Best Tank Destroyer...

The fixed gun is just too much of a limitation regardless of its firepower.


Your right TA as ever, there are no tank destroyers its defunct technolagy. but what is surprising to those of us used to wheeled vehicles is how fast a tracked vehicle can turn. I bet the slow traverse of many later WW2 tank turrets was slowerer than the actual vehicle traverse. I guess where really in the realms of driver and gunner skill here where a vehicle can spin at speed and lay the gun acuratly and quickly?

Kev

 

BTW I pictured this thread as ever on real world factors, not just on which has the best spec sheet. Ease of manufacture, use, maintainance, versitility should all be part of the decision, after all most of these are major advantages of the destroyer over a regular tank.

 

jagpanzer.mk4.

 

As one example of the M18 in action, I would recall an action between TD's from the 804th TD battalion (attached to 4th Armored Division) near Nancy in late September 1944 where they went head to head with Panthers from a German panzer brigade.
In this particular action both sides were suprised by the other. To one side of their relative positions was a ridge line that would give the first side there a huge advantage in position and vulnerability to the other. The 804th's M 18s raced there easily outrunning the Panthers. From their now hull down position the M 18s destroyed a half dozen Panthers for the loss of one of their own vehicles causing the Germans to withdraw.
Given the large reconnissance detachment that the US self-propelled tank destroyer battalion had they were in a good position to usually outscout their opposition and have their vehicles in good positions to counter enemy attacks.

As for turreted v. fixed gun the major problem with the later I see is that you have to move the entire vehicle to change firing direction. A turret allows the vehicle to face one direction while firing in another. In a defensive position it is possible for a turreted vehicle to turn off its engine reducing its signature (noise and possibly engine smoke) while still being able to effectively engage targets. A fixed gun vehicle would be in a bad position if it did not run its engine when expecting to engage simply because it would need it to turn to get on target.

 

I think fixed or limited-traverse guns mounted throught the front plate would be very much harder to manage in anything but a restriced-approach defence scenario.

Can you imagine, in a fluid battle, trying to coordinate driver and gunner to bring the piece to bear, especially when the driver has no special optics and may even be too low to see the enemy himself?

No thanks. I'd prefer a turreted type like an Achilles or M18.

Regards,
MikB

 

Devils advocate, Big disavantages of a turret :-

It has to balance this often either limits ther weight of the gun (and its lenght, a real disadvantage in a Tank destroyer as high velocity guns require long barrels) or you put a great big counter weight on the tail (with the performance drop that entails, What engineering bad practive to carry useless weight!) Fix the turret and it no longer has to balance

The gun has to balance so the turret (and turret ring) needs to be large, making for a large and wide, heavy, slow, expensive,large target. etc etc vehicle. The turret is also a weak spot, the movable joint by its very nature must be more easily prone to damage. eliminate it and improve protection.

The tank has to balance with the turret at a 90 angle. Tank has to wide to handle this making transporting difficult and resticing its use in confined areas.


Centre of gravity is raised. The tank is more liable to roll anmd sway losing traction.

Turrets are often cast, which is not only difficult to harden, but expensive and difficult to make. Not to mention very heavy. Turreted tanks weigh a lot more.

The over all height is raised considorably. I think I read somewhere that around 80% of knockout hits are to the turret. A low vehicle drops out of this 80% taraget area.

The manufacturing costs are huge. Have you seen a turret ring bearing, unbelievalbe things. I cant imagine how hard and expensive they are to make. Have you seen a milling machine that cuts the seats for a turrent ruing. Its basicall a giant lathe with a 8 foot throw. Not easy kit to come accross I wouldnt have thought.

The turret rotation speed on a lot of these monster tanks is so slow that slewing the whole vehicle doesnt really loose you any time. Us wheeled vehicle drivers forget how fast a tracked vehicle can turn, especially those with fancy modern transmissions that allow differing track direictions, a la Churchill or Elephant.

Less complex = less to go wrong = more reliable.

To summerise this, pound for pound, like for like, tank destoyers are lighter, faster, more manourable, cheaper, have larger and more powerfull guns, use less materials, use less gas, offer more protection, are more relaible and are harder to hit than an equivelent tank. You trade all of this for more flexablilty on multiple targets?? That turret is an engineering pain in the arse and its one hell of a trade off for sure.

There you have it, I rest my case, the tank is rubbish, long live the Tank destroyer!

Kev

 

Devils advocate, Big disavantages of a turret :........
........There you have it, I rest my case, the tank is rubbish, long live the Tank destroyer!

Kev

Which begs the question:

Where are all the modern, turretless tank destroyers?

Virtually all modern AFVs, whether MBTs, armed APCs, cavalry support vehicles, etc, are of turreted designs. While I appreciate the attributes of ease of manufacture, simplicity of design, and the lacking of a turret's disadvantages, the fact remains that the turreted MBT still provides the best in battlefield versatility and effectiveness and is still the premier destroyer of opponents AFVs, including tanks.

Personally, I believe turretless tank destroyer DESIGN peaked in the JagdPanther.

tom

 

MST,

Not suppossed to say that. Of course I am arguing a moot point. You cant just argue its the best cos its the most popular, very seldom the most popular of anything is the best. We would all be riding Moto Guzzi's if that was the case.

I think you may be right on the Jagdpanther however, theres no doubt its a peice of kit.

Kev

 

Turretless are easier to manufacture which is why they became popular in Germany in WW2. Also they suited a defensive style of warfare which the Heer were forced to pursue.

 

Nice page on a Swiss Hetzer rebuild.

Hetzer

I think the Hetzer would qualify as one of the best tank destroyers on a pound-for-pound and cost-effectiveness basis. Not as agile as a Hellcat, but probably a better protection for the crew.

I think I'll order a model of one very soon. Haven't built a Hetzer for probably 30 years.............

tom

 

Ya gotta love the Stug III. A very dangerous weapon in the hands of an expert. Cheap, sturdy, reliable and beautiful.



Just call me pzjgr!

 

Ya gotta love the Stug III. A very dangerous weapon in the hands of an expert. Cheap, sturdy, reliable and beautiful.



Just call me pzjgr!

Here's a model I did some years ago:

http://photos.hobbytalk.com/showphoto.php/photo/15624/cat/500/ppuser/28813

tom

 

Yes Tom, very nice. Love the detail and having the skirts off is an excellent touch.

 

Schucks, the Texans are taking over the world

 

No, they said they would be happy if they could just annex 'general'...

peace in our time....

 

good work on all the models, Tom

 

Schucks, the Texans are taking over the world


Nah, we're just making it a better place. A gun in every home, BBQ at every table and a shot of Jim Beam for every man.