Comments on: The curious case of Klein Tiger

By: Possible high tier light replacement: Panzer-Aufklaerer auf E-25 | For The Record

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 19:37:36 +0000

[...] and indeed it doesn’t seem to match anything Tiger related, as very well described in this article. That is, as long as we consider the Klein-Tiger as a Tiger related project, however what if it was [...]

By: Rich Vail

Rich Vail — Sun, 04 Aug 2013 20:45:42 +0000

Here’s some info on the Pz 38t…and the immense variety of variants that it spawned. I personnally, had no idea there were that many different designs based on it. No wonder WG has said there are at least 5 TD lines possible for the Germans.

http://henk.fox3000.com/38t.htm

redwing6
CO, The Blues & Royals (TBR on NA server)

By: xiantom

xiantom — Sun, 04 Aug 2013 20:27:23 +0000

The difference is that the T28 Prototype would have been actually physically possible to construct while the Klein Tiger is downright impossible.

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Sat, 03 Aug 2013 19:15:30 +0000

So why put the HEAT-tosser into a tank anyway rather than leaving it to the infantry and dedicated turretless ambush vehicles like the Hetzer derivatives and the planned E-25?

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Sat, 03 Aug 2013 19:13:47 +0000

Shell propellant has a bad habit of catching fire when hit by superheated bits of metal, nevermind now bursting-charge detonations and whatnots. And storing your ammo in the over-track sponsons obviously made such an event only too likely in the case the tank got shot in the side.
Thing is, the German tanks *had the same fucking problem*.
The Brits actually did a statistical analysis of “brewed-up” tanks in Normandy and concluded the Pz IV and Panther were just as bad in that regard as the Sherman. Ofc Shermans eventually got kitted out with wet storage in the floor to correct the problem – their German opponents didn’t. (The Soviets mostly followed a safer, if more inconvenient, placement philosophy, at least early on; however their propellant apparently had a nasty habit of exploding spectacularly rather than burning uncontrollably when it “brewed”…)

By: Ukmj

Ukmj — Sat, 03 Aug 2013 18:46:17 +0000

The “Shermans burned like hell” myth!

l suppose the Sherman being nicknamed the ‘Ronson’ (because it lit first time) or ‘Tommy Cooker’ by the Germans was also a myth!

The Sherman was a heap of crap but the best we had at the time, get used to it! Like the Brave Men who went into Battle in it!

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 03 Aug 2013 18:43:03 +0000

The small, light gun involved and a different suspension might have made it possible. They had been working on 20 to 30 ton vehicles for a while.

As for the gun itself, by then they were on the defensive. This seems like an ambush tank or something meant to guard the flanks/rear of a Tiger or Panther unit. Basically a replacement for the aged PzIV.

Again, the gun would be one of many compromises to get or keep weight down. Instead of comparing it to the Tiger maybe you should compare it to other VK20/23/30 tank designs?

By: Valkovich/MotorizedPatriot

Valkovich/MotorizedPatriot — Sat, 03 Aug 2013 18:39:39 +0000

Jagdpanther II – real, but has a different name
JPE-100 – real
T25/2 – fake
E-50M – somewhat real

By: mariouus

mariouus — Sat, 03 Aug 2013 18:07:23 +0000

I would recommend to add picture of correct engine, at current picture theres a Isotta Fraschini diesel engine with allmost twice the displacement.

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Sat, 03 Aug 2013 16:40:43 +0000

Projects in R&D were indexed as VK-something-or-other, the last I heard…