Sherman vs Panther part 2 ...

[Topsy-Turvy 80]

 

[QuarX 318]

 

[QuarX 318]

Spoiler

 

Here is the entire film of the Swedish Army tests with the German Panther in 1951

 

[OddBall06 691]

as these video's are German propaganda, you cannot take the results for granted.

 

[GermanSoldier 3,795]

3 hours ago, OddBall06 said:

as these video's are German propaganda, you cannot take the results for granted.

 

 

Lolwhat

 

they are from the swedish army in the 50s

[OddBall06 691]

first one was a german propaganda movie

[starkdog 534]

[OddBall06 691]

😂

[GermanSoldier 3,795]

52 minutes ago, OddBall06 said:

first one was a german propaganda movie

 

the first one is just a cut with sound added from the swedish army trials

 

[OddBall06 691]

You sure? In that case, i stand corrected

[Rdanzer 591]

On 5/12/2019 at 8:01 AM, QuarX said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Here is the entire film of the Swedish Army tests with the German Panther in 1951

 

 

Very nice Film! Great watch - games never really pay enough attention to Tank cross-country capability. You really see the differences in the suspension technologies of the tanks very well.

 

 

[Fegaris 1,744]

well its same like Betka vs Pz38(t) ..digged some reports from different armies basicly saying same and yet Pz38(t) ended up super slugish compared to BT

 

 

PS: nice necro tho 

Edited January 6, 2020

[_Finnish_Gamemaster_ 2,256]

6 hours ago, Fegaris said:

Pz38(t) ended up super slugish compared to BT

Surprising

[Fegaris 1,744]

1 hour ago, _Finnish_Gamemaster_ said:

Surprising

Actualy it is....once I get home I will try to find some articles about it in folders I had....

[Guest]

On 1/5/2020 at 11:26 PM, OddBall06 said:

You sure? In that case, i stand corrected

probably funded by germans who escaped to argentina, so ım not buying it.

Everybody at this point knows that M3 Lee was the best ww2 tank and german tanks, they just dont work and its all goebels propaganda. 

/s off

Edited January 8, 2020

[Timberwolf581 218]

Not sure what this thread is about.

[drhoops 2,319]

On 1/6/2020 at 5:38 PM, Rdanzer said:

You really see the differences in the suspension technologies of the tanks very well.

 

well, there is the good and the bad.

 

Panther suspension is bad when you have a broken inside road wheel and you have to remove several other road wheels just to get to it.

 

M4 bogey system was a breeze to repair, as was much of the M4.

 

When the machines were working, the Panther was clearly superior one on one.  But ease of repair meant more damaged or broken down M4's could be repaired and put back in service than could Panthers (not to mention the ubiquitous surplus parts the US had vs. the germans).  Add to that the ease of manufacture of the M4 vs. the Panther, and there is a very good argument that the M4 was a "better" tank than the Panther.  "Quantity has a quality all its own."- Thomas A. Callaghan Jr

Edited January 20, 2020

[GermanSoldier 3,795]

2 hours ago, drhoops said:

But ease of repair meant more damaged or broken down M4's could be repaired and put back in service than could Panthers (not to mention the ubiquitous surplus parts the US had vs. the germans).

 

To be fair the "ease of repair" argument is somewhat flawed.

 

The problem is mainly that even if the Panther was as easy to repair and the germans would have as many sparparts, it would make very little difference because

A) the vehicle has to be in combat considering the lack of available vehicles

B) there is most likely no time to actually recover and repair the vehicle

C) there is most likely not even the time to do maintenance

 

These are problems that the Soviets faced early in the war, accounting for a quiet high loss of AFVs despite them being rather easy to repair and do maintenance on (and even being praised as reliable) and that the Germans faced late in the war. So if you ask me, it doesnt matter how reliable or easy to repair your vehicle is, if you are put in a situation as the Germans in 44 or the soviets in 41, you will loose a large number of vehicles to technical issues that could have been prevented had the time for maintenance been available.

 

3 hours ago, drhoops said:

Add to that the ease of manufacture of the M4 vs. the Panther,

 

This IMO is another sort of milk maid argument.

How easy was the M4 to produce compared to the Panther, what do we want to compare, do we even actually have the accurate comparable numbers.

There is figures like that an M4 took 48.000 man hours to complete, a panther 55.000 man hours (other figures go for 25.000 manhours for a sherman)

But there is also figures like that a Panther took 2.000 man hours to complete

 

And there is the obvious problem of comparing the actual industrial capabilities and techniques, in which the Americans simply had the upper hand.

 

In short, it again depends on the country and its situation. Had the US build the Panther and the Germans the M4, the result would most likely be that the Panther would be produced faster / cheaper

[OddBall06 691]

On 1/20/2020 at 8:15 PM, GermanSoldier said:

 

To be fair the "ease of repair" argument is somewhat flawed.

 

The problem is mainly that even if the Panther was as easy to repair and the germans would have as many sparparts, it would make very little difference because

A) the vehicle has to be in combat considering the lack of available vehicles

B) there is most likely no time to actually recover and repair the vehicle

C) there is most likely not even the time to do maintenance

 

These are problems that the Soviets faced early in the war, accounting for a quiet high loss of AFVs despite them being rather easy to repair and do maintenance on (and even being praised as reliable) and that the Germans faced late in the war. So if you ask me, it doesnt matter how reliable or easy to repair your vehicle is, if you are put in a situation as the Germans in 44 or the soviets in 41, you will loose a large number of vehicles to technical issues that could have been prevented had the time for maintenance been available.

 

 

This IMO is another sort of milk maid argument.

How easy was the M4 to produce compared to the Panther, what do we want to compare, do we even actually have the accurate comparable numbers.

There is figures like that an M4 took 48.000 man hours to complete, a panther 55.000 man hours (other figures go for 25.000 manhours for a sherman)

But there is also figures like that a Panther took 2.000 man hours to complete

 

And there is the obvious problem of comparing the actual industrial capabilities and techniques, in which the Americans simply had the upper hand.

 

In short, it again depends on the country and its situation. Had the US build the Panther and the Germans the M4, the result would most likely be that the Panther would be produced faster / cheaper

i'm sorry, i believe you have zero degree in engineering. Even a blind kid can see how difficult the panther was to both build and repair. i know you are german biassed and that's okay, but what you are saying here, is just bullocks.

[bloodremar 281]

11 hours ago, OddBall06 said:

i'm sorry, i believe you have zero degree in engineering. Even a blind kid can see how difficult the panther was to both build and repair. i know you are german biassed and that's okay, but what you are saying here, is just bullocks.

Leave the German Fan boys alone they have fragile feelings...
They had to use slave labor and other nations to produce their equipment and still could not produce even half of what Uncle Sam made alone. Also Ships > Tanks. It will be nice when they compare their tanks with  T-44 , IS -3 or Centurion clearly allies at the end of the war had better technology for tanks while the Germans where simply trying to go bigger and waste what little resource they have left. If you look at the entire world war 2 you will realize that Soviet Union was ahead of Germany in tank armor protection. If you look at the entire world war 2 you will see that Germany had worse tanks at the beginning of the war and the end of the war then the allies.
But that's the best Germany had when you look at the air and the navy they were completely outgunned and out produced by US. US had B-29 Superfortress that can destroy the German factories where their tanks where build while Germany had no weapon that can attack US. So basically Germany had some tin cans named after cats and US had a Airplane that can drop atomic bomb that can destroy entire cities...So if we gonna compare who had the best weapon it was US: 

Its funny to me how they compare a cheap tank like the Sherman to the best they had while they don't realize that US most expensive toys where in the Air and the Navy.