There were no allied equipment that was really able to engage tigers.
Soviets had larger width shells but they were undersized. Higher caliber.
America didn't have any heavy tanks, they had one or two Pershing.
The is3 or the su152 are the best threat to a tiger. They still have less range by far.
Germany thought that everyone was going to build bigger and bigger tanks, remember they were the ones that had gone into Russia undergunned and underarmored.
I feel like you just watch talking kike heads on twistory channel or read internet forums, and dont do any research yourself.
The KT was single handedly responsiboe for many of the successes of thr late war counteroffensives. In Hungary at the Solznok river in October 1944, KTs of one of a singlr heavy tank battalion broke through thr Soviet lines and surrounded a romanian and soviet division, then they almost succeeded in surrounding the entire nearby soviet cavalry corps. This was well above the goals of that campaign, which were merely to repulse the Soviets from their bridgehead.
Ignore most of the responses, they're from retards who have never touched a tank, let alone actually know anything about them.
Main thing was a grossly overburdened powertrain. Most of the Tiger IIs issues stemmed from Germany's material shortages. As such, they were not able to develop and put into production the planned engine for the Tiger II, which led to them reusing the Maybach HL234, an upgraded version of the Panther's engine, in the Tiger II. This led to a horribly overburdened powertrain. The Tiger II did surprisingly well moving on roads and cross country despite this, but its overall mobility was still extremely limited, made even worse by severe fuel shortages in late-'44/'45. The final drive also had issues because of the sheer weight of the vehicle.
The vehicle itself was not terrible, it was good for its intended role as a heavy breakthrough vehicle, never intended to be produced in large numbers, but the issues I listed, plus the rapidly deteriorating state of the German Army, having to constantly retreat and abandon or destroy heavy equipment like Tiger IIs, led to poor performance and reputation.
It’s performance and reputation were good tho.
The KWK4388 never encountered a tank it didn’t outgun.
Its armor was poorly made but workable and even with inexperienced crews it was the most feared tank by other tanks.
>but its overall mobility was still extremely limited, made even worse by severe fuel shortages in late-'44/'45. The final drive also had issues because of the sheer weight of the vehicle.
Made worse too by operating under conditions of Allied air superiority - by 1944 German divisions regularly had to detrain over a hundred miles from the battlefront and the take longer routes over secondary roads to cover that ground to avoid air attack. Increasing fuel consumption and the wear and tear on an already inadequate engine.
But that 4% is enough to break through the entrechments, destroy their artillery and give you control of the battlefield.
4 days ago
Anonymous
Then why did is it that meme tanks like the PzKpfw II could achieve this when the Luftwaffe had air superiority and the things like the Tiger 2 couldn't when the Luftwaffe was effectively impotent?
4 days ago
Anonymous
Peak oil. The same reason capitalism is collapsing now.
4 days ago
Anonymous
at least try and troll better retard anon
4 days ago
Anonymous
OK well I don't think they even had the tiger 2 available when the war ended, and with the tiger 1 they didn't convert it to alternate fuels.
Problem was that German designs were too complex and too expensive.
They costed ten times more than any other allied tank and needed ten times longer production time which is bad news when Germany barely has any resources to compete and its factories constantly blown up.
Hitler is partially to blame for this. His constant interference with tank designs meant Germany could never mass produce anything because every tank had 20 different versions of its turret, chassis, filters, sights, engines, treads, cannon, ammunition, etc
The allied tanks were better because they did the job just as good and costed much less and were much easier to maintain and repair. Germany lost most of its tanks not due to combat but breakdowns, Germany never even standardized its spare parts which created a logistical nightmare especially in North Africa.
Yes the tiger and panther had superior armor and cannon, but the western allies rarely engaged them in tank-to-tank battle. Why should they? There was an abundance of free reigning P51 Mustangs ready to bust it with little risk.
The tigers were also more rare than allied heavy tanks of equal caliber. the majority of German tanks were Panzer IV who were of equal caliber to the Churchill, Sherman, and T34 who were again far cheaper and quicker to produce and easier to maintain.
No physical evidence for battle of Stalingrad.
But it was a good tank. American equipment was fail.
>too heavy
>no oil for it
>manpower issues
>reliability issues when it first came out
>only like 500 were made Lollll
It didn’t. It was very capable as a heavy tank. Especially on the defensive when it could sit back and fire away.
These also apply to the Abrams in Iraq tho. That tank smoked everything.
America lost the gulf war.
they did not fight 20 to 1
most of their tanks where not only destroyed but obselete
There were no allied equipment that was really able to engage tigers.
Soviets had larger width shells but they were undersized. Higher caliber.
America didn't have any heavy tanks, they had one or two Pershing.
The is3 or the su152 are the best threat to a tiger. They still have less range by far.
Germany thought that everyone was going to build bigger and bigger tanks, remember they were the ones that had gone into Russia undergunned and underarmored.
Germany won ww2, it surrendered to the weaker side (America) because israelites.
Soviets didn't have much capable of fighting them.
Because it operated against an enemy who (on all fronts) possessed air superiority.
It's very easy to shoot down planes with rifles.
It's much, much easier for a plane to strafe a rifleman with it's machine guns
It's mathematically the same process. It's far easier for a rifle man to hit a plane.
If Germans didn't have automatics they had other stuff.
Mental illness.
Soviet 85mm,122mm,152mm shot them from the side.
I feel like you just watch talking kike heads on twistory channel or read internet forums, and dont do any research yourself.
The KT was single handedly responsiboe for many of the successes of thr late war counteroffensives. In Hungary at the Solznok river in October 1944, KTs of one of a singlr heavy tank battalion broke through thr Soviet lines and surrounded a romanian and soviet division, then they almost succeeded in surrounding the entire nearby soviet cavalry corps. This was well above the goals of that campaign, which were merely to repulse the Soviets from their bridgehead.
Ignore most of the responses, they're from retards who have never touched a tank, let alone actually know anything about them.
Main thing was a grossly overburdened powertrain. Most of the Tiger IIs issues stemmed from Germany's material shortages. As such, they were not able to develop and put into production the planned engine for the Tiger II, which led to them reusing the Maybach HL234, an upgraded version of the Panther's engine, in the Tiger II. This led to a horribly overburdened powertrain. The Tiger II did surprisingly well moving on roads and cross country despite this, but its overall mobility was still extremely limited, made even worse by severe fuel shortages in late-'44/'45. The final drive also had issues because of the sheer weight of the vehicle.
The vehicle itself was not terrible, it was good for its intended role as a heavy breakthrough vehicle, never intended to be produced in large numbers, but the issues I listed, plus the rapidly deteriorating state of the German Army, having to constantly retreat and abandon or destroy heavy equipment like Tiger IIs, led to poor performance and reputation.
It’s performance and reputation were good tho.
The KWK4388 never encountered a tank it didn’t outgun.
Its armor was poorly made but workable and even with inexperienced crews it was the most feared tank by other tanks.
>but its overall mobility was still extremely limited, made even worse by severe fuel shortages in late-'44/'45. The final drive also had issues because of the sheer weight of the vehicle.
Made worse too by operating under conditions of Allied air superiority - by 1944 German divisions regularly had to detrain over a hundred miles from the battlefront and the take longer routes over secondary roads to cover that ground to avoid air attack. Increasing fuel consumption and the wear and tear on an already inadequate engine.
Aircraft are actually useless. It's just that his is a retard board.
>~50% of german munitions production of ww2 is aircraft
>numbers are comparable for the other powers
>useless
The bullets were interchangeable and they didn't produce a significant number of bombs.
Munitions means all war material, retard
I don't know what to say lib. You make no sense.
German tanks were only fightable by the best soviet stuff.
and for reference, AFVs of all types, represent between 4-8% of production (it varies by month). Land warfare is the real meme
But that 4% is enough to break through the entrechments, destroy their artillery and give you control of the battlefield.
Then why did is it that meme tanks like the PzKpfw II could achieve this when the Luftwaffe had air superiority and the things like the Tiger 2 couldn't when the Luftwaffe was effectively impotent?
Peak oil. The same reason capitalism is collapsing now.
at least try and troll better retard anon
OK well I don't think they even had the tiger 2 available when the war ended, and with the tiger 1 they didn't convert it to alternate fuels.
German engineering is overrated crap.
Unrelated questions but when/why did some people start calling this a warwinning tank?
Problem was that German designs were too complex and too expensive.
They costed ten times more than any other allied tank and needed ten times longer production time which is bad news when Germany barely has any resources to compete and its factories constantly blown up.
Hitler is partially to blame for this. His constant interference with tank designs meant Germany could never mass produce anything because every tank had 20 different versions of its turret, chassis, filters, sights, engines, treads, cannon, ammunition, etc
The allied tanks were better because they did the job just as good and costed much less and were much easier to maintain and repair. Germany lost most of its tanks not due to combat but breakdowns, Germany never even standardized its spare parts which created a logistical nightmare especially in North Africa.
Yes the tiger and panther had superior armor and cannon, but the western allies rarely engaged them in tank-to-tank battle. Why should they? There was an abundance of free reigning P51 Mustangs ready to bust it with little risk.
The tigers were also more rare than allied heavy tanks of equal caliber. the majority of German tanks were Panzer IV who were of equal caliber to the Churchill, Sherman, and T34 who were again far cheaper and quicker to produce and easier to maintain.
>reddit spacing
>reddit history
>Hitler is partially to blame for this. His constant interference with tank designs
Could you post the evidence for this?
It was designed for well supplied and prepared armored spearheads but ended up being used in the chaotic fighting withdrawal across eastern Europe.
The Germans had no tank transporters. Hence they didn't have a way to transport tanks.
If they had those then they would actually use their tanks.