T-34 not the best tank?
Select messages from
 # through # Forum FAQ
[/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> The Mess
#1: T-34 not the best tank? Author: mooxe,  PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 4:05 am
    —
http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.ca/2012/07/wwii-myths-t-34-best-tank-of-war.html
 
Nice article with references about how the T-34 being so superior was a myth. Very interesting read.

"In the period 1941-44 the production difference in AFV’s was 2-1 in favor of the Soviets (slightly higher if we add Lend Lease) but the exchange ratio was 3.5-1 in favor of the Germans. This means that if the Germans could concentrate all their production in the East the Soviets would run out of tanks."

"The light tanks T-60 and T-70 and the tank-destroyer SU-76 made up the majority of AFV’s in 1941-42 and even in 1943-45 the T-34 comprised roughly half of the Soviet frontline AFV force."

"...lack of turret basket (a rotating floor that moves as the turret turns) for the loader. This meant that the person loading the shells had to follow the movement of the gun and at the same time keep an eye on the floor so he doesn’t trip on the spent casings."

"A Soviet study in 1943 (23) admitted that the Pz IV was superior to their tank, assigning it a combat value of 1.27 to the T-34’s 1.16 (with the Pz III being the base 1.0)."

"The T-34 is the victim of Soviet and German wartime propaganda. The Russians had every reason to build it up as the best tank of WWII. The Germans also overstated its performance in order to explain their defeats."

Its the age old argument, that will be reignited over countless forums when Fury is released. I think there's more to a tank than just a tank. It's an army that makes a tank effective. Too many factors to just say one is better than the other.
#2: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 7:59 am
    —
That's not a secret in Russia and you can say the WAR has prolonged the life of T-34 for so long, otherwise the production would be ceased in early 1942 in favor to T-34M which was a kind of "hybrid" of PzIII and T-34.
#3: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Fri Jul 04, 2014 4:42 am
    —
I can see the T34 doing well in the beginning of the war. It was ahead of its time. (1940-41) But by 1943 it was just average but what does make it a war winner is the amount produced. Same goes for the Sherman.

If the allies went to Normady with the T34 there would of been the same complaints about the Panthers and Tigers. It really was no better then the Sherman it was just a few years ahead of it.
#4: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Schmal_Turm,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 04, 2014 12:42 pm
    —
The T-34 was best as a shock to knock the Germans out of the drunken complacency that they were entertaining that the Russians were going to be an easy victory. Once the numbers of them on the battlefield were considerable they made almost all of the tank and AT German Weaponry at the time, except for the 88, obsolete. Their introduction helped to hasten the Tiger I and the up gunning of all the German tanks that were still able to be. Until the advent of the T-34 and the KV the plans were to have the Tiger at 50mm armor with a short 75. Obviously, that changed considerably. The Tiger I was eventually designed to withstand the 76mm hits from the frontal arc.

I remember reading where Guerderian was relating a conversation with the Russian military observers before the war as both armies were conducting wargames in Russia. The Russian officers were asking if that was all of the tanks the Germans had as they had not brought out the new T-34s at the time. They were surprised to learn that it was. Obviously, the Russians were not impressed by what they saw from the Germans.

Even though the T-34 was eventually outclassed by the Panther the Germans never could approach the production numbers attained by the T-34. It was always a great breakthrough tank.
#5: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 04, 2014 1:23 pm
    —
Schmal_Turm wrote (View Post):
The T-34 was best as a shock to knock the Germans out of the drunken complacency that they were entertaining that the Russians were going to be an easy victory. Once the numbers of them on the battlefield were considerable they made almost all of the tank and AT German Weaponry at the time, except for the 88, obsolete. Their introduction helped to hasten the Tiger I and the up gunning of all the German tanks that were still able to be. Until the advent of the T-34 and the KV the plans were to have the Tiger at 50mm armor with a short 75. Obviously, that changed considerably. The Tiger I was eventually designed to withstand the 76mm hits from the frontal arc.

I remember reading where Guerderian was relating a conversation with the Russian military observers before the war as both armies were conducting wargames in Russia. The Russian officers were asking if that was all of the tanks the Germans had as they had not brought out the new T-34s at the time. They were surprised to learn that it was. Obviously, the Russians were not impressed by what they saw from the Germans.

Even though the T-34 was eventually outclassed by the Panther the Germans never could approach the production numbers attained by the T-34. It was always a great breakthrough tank.

better read more carefull an information via mooxe's link.
sorry to say but what you have posted here is mostly all wrong Smile
#6: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Schmal_Turm,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 04, 2014 4:34 pm
    —
I read quite a bit of the article and I still don't see what I posted that is so wrong. Unless the CC games are incorrect the German 37 and 50mm guns are not terribly effective against the T-34. The Tiger was up-armored to meet the 76mm gun. What is so wrong? So maybe they weren't the breakthrough tanks I mentioned but they were still in numbers that were hard to counter. Was Guerderian a liar as to what he reported as to what the Russian officials said to him? The German's didn't design the Panther to defeat the T-34?
#7: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 04, 2014 6:30 pm
    —
Quote:
he T-34 was best as a shock to knock the Germans out of the drunken complacency that they were entertaining that the Russians were going to be an easy victory.

no, the Germans didn't pay much attention to those approx 2.000+ T-34 abandoned and KO since June 22nd to October...and only started to cry in October at Mtsensk where exhausted units of Guderian were stopped for several days by 4th TBr using T-34 in ambush tactics.  
and somehow when they offered Guderian to use abandoned T-34 he refused and decided to wait for German tanks...

Quote:
Once the numbers of them on the battlefield were considerable they made almost all of the tank and AT German Weaponry at the time, except for the 88, obsolete.

T-34 became the main tank of the RA since mid 1943 and by then the Germans had tons of AT weapons to deal with it.

Quote:
Their introduction helped to hasten the Tiger I and the up gunning of all the German tanks that were still able to be. Until the advent of the T-34 and the KV the plans were to have the Tiger at 50mm armor with a short 75. Obviously, that changed considerably. The Tiger I was eventually designed to withstand the 76mm hits from the frontal arc.

decision to have 100mm armor tank was taken after the shock of meeting Matilda-2 in France and VK3601(h) with 100mm frontal armour was showed in May 1941...

Quote:
I remember reading where Guerderian was relating a conversation with the Russian military observers before the war as both armies were conducting wargames in Russia. The Russian officers were asking if that was all of the tanks the Germans had as they had not brought out the new T-34s at the time. They were surprised to learn that it was. Obviously, the Russians were not impressed by what they saw from the Germans.

memory fades you. Re-read the book Wink.

Quote:
Even though the T-34 was eventually outclassed by the Panther the Germans never could approach the production numbers attained by the T-34. It was always a great breakthrough tank.

PzIVG with KwK40 was a T-34 killer while invulnerable to T-34 at more than 300m.
#8: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2014 1:39 am
    —
Only around 8,550 PzIV made to a whole lot of T34's
#9: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2014 6:10 am
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Only around 8,550 PzIV made to a whole lot of T34's

the Germans could produce many more PzIV or Panthers or Tigers, the problem was not in production capacities but in production idea i.e. the amount of produced AVFs was equal to amount of trained crews available and not more.
when they started to train crews faster they started to produce more AVFs but that was already too late.
#10: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Schmal_Turm,  PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2014 11:52 am
    —
Well Dima, I reread the part of the book in question and if we are in fact referring to the same book by Guderian I quote the pertinent paragraph. The context I was referring to was wrong, as it was not part of the wargames in Russia, but the subject matter was still correct:

In the spring of 1941 Hitler had specifically ordered that a Russian military commission be shown over our tank schools and factories; in this order he had insisted that nothing be concealed from them. The Russian officers in question firmly refused to believe that the Panzer IV was in fact our heaviest tank. They said repeatedly that we must be hiding our newest models from them, and complained that we were not carrying out Hitler’s order to show them everything. The military commission was so insistent on this point that eventually our manufacturers and Ordnance Office officials concluded: ‘It seems that the Russians must already possess better and heavier tanks than we do.’ It was at the end of July 1941, that the T34 tank appeared at the front and the riddle of the new Russian model was solved. (Panzer Leader, pg 119)

So tell me now, what was so wrong with this part of what I said?
#11: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:58 pm
    —
Dima wrote (View Post):
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Only around 8,550 PzIV made to a whole lot of T34's

the Germans could produce many more PzIV or Panthers or Tigers, the problem was not in production capacities but in production idea i.e. the amount of produced AVFs was equal to amount of trained crews available and not more.
when they started to train crews faster they started to produce more AVFs but that was already too late.


Bull crap. Please show me where you read that information.  LOL
#12: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2014 9:20 pm
    —
Schmal_Turm wrote (View Post):
Well Dima, I reread the part of the book in question and if we are in fact referring to the same book by Guderian I quote the pertinent paragraph. The context I was referring to was wrong, as it was not part of the wargames in Russia, but the subject matter was still correct:

In the spring of 1941 Hitler had specifically ordered that a Russian military commission be shown over our tank schools and factories; in this order he had insisted that nothing be concealed from them. The Russian officers in question firmly refused to believe that the Panzer IV was in fact our heaviest tank. They said repeatedly that we must be hiding our newest models from them, and complained that we were not carrying out Hitler’s order to show them everything. The military commission was so insistent on this point that eventually our manufacturers and Ordnance Office officials concluded: ‘It seems that the Russians must already possess better and heavier tanks than we do.’ It was at the end of July 1941, that the T34 tank appeared at the front and the riddle of the new Russian model was solved. (Panzer Leader, pg 119)

that's because the Soviet intellegence was continuosly reporting heavy tanks with 100mm armour beeing developed in Germany.
and btw Guderian units met first T-34 during first days of invasion.

Quote:
So tell me now, what was so wrong with this part of what I said?

yes it was a context and that's why I told to re-read and nothing about wrong in that quote Wink.
#13: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2014 9:23 pm
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Dima wrote (View Post):
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Only around 8,550 PzIV made to a whole lot of T34's

the Germans could produce many more PzIV or Panthers or Tigers, the problem was not in production capacities but in production idea i.e. the amount of produced AVFs was equal to amount of trained crews available and not more.
when they started to train crews faster they started to produce more AVFs but that was already too late.

Bull crap. Please show me where you read that information.  LOL

Ahh good case of agressive irrogance! Smile
If my statement is wrong you can easily prove it is wrong...please Wink.
#14: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:31 am
    —
Dima wrote (View Post):
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Dima wrote (View Post):
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Only around 8,550 PzIV made to a whole lot of T34's

the Germans could produce many more PzIV or Panthers or Tigers, the problem was not in production capacities but in production idea i.e. the amount of produced AVFs was equal to amount of trained crews available and not more.
when they started to train crews faster they started to produce more AVFs but that was already too late.

Bull crap. Please show me where you read that information.  LOL

Ahh good case of agressive irrogance! Smile
If my statement is wrong you can easily prove it is wrong...please Wink.


I asked you to show me this information... I asked you... Why did you turn it around and ask me? LOL Your funny...
You made the statement about production so prove it. Wink Educate me. Wink Please.
#15: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:07 am
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Dima wrote (View Post):
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Dima wrote (View Post):
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Only around 8,550 PzIV made to a whole lot of T34's

the Germans could produce many more PzIV or Panthers or Tigers, the problem was not in production capacities but in production idea i.e. the amount of produced AVFs was equal to amount of trained crews available and not more.
when they started to train crews faster they started to produce more AVFs but that was already too late.

Bull crap. Please show me where you read that information.  LOL

Ahh good case of agressive irrogance! Smile
If my statement is wrong you can easily prove it is wrong...please Wink.


I asked you to show me this information... I asked you... Why did you turn it around and ask me? LOL Your funny...
You made the statement about production so prove it. Wink Educate me. Wink Please.

I made a statement, you said it is a bull crap - so prove it was wrong - that's a simple logic Wink.
I will make more statements:

1) The Germans had much better production capabilities than the USSR.
2) The Germans could easily produce 20.000 armored vehicles a year on same facilities.
3) By the end of the war the Germans produced only about 25% less armored vehicles than the USSR.
#16: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: AT_Stalky,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:48 am
    —
Dima wrote (View Post):
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Only around 8,550 PzIV made to a whole lot of T34's

the Germans could produce many more PzIV or Panthers or Tigers, the problem was not in production capacities but in production idea i.e. the amount of produced AVFs was equal to amount of trained crews available and not more.
when they started to train crews faster they started to produce more AVFs but that was already too late.


Dima, wasnt it also the fuel capacity and battefield logistics that was a bottleneck for germans limiting the number of AFW and motorization?
#17: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 12:13 pm
    —
Hi Stalk,

AT_Stalky wrote (View Post):
Dima wrote (View Post):
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
Only around 8,550 PzIV made to a whole lot of T34's

the Germans could produce many more PzIV or Panthers or Tigers, the problem was not in production capacities but in production idea i.e. the amount of produced AVFs was equal to amount of trained crews available and not more.
when they started to train crews faster they started to produce more AVFs but that was already too late.

Dima, wasnt it also the fuel capacity and battefield logistics that was a bottleneck for germans limiting the number of AFW and motorization?

that's a common knowlegde, yes, but if you check each year you wouldn't see an increase of fuel/materials availability but still there was a drastical increase of armoured vehicles produced since 1943.
And in the same time in 1943 they expanded Panzerwaffe, rebuilt lost Pz(G)Ds, reduced training time for crews and got a way less quality but mass armored units. That's when SS-PzD started to be elite as they still kept an old training process along with some Heer elite units like GD.
#18: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:11 pm
    —
Quote:

1) The Germans had much better production capabilities than the USSR.
2) The Germans could easily produce 20.000 armored vehicles a year on same facilities.
3) By the end of the war the Germans produced only about 25% less armored vehicles than the USSR.



Yes, I see statements with 0 facts... LOL  Where did you get this information? Site sources please.

1) Much better? That's why they produces 50% less AFV... Better in what way?
2) 20,000 more per year.  I mean with your numbers Germany would of out produces America? really? Site sources!!!!!
3) Wikipedia:
Total German AFV output from 1939:    48,777
Total Russian AFV  output from 1940:  106,025

I see around 50%... Not 25%

LOL, you are funny! Again, site sources... Forgive me if I believe Wikipedia before I believe you...
Germany would of out produces America? really? ROFLMAO Oh this one is killing me..  

But again, If I am wrong then please show me by siting sources. I am always willing to learn.
#19: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:14 pm
    —
FYI
America's output of AFV according to Wikipedia was around 122,000
#20: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:34 pm
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):

Yes, I see statements with 0 facts... LOL  Where did you get this information? Site sources please.

I gave you facts, it's your problems that you can't disprove my statements or find proves of my statements.

Quote:
1) Much better? That's why they produces 50% less AFV... Better in what way?
2) 20,000 more per year.  I mean with your numbers Germany would of out produces America? really? Site sources!!!!!
3) Wikipedia:
Total German AFV output from 1939:    48,777
Total Russian AFV  output from 1940:  106,025
I see around 50%... Not 25%

AVF is not equal to armored vehicle, the Soviets couldn't spend armor plates on armored cars as most of them went to a tank production. So why do you count AVFs only? For example SdKfz 232 had 30mm frontal armor and T-70 had 35mm frontal armor....
And even if you count AVFs only, try to count a gross tonnage of AVFs produced that can help you (although I doubt) to understand approximate use of materials and manpower.

Quote:
LOL, you are funny! Again, site sources... Forgive me if I believe Wikipedia before I believe you...
Germany would of out produces America? really? ROFLMAO Oh this one is killing me..  

Why would Germany outproduce the USA? Check how many armored vehicles did USA produce.

Quote:
But again, If I am wrong then please show me by siting sources. I am always willing to learn.

most of the sources regarding this question are available online, just make an effort to find them.
#21: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:36 pm
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
FYI
America's output of AFV according to Wikipedia was around 122,000

god bless Wiki! Wink
Now try to find the total production of armored vehicles for the USA.
#22: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:48 pm
    —
You sited no sources. None at all. You just spout off bull crap. You are funny!!!! Really funny and boring...    Surprised

SITE SOURCES!!!!!!!! Please!  :)

No facts, Out produce America...  LOL  How, Where? Anything? Come on. Just this one fact.
Please!!!!
#23: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:57 pm
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
You sited no sources. None at all. You just spout off bull crap. You are funny!!!! Really funny and boring...    Surprised
SITE SOURCES!!!!!!!! Please!  Smile
No facts, Out produce America...  LOL  How, Where? Anything? Come on. Just this one fact.
Please!!!!

again, I made statements, you said they are bull crap, so it's up to you to disprove my statements - that's a simple logic Wink.
if you don't have sources to disprove my statement then you should fuck off or make an excuse for your shitty statement and ask for answers - that's a simple logic Wink
#24: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 6:26 pm
    —
Sources!!!  Site them!!!  Please!!!!
#25: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Pzt_Crackwise, Location: Switzerland PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:53 pm
    —
Yeah, I also would be very interested to see sources cited during arguments (overall) Smile

Apart from strengthening the discussing people's cases, it also makes it much more interesting to follow the discussion since other people can also learn some stuff from these sources.
#26: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:02 pm
    —
Pzt_Crackwise wrote (View Post):
Yeah, I also would be very interested to see sources cited during arguments (overall) Smile
Apart from strengthening the discussing people's cases, it also makes it much more interesting to follow the discussion since other people can also learn some stuff from these sources.

I can answer and explain but first the guy needs to excuse for his words or disprove my words.
#27: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:20 pm
    —
CITE SOURCES!!! You never did.
At least I used Wikipedia, you used nothing. Nothing at all.

I am done. Thread closed for me. Waste of time.
#28: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:54 pm
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
CITE SOURCES!!! You never did.
At least I used Wikipedia, you used nothing. Nothing at all.
I am done. Thread closed for me. Waste of time.

fuck off, bye.
#29: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: vobbnobb,  PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:37 pm
    —
I would say in WW2 soviet tanks on average were out armored but not out gunned. They had an easier time fighting German armor than the US & British did, mostly due to their high calibre main guns. They knew this. They most likely used poor visibility and the snow to hinder their advance of being seen when assaulting if you can't hit the armor in a snow storm or at night it wouldn't matter how many inches the tank had on it.
#30: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: dj,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 4:05 am
    —
No...T-34 really is the best all around tank in WW2 due to production rate, innovative sloped armour (Germans copied later) and good balance of speed/protection.  Yes later in war, the Tigers and Panthers were superior...however by the time they arrived it was already too late.  The Germans had been routed in Stalingrad and it was the T-34 that broke the backs of the Axis forces.
#31: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: russ109,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:18 pm
    —
The writing was on the wall for the Germans in the fall of 1941. The Army was over streched, poor logistics, not nearly enough fuel, ammunition, limited tanks, vehicles and never enough soldiers to replace the losses.

The Tiger and Panther good defensive tanks as they were, were over engineered, costly to produce and required a skilled work force to assemble, specially in the case of the Tiger, hence why only a limited number were built.

The T34 was designed to be mass produced by a semi / unskilled work force in large numbers. It couldn't have been that bad as one of the manufacturers who was competing for the Panther contract produced a prototype near identical to the Russian tank.
#32: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:35 pm
    —
Quote:
No...T-34 really is the best all around tank in WW2 due to production rate, innovative sloped armour (Germans copied later) and good balance of speed/protection.

T-34 sloped armor was based on S-35 armor shape.
due to lack of AP shells the main AT ammo for T-34 76mm gun was HE or cannister set on impact till like mid 1942 so they couldn't really fight the German tanks unless in ambush.

Quote:
Yes later in war, the Tigers and Panthers were superior...however by the time they arrived it was already too late.

again, PzIVG was already a pure T-34 killer.

Quote:
The Germans had been routed in Stalingrad and it was the T-34 that broke the backs of the Axis forces.

in Stalingrad around 50% of the RA tanks were T-60/70.
#33: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:45 pm
    —
Quote:
The writing was on the wall for the Germans in the fall of 1941. The Army was over streched, poor logistics, not nearly enough fuel, ammunition, limited tanks, vehicles and never enough soldiers to replace the losses.

ha! both Germans and Soviets  thought differently till like spring 1943 Wink.
example: half of the USSR population remained on the occupied territories by late 1942.

Quote:
The Tiger and Panther good defensive tanks as they were, were over engineered, costly to produce and required a skilled work force to assemble, specially in the case of the Tiger, hence why only a limited number were built.

Tiger wasn't a defence tank, Panther was.

Quote:
The T34 was designed to be mass produced by a semi / unskilled work force in large numbers. It couldn't have been that bad as one of the manufacturers who was competing for the Panther contract produced a prototype near identical to the Russian tank.

not correct, T-34 was a high tech for the Soviet industry and it was very hard to produce it.
but VK3001(db) was never accepted Wink. and somehow very few captured T-34 were pressed to service and before they were upgraded to suit the German demands...
Close Combat Series -> The Mess


output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1