Axis Tankers and their big machines .

Discussion in 'Weapons, Technology & Equipment' started by Diptangshu, Jun 28, 2014.

  1. Diptangshu

    Diptangshu Active Member

    I am interested to know from all of you who keeps interests on the Axis tanks and their aces that their high killing rates 'had been possible' only due to their big machines like Tigers, Panthers or other types.
    Aces like Barkmann, Knispel, Wittmann and others scored by higher counts of kill but, do you think that they could perform the same if they manned the Allied tanks they confronted?
    I think all they Scored, been possible due to their machines!
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2014
  2. Turo Nieminen

    Turo Nieminen Member

    Well i must say that even though the quality of german panzers was exceptional theres more to it. Could they have performed the same in allied tanks? I believe they could have been just as effective. Taking a look of those aces earlier careers you will notice that they had previously used inferior equipment.

    You should also consider the fact that armored fighting vehicle is only as effective as its crew. Can easily imagine what would happen if your gunner hesitate or aim poorly, can also imagine what would happen if the radio man hassle frequensies and miss notice about large counter attack.

    These aces were mostly experienced with several years of fighting behind them. Personally i doubt that novice crew could have performed as well as they did.

    You do have point on giving credit to german engineering but also the men and their crews were truly exceptional in experience, cooperation and knowing all those dirty tricks there is when going tank vs. tank.
  3. aghart

    aghart Former Tank Commander Moderator

    A lot has to do with the theatre of operations. Most German tank "aces" scored the majority of their kills in Russia. This, especially in 1941/42 was against an enemy who was at best " not very good" It was only later that the Soviets came into their own. The huge numbers of Soviet tanks and vast open terrain also enabled the Germans to rack up some very good scores. The number of Tank Vs Tank battles against the western allies is actually quite small and most of those were in North Africa. In Normandy the allies (especially the British) suffered heavy tank losses, but this was in terrain that suited the defenders allowing the heavy armour and powerful guns of the german tanks to be used to their full potential. However, putting all that aside, the fact is that the German tank arm was superbly trained, efficient, and used well thought out tactics, So i think they would have done well even if equipped with Sherman tanks. In Normandy however, especially when looking at how Wittmann brought the 22nd Armoured brigade to a halt, he used his Tiger tanks brilliantly but he would not have succeeded in that action without the massive armour of his tanks to brush aside the British tank shells.

    In fact the British experience in Normandy dictated the design of British tanks post war. Powerful gun, heavy armour, with mobility last.
  4. Diptangshu

    Diptangshu Active Member

    I admit all of yours. No question upon the Axis armored power engineering and tactics. Guderian commanding his armored forces well equipped with M4 Shermans in Blitzkrieg, I wonder for then the re-written MBT History, '42 - '45.
    Maj Gen Maczek or Lt Col Abrams could do no less than what written in the history made by the Axis aces. Had the Alied commanders got the equivalet machines, they could have scored no less than the Axis aces. In the ETO, Axis armored commanders oftenly got a good numbers of armored columns which enabled them to score a sheer count, where an equivalent Allied's armored forces been absent !
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2014

Share This Page