The final combat of the WW2 era German Panzer
Discussion
Interesting account of the final combat use of Wehrmacht panzers, almost a quarter of a century after the end of WW2.
https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2016/09/04/pan...
https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2016/09/04/pan...
I find it moderately interesting that, come the end of WW2 when we had access to all the excellent machinery the Germans had devised, instead of of saying "this Panther is much better than anything we have, let's sort out the faults and have them for ourselves" we carried on with crappy old Churchills and whatnot. Same with the the Arado 234 and Me262. I know we evaluated them and adopted design principled etc, but nevertheless. Maybe by 1945/6 we were already looking at the next generation anyway, with Centurions etc on the drawing board if not actually in development.
The Centurion entered service in late 1946 having been in development since late war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_(tank)
The Me262 was used to develop later jet fighters but as it stood had its own problems as a fighter:
Winkle Brown:
"This was a Blitzkrieg aircraft. You whack in at your bomber. It was never meant to be a dogfighter, it was meant to be a destroyer of bombers... The great problem with it was it did not have dive brakes. For example, if you want to fight and destroy a B-17, you come in on a dive. The 30mm cannon were not so accurate beyond 600 metres. So you normally came in at 600 yards and would open fire on your B-17. And your closing speed was still high and since you had to break away at 200 meters to avoid a collision, you only had two seconds firing time. Now, in two seconds, you can't sight. You can fire randomly and hope for the best. If you want to sight and fire, you need to double that time to four seconds. And with dive brakes, you could have done that."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_(tank)
The Me262 was used to develop later jet fighters but as it stood had its own problems as a fighter:
Winkle Brown:
"This was a Blitzkrieg aircraft. You whack in at your bomber. It was never meant to be a dogfighter, it was meant to be a destroyer of bombers... The great problem with it was it did not have dive brakes. For example, if you want to fight and destroy a B-17, you come in on a dive. The 30mm cannon were not so accurate beyond 600 metres. So you normally came in at 600 yards and would open fire on your B-17. And your closing speed was still high and since you had to break away at 200 meters to avoid a collision, you only had two seconds firing time. Now, in two seconds, you can't sight. You can fire randomly and hope for the best. If you want to sight and fire, you need to double that time to four seconds. And with dive brakes, you could have done that."
Edited by paintman on Tuesday 16th January 09:35
paintman said:
The Centurion entered service in late 1946 having been in development since late war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_(tank)
The Me262 was used to develop later jet fighters but as it stood had its own problems as a fighter:
Winkle Brown:
"This was a Blitzkrieg aircraft. You whack in at your bomber. It was never meant to be a dogfighter, it was meant to be a destroyer of bombers... The great problem with it was it did not have dive brakes. For example, if you want to fight and destroy a B-17, you come in on a dive. The 30mm cannon were not so accurate beyond 600 metres. So you normally came in at 600 yards and would open fire on your B-17. And your closing speed was still high and since you had to break away at 200 meters to avoid a collision, you only had two seconds firing time. Now, in two seconds, you can't sight. You can fire randomly and hope for the best. If you want to sight and fire, you need to double that time to four seconds. And with dive brakes, you could have done that."
'Roller coaster' I'd suggest. Climb up from below, hose the target, dive away.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_(tank)
The Me262 was used to develop later jet fighters but as it stood had its own problems as a fighter:
Winkle Brown:
"This was a Blitzkrieg aircraft. You whack in at your bomber. It was never meant to be a dogfighter, it was meant to be a destroyer of bombers... The great problem with it was it did not have dive brakes. For example, if you want to fight and destroy a B-17, you come in on a dive. The 30mm cannon were not so accurate beyond 600 metres. So you normally came in at 600 yards and would open fire on your B-17. And your closing speed was still high and since you had to break away at 200 meters to avoid a collision, you only had two seconds firing time. Now, in two seconds, you can't sight. You can fire randomly and hope for the best. If you want to sight and fire, you need to double that time to four seconds. And with dive brakes, you could have done that."
Using German tanks after WW2 would probably have been unacceptable to the politicians, military and population.
Yertis said:
I find it moderately interesting that, come the end of WW2 when we had access to all the excellent machinery the Germans had devised, instead of of saying "this Panther is much better than anything we have, let's sort out the faults and have them for ourselves" we carried on with crappy old Churchills and whatnot. Same with the the Arado 234 and Me262. I know we evaluated them and adopted design principled etc, but nevertheless. Maybe by 1945/6 we were already looking at the next generation anyway, with Centurions etc on the drawing board if not actually in development.
The closest thing to the Arado was the Canberra, but it looks that was already under development in 1944. The Americans appear to have evaluated it but not the British, although Eric 'Winkle' Brown did fly it.Simpo Two said:
Using German tanks after WW2 would probably have been unacceptable to the politicians, military and population.
The allies planned to use German ships after WW1, although the British weren't keen on the idea as it would have increased the power of other navies in relation to ours.Yertis said:
I find it moderately interesting that, come the end of WW2 when we had access to all the excellent machinery the Germans had devised, instead of of saying "this Panther is much better than anything we have, let's sort out the faults and have them for ourselves" we carried on with crappy old Churchills and whatnot. Same with the the Arado 234 and Me262. I know we evaluated them and adopted design principled etc, but nevertheless. Maybe by 1945/6 we were already looking at the next generation anyway, with Centurions etc on the drawing board if not actually in development.
I think you're right that Centurion and the next generation of US tanks - Pershing etc - were already well under development; Panthers and Tigers had been captured and analysed in 1943 and from a British perspective the crucial decision had been made to set aside the rail loading gauge requirement.Piginapoke said:
Interesting article. I wonder if the Syrians would have had more success with Tigers and Panthers against Centurions?
Good question. Considering that the heavy German tanks could have been considered to need more maintenance than the P4 and Stug, and were fairly complex, I'm not sure the Syrians would have many serviceable vehicles. Regarding their combat prowess I only have my old man's thoughts (ex Cromwell, Comet, and Centurion crewman) that they didn't want to be anywhere near either in a Cromwell, were ok taking either on in a Comet, and would have no problem going looking for trouble in the Centurion.
Steve_W said:
Piginapoke said:
Interesting article. I wonder if the Syrians would have had more success with Tigers and Panthers against Centurions?
Good question. Considering that the heavy German tanks could have been considered to need more maintenance than the P4 and Stug, and were fairly complex, I'm not sure the Syrians would have many serviceable vehicles. The Syrians chose the MkIV based on availability from sources quoted in the article, not on what may or may not have been a better option.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff