Showing posts with label StuG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label StuG. Show all posts

Monday, 19 June 2023

Assault Gun with Field Improvements

The situation with German military vehicles in museums, especially Russian ones, is difficult. The treatment of German armour in many countries during the Second World War and immediately afterwards is understandable. It was decades before anyone started to think about their historical value. It's hard to blame our ancestors for this, considering what these vehicles did to them. As a result, German tanks and SPGs are very rare today. Nevertheless, they are slowly reemerging in the hands of museums and private collections thanks to restoration workshops.

A new vehicle appeared on display.

Vadim Zadorozhniy's Technical Museum is one such organization. The museum restores military vehicles of the Second World War, including German ones. Recently, the museum put a new StuG III Ausf.E on display. This is a somewhat unusual vehicle and its story is worth telling.

Friday, 11 November 2022

A Soviet Look at French Cavalry

It just so happened that Soviet tank building grew out of the French school. Renault FT light tanks captured in the spring of 1919 happened to be the most appropriate type for production in Soviet Russia. That resulted in the Russian Renault, the first Soviet tank produced in series. The MS-1 tank followed. This was a whole new tank from a technical point of view, but performed a similar role to the Russian Renault. There is nothing strange about this, as French tank building was still the object of imitation in many countries. The Red Army continued to watch what was happening in France even in the late 1920s. Khalepskiy’s commission unsuccessfully tried to buy a French Renault NC tank, and traces of this tank can be seen in the design of the T-19 tank, the unsuccessful replacement for the MS-1. This is where the concept of a 3-man tank with a 1-man turret comes from. Priorities changed after that.

Three Pz.Kpfw.35 S (f) tanks were captured more or less intact in the end of January of 1942 with the Panzerzug 27.

Wednesday, 28 September 2022

Pz.Kpfw.IV vs StuG

 "Top Secret

Inspector General of the Tank Forces
#046/44 Top Secret

June 26th, 1944

Copy 1 out of 5

Notes on the report to the Fuhrer

Replacement of Pz.Kpfw.IV tanks with L/48 and L/70 assault guns.

1) Tactical-technical data

The 75 mm L/48 gun with the model 1939 armour piercing shell can penetrate all known types of English, American, and Russian tanks from medium distances of 600-1200 meters (including the English Cromwell tank, see attachment #1).

Friday, 11 June 2021

In Defense of the Panzer IV

With the debut of the Panther in 1943 the Pz.Kpfw.III and Pz.Kpfw.IV were threatened with cancellation. Their chassis would be used to make StuGs, a vehicle that could not be replaced with the Panther. However, Guderian himself wrote a treatise in defense of the humble Pz.Kpfw.IV.

"Notes for the Fuhrer's report (September 5th, 1943)

Pz.Kpfw.IV tank or assault gun?

Despite arriving reports, the assault gun has practically no advantages over the Pz.Kpfw.IV tank, as the assault gun:

Monday, 15 March 2021

Snow "Shoes"

The tank was born on the battlefields of WWI where it had to combat not only enemy fortifications, but also mud. Tanks were often lost not from enemy fire, but from being stuck on cross country terrain. Engineers and the military first started thinking about how to improve mobility of their vehicles. Further improvements focused on improving mobility in general, but advanced methods of driving on soft terrain did not progress past experiments. Engineers returned to the issue of improving off-road mobility in WWII. In addition to mud, tanks got a new enemy: snow. This issue was most prevalent on the Soviet-German front where there was more snow than anywhere else for obvious reasons.

Wednesday, 10 March 2021

Extra Protection

The tendency to increase armour protection was one of the most notable features of the German tank building school. No nation in the world increased protection without a radical change to the chassis. For instance, the Pz.Kpfw.III more than tripled the thickness of its front armour compared to its initial form. The Pz.Kpfw.IV set a record, quadrupling the thickness of the front hull compared to that of the B.W. This wasn't it, as the Germans still worked on improving protection of tanks that were already build. This article will cover those methods.

Thursday, 1 August 2019

Aquino Tank Weekend Reenactment Day 1

The battle for Aquino airport in Italy on May 19th, 1944, was a difficult one for the Canadian Ontario Regiment and the British 26th Armoured Brigade that they were supporting. The attack against the German defensive line covered by fog failed. Even though the Hitler Line fell only a few days later, the sacrifice of the Ontario Regiment is still commemorated by the Ontario Regiment Museum at the Aquino Tank Weekend every year.


Thursday, 25 July 2019

StuG Replica at Aquino

This StuG replica looks pretty good, but a quick count of the road wheels reveals that it's not a StuG at all. This is a vehicle on the FV 432 chassis, which is commonly used to make replicas of PzIII and StuG vehicles for reenactments.



Wednesday, 21 December 2016

Trophies into Battle

"Report on the fighting condition of captured tanks (German)

In Zamoshye: 1 medium tank without a turret, functional. At the battalion's repair yard: 3 medium tanks.
  1. No machineguns, optics, or radio, requires medium repairs (suspension, radiator, fuel tanks, turret hatch).
  2. No machineguns, optics, or radio, requires medium repairs (electric wiring, radiators, suspension).
  3. No machineguns, optics, or radio, requires medium repairs (suspension, fuel tanks).

Saturday, 9 July 2016

Steel Inheritance

The Czechoslovakian industry received a number of advanced military technologies after the end of the Second World War as the result of German orders, but their inheritance didn't end here. A large amount of formerly German tanks were left in the country. Even though Czechoslovakia preferred Soviet tanks and SPGs, nobody was going to say refuse the wealth of German vehicles. As a result, the country ended up with a colourful tank park, including domestic pre-war LT vz.35 and LT vz.38, British Cromwells and Challengers, Soviet T-34-85s and IS-2s, and many German vehicles, including the StuG 40.

Monday, 4 July 2016

Captured German Tanks in the Red Army

According to Maksim Kolomiyets, this was the inventory of German tanks in the Red Army on June 16th, 1945:
  • 1st Belorussian Front: 39 Panthers (26 need repairs), 11 PzIVs (all need repairs), 2 PzIIIs (all need repairs), 9 Jagdpanthers (7 need repairs), 74 StuGs (59 need repairs). Total: 135 vehicles, 103 need repairs.
  • 2nd Belorussian Front: 3 Tigers (all need repairs), 2 PzIVs (all need repairs), 12 PzIIIs (11 need repairs), one PzI, one PzII (needs repairs), one Jagdpanther (needs repairs), 12 StuGs (all need repairs), 255 APCs (44 need repairs, 211 cannot be repaired).
  • 1st Ukrainian Front: 11 Tigers (1 needs repairs, 5 cannot be repaired), 27 Panthers (17 need repairs, 10 cannot be repaired), 47 PzIVs (15 need repairs, 14 cannot be repaired), 52 PzIIIs (34 need repairs, 9 cannot be repaired), one PzI, 17 PzIIs (8 need repairs, 8 cannot be repaired), 118 StuGs (93 need repairs, 5 cannot be repaired), 45 other SPGs, 62 APCs (34 need repairs, 23 cannot be repaired). Total: 317 tanks and 62 APCs.
  • 2nd Ukrainian Front: 27 Tigers (24 need repairs, 3 cannot be repaired), 122 Panthers (27 need repairs, 86 cannot be repaired), 79 PzIVs (10 need repairs, 53 cannot be repaired), 49 PzIIIs (11 need repairs, 25 cannot be repaired), one PzI, 23 PzIIs (2 need repairs, 19 cannot be repaired), 30 150 mm SPGs (12 need repairs, 13 cannot be repaired), 2 105 mm SPGs (need repairs), 4 Jagdpanthers (need repairs), 158 StuGs (38 need repairs, 64 cannot be repaired), 81 other SPGs, 485 APCs (374 need repairs, 111 cannot be repaired). Total: 575 tanks and 485 APCs.
  • 3rd Ukrainian Front: 36 Tigers, 84 Panthers, 3 PzIVs, 6 150 mm SPGs, one Jagdpanther, 28 StuGs. Total: 319 tanks and SPGs (data is incomplete).
  • Courland group: 15 Tigers (8 need repairs), 35 Panthers (25 need repairs, 4 cannot be repaired), 41 PzIVs (15 need repairs), 12 PzIIIs (8 need repairs, 1 cannot be repaired), one PzI, 2 PzIIs (need repairs), 18 150 mm SPGs (17 need repairs), 19 105 mm SPGs (15 need repair), 9 StuGs (need repairs), 323 other SPGs, 279 APCs (113 need repairs). Total: 474 tanks and SPGs, 279 APCs.
There is no data for other fronts, but an estimated 3000 armoured vehicles were captured, 1851 tanks and SPGs and 1081 APCs.

Friday, 22 April 2016

World of Tanks History Section: Canadians in Germany, Battle for Binnen

Having broken the resistance of the German divisions, the Allies reached the Rhine by February-March of 1945. This river could reach 500 meters in width and was the last serious barrier before the industrial regions of Germany and its capital, Berlin.

The objective of the 21st Army Group commanded by the British Field Marshal Montgomery was to encircle the Ruhr industrial area from the north. The commander concentrated over 700,000 men, over 5000 tanks and SPGs, over 4000 guns, and enormous amounts of fuel, ammunition, and other equipment on the western shore of the Rhine. The Allies had more than a tenfold advantage over the Germans in every respect, but Montgomery did not expect a walk in the park. The German army was a deadly wounded beast.

First Assault on Binnen

On the night from March 24th to 25th, after a powerful artillery barrage and series of bomb strikes, Montgomery gave the order to cross the Rhine. The Allies had plenty of boats and were well covered by artillery, so even the advance units crossed with minimal losses. The crossing was illuminated by special projectors set up on the west shore of the river and tanks with special lights. Bridgelayer tanks followed APCs full of infantry, which helped amphibious Sherman Duplex Drive tanks to climb on shore. Having captured several large footholds, the Allies began building bridges and cleaning up the remainder of the German resistance.

In the 1st Canadian Army sector, infantrymen of the 9th brigade and soldiers from the highland regiments came ashore: Highland Light Infantry, Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry Highlanders, North Nova Scotia Highlanders, and the 7th Argyle Highlanders Regiment. A German stronghold in Binnen was in their way, defended by elements the 16th Fallschirmjager and 115th Panzergrenadier regiments, 600 troops in all with several AT guns, mortars, and StuG III SPGs are mobile reserves. The Canadians that assaulted the village numbered 800.

As the infantry drew closer to the village, the Germans recovered from the artillery strike. Resistance started to build up. By the morning of March 25th, the soldiers from the 7th regiment occupied several buildings near the village, but did not enter Binnen proper, covering the right flank of their neighbouring regiment.

The first attack on Binnen began on March 25th at 6:40 AM. The Canadian infantry was supported by Shermans from the Staffordshire Yeomanry regiments and 25-pdr (87.6 mm) howitzers. The Canadians that atacked from the south came under firs from machineguns, mortars, and hidden AT guns. Two tanks were knocked out. The Canadians managed to reach the closest embankment, climb up, and capture the German trenches, but they were suppressed by machinegun fire and could not advance to the village. The soldiers on the embankment had perfect positions to correct their artillery, but it would not fire: they were some 100 meters from highlanders that broke through and didn't want to risk friendly fire.

Two StuGs opened fire from the eastern side of the village. Three Shermans rushed to help. The lost this duel: one tank was knocked out, one bogged down, and the crew of the third fled. Lieutenant Colonel Forbes evaluated this frontal attack as unsatisfactory and ordered his soldiers to fall back.

From Two Sides

Forbes planned his next attack. Engineering teams would create a smokescreen to prevent German artillery and machineguns from aiming. The same units would attack under the cover of the smoke. Aside from the frontal attack, Forbes decided to attack Binnen from the left flank, using fresh forces. In order to make this possible, two platoons of highlanders (about 40 men) were sent to capture nearby Gritterbusch. The flanking groups would then clear the village from Germans.

In order to hide their presence, the soldiers gathered at the embankment. However, German mortar crews spotted this rotation and opened fire. The biggest danger to the attackers were German soldiers, hiding in the trenches with machineguns and grenade launchers.

Private J. Cameron performed an act of heroism. He came close to the enemy trench and threw in two grenades, killing four Germans. On the way back to his positions, he was shot in the back.

While the battle on the flank raged on, the rest of the forces gathered behind the smokescreen. With help from Wasp flamethrower carriers, they captured several buildings on the outskirts of Binnen. The Wasps could spit flame over 50 meters, killing Germans hiding in buildings or trenches. Thanks to their armour, the highlanders managed to deal with machinegun nests in two stone three-storey houses.

In the village, the Canadians were bogged down in urban combat against the Germans, who were set up in every house. Step by step, the highlanders were moving towards the center of Binnen, clearing out pockets of resistance, but taking heavy losses. Over 100 Germans were taken prisoner.

Counterattack and Capture

The commander of the German grenadiers decided to attack, ordering three SPGs and 150 infantrymen into battle. The counterattack began in the evening of March 25th around 7:00, starting at the Emmerich settlement. The grenadiers and StuGs were supported by artillery.

At first, the Germans managed to buckle the highlanders and destroy some vehicles. One Wasp was destroyed by a StuG, another by grenadiers. Then, the StuGs engaged the Shermans. The battle was at a short range, only 40 meters. Two Canadian tanks fired first, but their shells went too high. The experienced German crews calmly shot up the unlucky Shermans. Five Archer tank destroyers armed with powerful 17-pdr (76 mm) guns came to their aid.

A duel between German and Canadian SPGs began. One of the Archer commanders recalled: "The German tank was driving right at us, and could fire at any moment. I yell to my gunner: "Fire!" The first shot hit the gun mantlet and the SPG was engulfed in smoke." The second StuG was also knocked out, but likely by artillery called up from the opposite shore of the Rhine.

The Allies often used a fire control method called "time on target". This technique gathered fire from all batteries in the vicinities and, if possible, aircraft. This time, several dozen guns rained fire on the German defenders, including powerful 180 mm ones. Over seven minutes, Canadian artillerymen fired over 1400 rounds.

The artillery barrage suppressed the German counterattack and helped the Canadians fortify their new positions. Binnen was finally cleared in the middle of March 26th. The highlanders, aided by tanks and flamethrowers, cleared out the last of the German resistance, mostly snipers and machinegunners.

The Canadians lost 44 men dead and 68 wounded in the battle. The German losses were much higher: 230 dead and 200 captured, most of which were wounded by shrapnel or fire. The tank count was not in the Canadians' favour. Having destroyed two StuGs, they permanently lost five Shermans and two Wasps. Another few tanks and one Archer were repaired.

The fall of Binnen helped grow the Allied foothold by 48 km in width and 35 km in depth, and to later move into the heart of Germany. The Ruhr pocket soon formed, one of the largest encirclements of the Western front. After its surrender on April 18th, 1945, there was little resistance left in the path of the Allies. All possible German forces were trying to hold off the Red Army's rush for Berlin.

Original article available here.

Sunday, 17 April 2016

StuG in the USSR

At the start of the Great Patriotic War, Soviet military intelligence and the GAU had a very approximate idea about the types and characteristics of German tanks. This deficiency led to an overestimation of the possibilities of German armour and the launch of the KV-3, 4, and 5 programs in March of 1941. Even information on real German tanks was sparse. Intelligence missed the increase of the front armour of PzIII and PzIV tanks to 50 mm and use of 50 mm guns. This lack of information had to be made up for in the most reliable way during the war: studying trophies. Among the vehicles that were glossed over by Soviet intelligence was the StuG assault gun.

Present from Kiev

The first use of this vehicle, envisioned by Field Marshall Manstein, was in France, in May-June of 1940. It would be incorrect so say that Soviet intelligence learned nothing about the StuG. However, it did not earn much attention, and its description was brief.

"As a rule, assault gun squadrons accompany infantry in attacks of fortified positions and strongholds in the direction of the main attack, first in motorized divisions, then later in tank and infantry divisions. The squadrons are armed with 75 mm tank guns installed on the chassis of the PzIII medium tank with a special turret and armour. The main task for these vehicles is the destruction of the enemy with direct fire."

The Soviet military had no idea about the importance and effectiveness of these low, mobile, and well armed fighting machines. Meanwhile, in June of 1941, more than 10 StuG battalions (Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung, or StuG.Abt.) assembled on the Soviet border. Among them was 197th StuG. Abt. under the command of Major Helmuth Christ.

Red Armymen posing on a captured StuG III from StuG. Abt. 197, August 1941.

This battalion was formed in October of 1940 and was armed with StuG Ausf. B vehicles. StuG. Abt. 197 had its baptism by fire alongside the 132nd Infantry Division in May of 1941 during the invasion of Yugoslavia. During the start of the invasion of the USSR, the battalion was subordinate to 
XXXXVIII Tank Corps of Army Group Center. Soon after the fighting began, it was transferred to XXXXIV Corps in Army Group South.

That same vehicle at the NIIBT Proving Grounds, early September of 1941. The damage to the suspension and the letter E on the side can be clearly seen.

On August 15th, the battalion was located at the city of Kanev, where fierce battles for the Dnieper were fought. Soviet infantry counterattacks managed to capture at least two StuG III Ausf. B from StuG. Abt. 197. The vehicles from 3rd battery was captured intact and was used in a photoshoot with the soldiers who captured it. The second vehicle, #90247 with the name Prinz Eugen, was also mobile. According to StuG. Abt. 197 records, both vehicles were lost after hitting mines. After brief repairs, they were transferred to the Soviet rear.

The assertion that at least one of the vehicles went to fight with a Soviet crew is often made, but this is not true. In early September, the vehicles from 3rd battery was already at the NIIBT Proving Grounds. As for Prinz Eugen, it was transferred to the rear of the Central Front. A brief description was composed, with the trophy getting the name "medium German tank T-3 with an immobile turret". The description included external and internal characteristics of the vehicle. These characteristics were fairly close to the real ones. Despite the urgency, the specialists who studied the vehicle had time to partially take it apart and put it back together.

The second captured StuG III Ausf. B from StuG. Abt. 197.

The NIIBT Proving Grounds went in a different direction. Instead of beginning a detailed study, they made a brief composition of its characteristics. A summary of German armour was ready by September 11th, 1941. The tactical-technical characteristics in this summary were more precise, especially when it came to armour thickness. Aside from measurements, a brief trials were also staged, where the StuG reached a speed of 50 kph.

That same vehicle from the left. This StuG had the personal name "Prinz Eugen".

In NIIBT documents, the StuG was referred to as "artillery tank" or "Artsturm" for short. It's not known who invented this term, but it stuck to the StuG in Soviet documents.

Tough Nut

The StuG III was studied to compose a guidebook on German vehicles that was so desperately needed at the front. Because of this, trials were performed in an accelerated way, and some conclusions may be unfounded.

StuG III from the rear.

"The artillery assault tank is designed to act in the first echelon of tanks. The tank has no turret. It can only fire forward in a 28 degree arc by turning the gun on a mount. There are no machineguns. The lower part of the artillery tank, the suspension, the engine, the planetary turning mechanism, and the controls are taken from the PzIII. The gearbox is the same as the one on the PzII Ausf. B and only differs in its size. 

The armour of the tank can be defeated by guns of all calibers. It is possible to destroy the tank through the opening above the gun mount using a bottle of incendiary fluid or a grenade."

The conclusions regarding protection seems hasty. Of course, there were some poor decisions made regarding the vehicle, and the protection of the casemate was one of them. The gun sight opening "caught" shells, but it was changed in the Ausf. C version. The gun mount was also far from ideal as far as shell resistance went. However, the protection offered by the front armour went underappreciated by the proving grounds. The StuG III was the first mass produced German vehicle with anti-shell armour. The front armour of even the StuG III Ausf. A was 50 mm. The vehicle was reliably protected from the 37 mm gun. The PzIII and PzIV only received improved armour a year later.

Poster with vulnerable parts of the StuG, which slightly differed in reality.

It was already obvious that the 45 mm gun will have problems with German armour in late 1940. A 30 mm thick evacuation hatch from a PzIII tank bought in Germany was fired upon, penetrated, and even shattered, but not on the first try. These results showed that thicker armour would be impenetrable. Nevertheless, in September of 1941, the verdict was "vulnerable to artillery of all calibers". The same verdict was repeated in the flyer from the "Destroy German Tanks" series.

A full fledged study of the vehicle's armour was only made in September of 1942. PzIII, PzIV, Pz38(t) and the StuG were tested at the NIIBT Proving Grounds at Kubinka and their Kazan branch. The tanks were fired upon by Soviet, American, British, German, Czechoslovak, and French tank guns. Their resistance at 50, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 800 meters was measured.

Results of firing the 45 mm gun (1 and 2).

First, the vehicle was fired upon by the 45 mm mod. 1942 tank gun in the T-70 tank. It penetrated the 30 mm armour with no problems from a range of 850 meters. Firing at the front was a different story. From 100, then 50 meters, the result was the same: 20 mm dent. The shells fell apart on impact.

Hits from 2-pdr shells. The penetration was likely by chance.

The story can end here with the conclusion that Soviet armament was bad, but similar results were shown by another gun: the British 2-pdr (40 mm) in a Canadian Valentine VII tank. The sides also proved effortless. As for the front armour, it was only penetrated once, and the penetration was deemed unsatisfactory, since the shell landed into the joint between the central and lower front plates. In all other cases, the shells made 25 mm deep dents. One can only feel sorry for British tankers whose main armament was the 2-pdr gun until the fall of 1942.

Penetrations by 37 mm subcaliber rounds from the A-7 gun on the Pz38(t)

A similar result was attained by the 37 mm A-7 gun on the Czechoslovak Pz38(t) tank. It could confidently penetrate the sides, but the front was invulnerable: the shells left 40 mm deep dents. The results were different for subcaliber shells: they could penetrate at 100, 200, and 400 meters.

The 37 mm M5 gun installed in the American light M3 tank performed better. Its M51 shell easily penetrated the front of the StuG at 100 meters, and 35-50 mm deep dents were formed at 150 meters. This can primarily be explained by the larger casing size used by Gladeon Barnes in its creation, giving the gun's shells a higher velocity compared to British and Soviet analogues.

The ordinary armour piercing shell from the M5 37 mm gun confidently penetrates the front armour.

The 47 mm SA 35 gun on the Somua S35 was even more effective. It could penetrate the front of the StuG III from 400 meters, but at this range only every other shot penetrated. The German 5 cm KwK 38 L/42, the stock armament on PzIII tanks by 1942, could penetrate the front of the StuG at 800 meters.

Penetrations left by the SA 35 gun installed in the French Somua S35 tank.

The 75 mm M2 gun used in the American M3 medium tank achieved curious results. The first Lend-Lease convoys didn't bring armour piercing ammunition, so HE was used. The results were poor, not a single penetration was made. The maximum that was achieved was a 10 mm dent. In addition, a deep dent was formed in the transmission cover while firing at the upper front plate. The 76 mm F-34 achieved different results and made Swiss cheese from the StuG at all distances. The armour caved in upon impact, forming many fragments.

Results of the 75 mm M2 gun used on the American M3 medium tank.

Landmark

At the same time, the StuG III was being studied at NII-48. The composition of the armour and joints between plates were being examined and successful design decisions that could be implemented in Soviet production were extracted. 

"The hull of the German Artsturm tank:
The hull is welded. The ceiling of the fighting compartment is attached by bolts with a hidden head. Initially, the front plate was 50 mm thick, the sides were 30 mm thick, and the rear was 20 mm thick. Later, the rear 20 mm plates were replaced by 50 mm plates.

The hull is composed of rolled Chromium steel with 0.1% Vanadium. The Brinell hardness of the plates is 337-476, the diameter of the print is 2.8-3.32. The armour is malleable, has good resistance, and doesn't chip.
...
German PzIII, PzIV, and Artsturm tanks are made with Chromium steel and have good shell resistance. The composition of armour can be used to produce armour thicker than 50 mm. Curing, rolling, thermal conditioning and welding of Chromium steels mark 5140 and 5150 is already mastered by our industry and putting this armour into production will not be a problem.
A Chromium electrode containing 2.1% Chrome and 0.2% Carbon can be recommender."

Layout of the StuG's armour from NII-48's report.

It is worth mentioning that work on 45 mm subcaliber shells and a 45 mm gun with a lengthened barrel was going on before the trials of German tanks. The results of the trials only hurried both designs.

Initially, the German novelty was of no interest to Soviet designers. Later, the StuG III had a big effect on the development of medium self propelled artillery. Before, Soviet SPG designs were, as a rule, open topped tank destroyers with rotating turrets, like the U-20 project. By spring of 1942, the priorities shifted to assault guns with closed casemates, similar to the StuG III, but that is a topic for another article.

Original article by Yuri Pasholok.

Saturday, 9 April 2016

Mythical Tanks

German secret tank projects are a common topic for internet arguments, reshuffling of facts, or outright falsifications. Some of this is done as a joke, some out of ignorance, and some intentionally. Today, let's seriously try to discover which of these phantom German creations are real and which are not.

Waffentrager auf E-100



The most frequently discussed and unusual vehicle in the German World of Tanks tech tree. This vehicle is completely made up by Wargaming. Initially, it was supposed to have dual 128 mm guns, but due to a lack of multiple gun support, it received an AA gun with an autoloader. Soon it will be replaced with a much more realistic project found in the archives. The reason for this replacement is primarily that it's too different from other vehicles in the tank destroyer branch.

GW Tiger (P)


This is the second SPG developed by Wargaming with no historical prototypes. It appeared as a result of lengthening the artillery branch to tier 10. Conceptually, the GW Tiger (P) is a logical predecessor to the GW Tiger, or Grille 17/21. Unlike the Waffentrager auf E-100, there are no plans to remove this vehicle from the game, as it fits into the tech tree perfectly. In addition, no real projects were found to replace it.

E-50 Ausf. M


The vehicle was developed by Wargaming and even patented. Nevertheless, it is not a complete fabrication. The E-50 Ausf. M is a conceptual vision of further development of the E-50 medium tank. The hull and parts of the turret are developed from ides from the original E-50 project. According to documents, a rear transmission was planned. Later, this idea was developed by the French when creating their own medium tank, the AMX M4. The E-50's engine migrated to that project as well.

Jagdpanzer E-100


Unlike the Waffentrager auf E-100, this vehicle was not created by Wargaming. This vehicle was originally called Sturmgeschuetz E-100, but don't let the name fool you: it was designed as a tank destroyer. Blueprint BZ 3364, as well as fragmented information from other sources, laid the foundation for this design. You can read more about this vehicle in a separate article. Despite the fact that no proper blueprints of the vehicle exist, its design is in tune with what Krupp was designing in the summer of 1944.

Jagdpanther II


Some over-eager "specialists" assign the credit for this vehicle to Wargaming. In reality, the vehicle was designed by Krupp engineers. In November of 1944, a project called Panzerjäger Panther mit 12,8 cm L/55 (Pak 80) was being worked on, a Panther-based tank destroyer with a rear fighting compartment. This design allowed the installation of a much more powerful 128 mm Pak 80 gun, the same one as was used in Jagdtigers. Since no changes to the chassis were mentioned in the documents, the in-game model uses the unchanged chassis of the Panther II.

VK 72.01 (K)


Another design attributed not only to Wargaming in general, but to the author of this article in specific. While he is honoured, he must admit that the VK 72.01 was also designed by Krupp. The VK 72.01 index appeared in early 1942. The requirements initially described a mass of 72 tons, but it rapidly grew to 90 tons, the same weight as the VK 70.01 by the end of 1941. A 105 mm or 149 mm gun was chosen as this tank's armament. In the spring of 1942, Krupp engineers began working on a variant of the tank with a rear fighting compartment. The VK 72.01 project changed so often over the pan of several months that claiming that the in-game implementation never existed is a very bold move.

E-90 (Pz.Kpfw. Tiger III S)


This tank is the product of the wild imaginations of internet historians that came about in the late 2000s. According to the creators, the Pz.Kpfw. E-90, or Tiger III S, is a lightened variant of the E-100. This statement bumps into a logical problem: the E-75 was supposed to replace the Tiger II, and the E-100 was supposed to share many components with the Tiger II. Why the Germans needed another heavy tank is something that human logic cannot explain. Nevertheless, this creation managed to break out from the internet and into print.

E-79 Schwartzwolf VK 66.01



10 years before World of Tanks, ASCII Corporation published a game called Panzer Front for the Sony Playstation. Aside from real tanks, it had made up ones like the E-79. World of Tanks developers are often asked when the E-79 will appear in their game. This is an interesting question, but there are enough made up tanks in the game that adding another one makes no sense. Plus, the issue of copyright must still be considered.

E-100 Henschelturm/Adlerturm


This tank was designed by a Chinese plastic model company. According to their design, Henschel developed a turret for the E-100 as an alternative to the stock turret. Internet historians took it one step further, alleging that Adlerwerke designed another turret. Both "engineers" are lousy specialists of German armour history. Henschel never designed tank turrets, that was the job of Krupp. Adler also had nothing to do with turrets, as they were working on the E-100's suspension. In other words, the E-100 Henschelturm and E-100 Adlerturm are fantasies of people who have no knowledge of German tank design.

Sturmgeschuetz 40 T-34


This strange apparatus (top photo) appeared several decades ago in magazines and books dedicated to the StuG III. Allegedly, the casemate of a StuG 40 Ausf. F/8 was installed on a captured T-34 chassis. Particularly eager publishers even provide a coloured projection of the tank. In reality, it is nothing but a photoshop (original photo on the bottom).

Flakpanzer T-34


According to unconfirmed sources, Kampfgruppe Kienast used a captured T-34 converted to use an 88 mm Flak 18 AA gun. A photo of this vehicle is shown as proof. With stunning regularity, this photo comes up on forums along with demands to add this vehicle to World of Tanks. A simple search quickly reveals that this is a photoshop with a captured T-34-85 as the base. There was a real Flak 18 carrying tank, the PzIV, discovered by Americans at a junkyard for German vehicles in the Czech Republic.

Jagdpanzer E-50


This unusual design is the product of French artist Hubert Cance. According to the author, this is was a tank destroyer on the E-50 should look like. In reality, no SPGs were designed on the E-50 chassis, and even the E-50 itself did not move past the concept stage. Consider the fact that Hubert Cance shoved all crew members into the casemate. He managed to do the same with the Jagdpanther II. On factory blueprints of the Panzerjäger Panther mit 12,8 cm L/55 (Pak 80), there are clearly seats for the driver and hull gunner in the hull. The place where Hubert Cance put them is actually occupied by the cooling system.

15 cm Sturmgeschuetz E-75


Not too long ago, Trucks & Tanks magazine published this monstrous design by Hubert Cance. It was based on rumours of an SPG allegedly developed on the E-75 chassis with a 149 mm L/52 gun. There is some information on this SPG in literature, but it is a mistake. The gun was indeed planned, at least on paper, but for the VK 70.01 in early 1942. Judging by the documents, the plan was for a tank, and not an SPG. As for this reconstruction, its realism is rather dubious. The load on the front road wheels would be absolutely horrible.

Sturmgeschuetz Maus


This project has a basis in reality, but Hubert Cance failed us yet again. It is completely unclear where the engine goes in this design, or the generator, or any other components. A rear fighting compartment would have been much more logical.

Kampfwagenvernichter Ausf. F (E-100) Krokodil


Another one of Hubert Cance's creations, published in 2007 in the Battailes & Blindes magazine. The concept of a tank destroyer on the E-100 chassis was taken as the basis. The author applied his creativity and came up with a design inspired by the Jagdpanther. He clearly did not think about the load on the front wheels. In reality, this design would have been impossible, as the front wheels and suspension elements would break down constantly. Nevertheless, the "Crocodile" gained popularity, and is frequently requested in World of Tanks.

Kampfwagenvernichter E-90


An evolution of the E-100 Krokodil by internet "historians". This is a Krokodil on the chassis of the fictional E-90 tank. This design has the same flaws as the original, except this time, even its suspension has nothing in common with reality.

Geschuetzwagen E-100


Lastly, let's talk about a completely made up SPG from World of Tanks was was not made up by Wargaming. In late 2000s, a scale model builder made a Geschuetzwagen E-100. Despite the fact that the vehicle was completely fictional, the design was very convincing. It is very similar to the Grille 17/21 and logically takes the top place on the German SPG branch. Removal or replacement is not planned.

Friday, 18 December 2015

Trophy Report


"Description for the map of knocked out German tanks in the vicinity of Volkovyshki

20 tanks were discovered on both sides of the road and on the road itself. There is a PzV tank on the western outskirts and a SU-75 SPG on the PzIII chassis on the south-eastern outskirts. On this highway to Verzhebolovo, there is a PzIV tank and an APC shortly before lake Poyeznory.  There are two tanks near Greater Shelva: one PzV and one PzIV.

Most tanks are knocked out by artillery fire, and only 2 were destroyed by aircraft.

There are many small craters from bombs on the battlefield, which suggests that the German tanks were dispersed by bombings. Most tanks on the battlefield burned up. Three tanks were restored and passed off to other units. Another fully functional PzV tank was found stuck in a swamp.

According to data obtained by reconnaissance, it was established that a significant amount of knocked out tanks was evacuated. This can be determined by tracks where the tanks stopped and were later hauled off.

A table of examined tanks follows:

# on map Tactical number Type of tank Direction of movement Damage
1 232 APC North Penetration on the right by artillery shell.
2 None PzIV North-west Five penetrations from artillery in the right side, burned up.
3 None PzV North Penetration in the side, burned up.
4 355 SU-150 on the PzV chassis South-east Damaged by artillery fire, barrel is destroyed, left track is broken.
5 101 PzV North-west Fully functional, stuck in swamp
6 None PzIV North-west Damaged by artillery fire, left side penetrated, burned up.
7 313 PzV West Damaged by artillery fire, penetration of the left side, engine burned up.
8 None APC South-east Damaged by artillery fire, two penetration in the side.
9 None PzV West Damaged by artillery fire, penetration on the right side. Burned up.
10 A22 PzIV West Damaged by artillery fire. Penetration in the turret. Burned up.
11 A03 PzIV North-west Damaged by artillery fire. Penetration in the front, dents on the gun.
12 11 PzV North-west Damaged by artillery fire, penetration in the side. Burned up.
13 706 PzV West Damaged by artillery fire, damage to the final drive.
14 709 PzV North-west Damaged by artillery fire, penetration in the right side. Burned up.
15 124 PzV North-west Damaged by artillery fire, penetration in the right side. Burned up.
16 708 PzV North-west Damaged by artillery fire, penetration in the engine compartment. Burned up.
17 A23 PzVI West Damaged by artillery fire, penetration in the left side. Burned up.
18 221 PzV West Destroyed by aircraft, turret had been blown apart. Burned up.
19 None PzV West Destroyed by artillery. Penetrated in both sides. Burned up.
20 201 PzV West Destroyed by aircraft. Turret is destroyed, penetration of roof armour.
21 612 PzIV South-west Destroyed by artillery. Penetrated several times in the sides. Burned up.
22 None APC West Destroyed by artillery. Burned up.
23 None SU-75 South-west Destroyed by artillery, penetration of the sides. Burned up.
24 None APC South-west Destroyed by artillery.
25 None PzVI North Destroyed by artillery, penetration of the side and broken tracks.
26 None PzV North Destroyed by artillery, penetration of the side.

The table has two mistakes in it. One is that a Hummel is identified as a Panther variant, and the other is that tanks #10 and #11 (tactical numbers A22 and A03) are incorrectly identified as PzIVs instead of Tigers. They are correctly identified on the map.


Via altyn73.