and some Wartime centurion (with 17 pdr) should be a Tier 8 med.
Will see how they perform. For sure Cent is iconic and many would love to see it at tier 10, but it suits tier 9 better imo.
DeleteSo, does WG gonna give the germany gun 15% pen buff they forgot ?
ReplyDeleteNo
DeleteOverlord, Thank You for Your effort. That read is extremely informative and enjoyable. Keep it up. Maybe next time try to catch Mr Jentz.
ReplyDeleteP.S. KROKODIL FTW!!! :)