Author Topic: Tanks Destroyers ??  (Read 4883 times)

Offline Denniss

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 607
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #15 on: March 30, 2017, 04:04:57 AM »
StuGs were always part of the artillery arm, tank hunters may have belonged to infantry AT arm, TDs belonged to armor although the Jagdpanzer 38 may have belonged to infantry AT arm.
The Jagdpanzer IV was first supposed to be another StuG class vehicle but General Guderian intervened and claimed it for the Panzertruppen (Armor arm).

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #16 on: March 30, 2017, 08:39:15 AM »
Yes the U.S. doctrinal use of DTs were very different from the Germans and Soviets. American doctrine used tanks for infantry support and DTs as highly mobile AT platforms to support the tanks. In Germany the tanks were designed primarily for tank on tank combat and the DT's grew out of the infantry support artillery role: The StuG assault gun. Soviet doctrine mirrored the German. The British played with the idea, but never really developed the TD concept, preferring an all-tank force. Although their cruiser-tank concept was reminiscent of the U.S. TDs. (Or perhaps the other way around.)


https://youtu.be/08wP9JODO78
No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #17 on: March 30, 2017, 10:16:45 AM »
Yeah its interesting and not known by many that when the west gave away Czechoslovakia they gave away what was probably the Industrial Jewel in the Crown of tank development and manufacturing. That 38T was the best light tank of the early war tho I didnt know it was the base for such a good TD.
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline Zimme83

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3069
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #18 on: March 30, 2017, 10:37:44 AM »
A lot of the german TD:s were just a way to increase AT capability by using  obsolete tank chassis and add a bigger gun by not having any turret. StuG III is a perfect example, PzKw III where pretty much obsolete as a tank by 1942 but as a StuG it was an effective weapon even in -45.
''The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge'' - Stephen Hawking

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #19 on: March 30, 2017, 11:09:07 AM »
That's not entirely correct Zimme... The StuG III was developed alongside the Pz.Kpfw. III with the first prototypes being built in 1937. The Pz.Kpfw. III was also still in the prototype stage of development at this time and didn't enter service until 1939. The StuG followed it in 1940. While some other German TDs like the Panzerjäger and Marder series were conversions of obsolescent tanks (and were largely unsuccessful), the StuG series were purpose built from the best tank chassis the Germans had at the time. The Germans made TD versions of all their best tank chassis even the Panther and Tiger II.
No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #20 on: March 30, 2017, 12:01:45 PM »
How about some info on the Soviet TDs ?
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline Zimme83

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3069
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #21 on: March 30, 2017, 12:10:43 PM »
Yes, OK, the Stug III wasn't the perfect example after all, i admit that. A better example would have been the Panzerjägers like Marder I and III

But to sum it up:
German TD:s can in general be divided into 3 groups:
- the "Panzerjägers", - converted tanks with often open superstructure and fitted with a heavy anti tank gun, developed into the:
-"jagdpanzers" purpose built tank destroyers with both good protection and armament. And the
-"StuG:s" "assault guns" intended as infantry support but eventually became AT weapons due to the situation.

''The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge'' - Stephen Hawking

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #22 on: March 30, 2017, 12:54:07 PM »
How about some info on the Soviet TDs ?

The Soviets became interested in assault guns following the success of the StuGs being used against them. As a result from 1942 onward the Soviets developed an impressive range of excellent assault guns and TDs mostly based on the T-70, T-34 and IS tank series. They mimicked their German counterparts in both design and tactics.

The late-1944 SU-100 is my favorite. T-34 mobility, Panther class frontal armor and Tiger class gun (same 100 mm gun that would later be used on the T-54/55). It even kinda looks German... So much so that it was used as a stand-in for German TDs in one of my favorite B war movies.  :aok


https://youtu.be/NFAEzCuGfis
No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #23 on: March 31, 2017, 09:33:03 AM »
I'd like to see the SU-100 in the game. That was a hell of a gun on it.
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #24 on: March 31, 2017, 11:12:59 AM »
Yes it's right up there with the JagdPanzer IV/70 and JagdPanther. If not for the typical crummy Soviet optics I would consider the SU-100 the best TD of the war.

« Last Edit: March 31, 2017, 11:14:47 AM by PR3D4TOR »
No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24759
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #25 on: March 31, 2017, 03:12:45 PM »
.... of the last 4 months of the war (in Europe).  ;)

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #26 on: March 31, 2017, 03:31:17 PM »
More like the last six months. Production started in September 1944. By July 1945, 2,335 SU-100s had been built. They saw extensive combat in Hungary, Czechoslovakia and the invasion of Germany itself.

Interesting fact: Last known SU-100 to see combat was in Yemen last year.

No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24759
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #27 on: March 31, 2017, 04:42:34 PM »
Here's a Soviet monster for ya:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISU-152

"The ISU-152 could also operate as an effective heavy tank destroyer. Though it was not designed for the role, the vehicle inherited the nickname Zveroboy ("beast killer") from its predecessor, the SU-152, for its ability to reliably kill the best protected German fighting vehicles; the Panther tank, the Tiger and King Tiger tanks, and even the rarely fielded Elefant and Jagdtiger tank destroyers. The sheer weight of the 152.4 mm shells resulted in an extremely low rate of fire, only one to three rounds per minute, and were not as accurate at long range as high-velocity tank antitank guns. However, the massive blast effect from the heavy high-explosive warhead was capable of blowing the turret completely off a Tiger tank. A direct hit usually destroyed or damaged the target's tracks and suspension, immobilizing it. While the low-velocity 152mm shell did not generally penetrate heavy armor, it frequently killed or severely wounded the crew through spalling (splintering) inside the hull as well as injuries caused by blast concussion. Surviving crew were often left with an immobilized vehicle which had to be hurriedly abandoned before being destroyed. For anti-tank operations following the Battle of Kursk, armour-piercing ammunition was developed, with an eye towards giving the howitzer a more traditional anti-tank capability. However, these rounds were expensive, in short supply, and only moderately more effective than the standard non-penetrating high-explosive round. As a howitzer the ML-20S exchanged velocity and accuracy for throw weight and distance, and was not intended to compete with true anti-tank guns."

"The ISU-152 was not a true purpose-built tank destroyer. It had a very low rate of fire compared with specialised tank destroyers such as the German Jagdpanther or the Soviet SU-100, which could manage a brief burst of 5-8 rounds per minute. However, prior to the introduction of the SU-100 it was the only Soviet armored vehicle capable of tackling the German heavy tanks with any kind of reliability, and its ability to satisfy multiple roles meant it was produced in far greater numbers than the SU-100. Attention to camouflage, quick relocation between firing positions, and massed ambushes of 4-5 vehicles firing in salvo at a single target's flanks reduced the disadvantage of the low rate of fire. Using these tactics, the ISU-152 became greatly feared by German heavy tank commanders, robbing them of their prior sense of invulnerability to Soviet guns and forcing them to commit their forces more cautiously and sparingly."

Soviet military service

World War II

Eastern Front
Continuation War
Soviet–Japanese War
Manchurian Invasion
Hungarian Revolution

« Last Edit: March 31, 2017, 04:49:22 PM by Arlo »

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #28 on: March 31, 2017, 08:05:02 PM »
Whew! I could just picture in my mind those big eastern front tank battles. They must have been something.
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9397
Re: Tanks Destroyers ??
« Reply #29 on: March 31, 2017, 10:03:47 PM »


Great find, Arlo.  History Channel of Russia.  Probably equally accurate.

Some great video, and first time I knew that this spg was introduced so early in the war.

- oldman