Tiger II with 105mm L/68

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

it’s a known fact that the Tiger II with 105mm L/68 (unlike fantasies like the ingame E-75 with 128mm for example) was a historical project. It was first mentioned by either W.Spielberger or H.Doyle in Panzer Tracts and probably the best known drawing of the vehicle is this:

1168721_original

That however is merely a sketch, based on plans, found in the Bundesarchiv by Yuri Pasholok’s people (he does not search for it personally, he has “people” looking for it). He published a tiny fragment of it (just the designation of the drawing) in his blog post (the reason he does not publish whole drawings anymore is that it is against Bundesarchiv rules):

1168421_original

Anyway, that’s not that interesting.

What is interesting is the history behind the gun in the game. Originally, it was called 105mm KwK 46 L/68 – KwK means Kampfwagenkanone (tank gun), the number signifies the year. The gun has never been however called as such – this particular name was made up (as Yuri Pasholok confirms) by Sergei “SerB” Burkatovsky. Later, it was renamed to simply 10,5cm KwK L/68 (which is historically accurate). The gun itself was – as you can see from the document title – developed in November 1944.

And meanwhile in definitely totally absolutely more historically accurate game…

maxresdefault

Ooops.

49 thoughts on “Tiger II with 105mm L/68”

  1. Yeah.
    Strange how WT fanboys forget about it… one unhistorical name for a vehicle that never existed (though planned :P)

    And even it is not enough against IS-4…

  4. Can you please stop argueing about WT and concetrate on just WoT if this blog is about WoT and tanks?
    However I like both games and not a fanboy of any game, I find it offensive that pople always trying to find fails in other concurence games…
    Also this is a picture about Planned vehicles months before closed beta release, and BTW:in the actual game you can not find any 46 number

    • And…you think SS doesn’t point out fails in WoT? WG EU fail ring a bell? He points fails so that 1) People are aware of it, and 2) So these companies become aware of it and fix it. He’s fair about it.

    • Don’t worry man, as a long time player of WT since 1.27 you currently have nothing to worry, the mod team of WT on the forum removes a lot of “negative” posts or even historical posts saying why was this removed when it had it. As well as much more bullshit and really dumb stuff pulled by mods.

      Oh as well as Russian tanks currently are mostly the way to go in GF besides the god awful T-26. Even WT’s T-28 is awesome, due to it’s incredible hardness to kill unless you know where to shoot. Tier 5 is currently in favor of T-54/IS-4 if you don’t have these you will mostly lose. Maybe JT might work but not really due to T-54′s. Also T-50 has been the killer of low tier…

      May sound all great right, but trust me there is huge BR problems right now and about 80% of the tanks in WT are extremely over tiered and just not balanced. Also a lot of damage models as well are wonky and just don’t make sense.

    • If you remember his WT:GF “review”, you won’t be surprised about his attitude about WT in general. So, no double proof here folks!..

        • Yeah, WT GF is going down hill even as a long time player since 1.27 I have to agree, Tier 5 is currently owned by IS-4 and T-54, if you don’t have these you are mostly at a loss. This is where I think replacing T-54 at least with T-44 with 100mm would be at least a better option as the turret on T-44 ends up being weaker so hull down isn’t the greatest option.

          As well as BR problems (80% of the tanks now are over tiered pushed into completely being unbalanced, Tiger 1 in WT is x10 worse now then the one in WOT but at least Tiger 1 in WOT is playable and can be good in the right hands). This is pretty much Gaijin wanting tanks to verse what they saw which is out right stupid because 80% of the guns in WT have dead on like accuracy so… Unless they want to add in poorly trained crews and poor gun handling… I just don’t know anymore.

        • The difference is… WoWP could never go downhill as it was on the bottom already. :D

          • Haha. Yeah whatever part of WG took on WOWP obviously didn’t know what they hell they were doing at the time and/or didn’t know what the hell to even do with it.

            I even tried the test server and oh my god I couldn’t take it anymore even with the modifiers god.

    • Yes, the OP is just another example of WoT fanboyism. He’s “surprised” that WT used a couple of blueprint tanks or projects while the 95% of their other tanks are a thousand times more historically accurate than WoT’s.
      QQ more, SS.

  6. Would it be possible to talk Bundesarchiv into hosting those drawings openly on their web server, like many other pictures? Even wikipedia uses some of theirs. What’s the problem?

  8. Neat that drawn specs for metal works are exactly the same nowadays, just drawn on computer.

  9. A little speak about WT, If Warthunder still keep the “Historical Accuracy” Nation like Japan and German will be suffered imbalanced, Just Like WOT while long time ago all vehicles limited only 1957 but now its 1965 right
    why not Warthunder??

    BTW SS im not gonna sperg but the Pict u posted is long time ago, so many Vehicles already changed name or the gun itself for example Panzer IV/70 it was supposed to be TD or Jagdpanzer, later on it was corrected to Jagdpanzer IV/70

    • So you mean that WT ran into the same issue as WoT did? They also realized that it’s close to impossible to balance a game if only sticking to historical info.
      Why is this? Well, it might have something to do with the fact that war isn’t balanced IRL either.

    • “for example Panzer IV/70 it was supposed to be TD or Jagdpanzer, later on it was corrected to Jagdpanzer IV/70″

      Strange, the vehicle was designated Panzer IV/70 at least as far as Jentz, Doyle, and Spielberger tell

  10. About WT and historical tank designs.. They are actually discussing whether to implement the E-series or not. (no shit guys)

    Atleast the E-50 and E-75, so the germans has something to compete against the T-54 and IS-4 with..
    The thing is, it’s incredibly difficult to balance a tank game with German WW2 tanks, if you also plan to go post war.
    Since the germans had nothing build that would compete with post war soviet designs.

    Personally, i don’t get what all the “ITS UNHISTORICAL” fuzz is about. But it seems to be a VERY sensitive topic for some.

    • They could always do what they did for aircraft and give them imported tanks that bridged the gap between wartime and post-war domestic vehicles. So the germans would probably end up with Pattons or somesuch. Same for the japs iirc.

      • It’s definitely doable, but that is a poor choice out of many poor choices. Why play the Japanese tree if half the content is going to be in the American Tree anyways?

    • LOL, they surely got everything wrong. E-series was in real life meant on par with earlier designs and i suspect that it would have turned out to be a bit inferior due to shortcuts proposed.
      WG shit is the other way round because of HP points and creative historians – but seeing it copied in another game just make me rolling on the floor…

    • I wouldn’t mind as much if the Gaijinfans hadn’t/didn’t practically go “WOT is inferior WT:GF is realism, therefore better” a few months ago. They were on cloud hype trying to justify it. ( I tried playing WT. s’decent for a game )

      Additionally, if Gaijin wants to say it’s trying to be historical, then it gets the historical accuracy scrutinized. There’s nothing bad about it if they can’t quite be perfect, but the claims should be checked.

    • I think Silent’s statement isn’t attack WT, he only just criticizing something well he speak (post) truthfully, he is not only criticizing that game (WT) but WOT also, if only he play WT a lot then you will see a lot of WT post negative side in this blog

      yes i play and enjoy both games

    • Silent doesn’t attack anything in particular except misinformation about historical items/plans/vehicles/documents.