±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6645

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 709
Total: 709
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Photo Gallery
03: Community Forums
04: Community Forums
05: Your Account
06: Community Forums
07: Downloads
08: Photo Gallery
09: Downloads
10: Community Forums
11: Community Forums
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: Home
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Community Forums
18: Statistics
19: Downloads
20: Community Forums
21: Statistics
22: Photo Gallery
23: Downloads
24: Photo Gallery
25: Community Forums
26: Community Forums
27: Photo Gallery
28: CPGlang
29: Community Forums
30: Community Forums
31: Community Forums
32: Home
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Home
36: Community Forums
37: Community Forums
38: Community Forums
39: Community Forums
40: Community Forums
41: Home
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: Community Forums
46: Community Forums
47: Community Forums
48: Photo Gallery
49: News Archive
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Statistics
53: Downloads
54: Photo Gallery
55: Home
56: Community Forums
57: Photo Gallery
58: Photo Gallery
59: Home
60: Member Screenshots
61: Your Account
62: Home
63: Downloads
64: Community Forums
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Community Forums
70: Photo Gallery
71: Home
72: Photo Gallery
73: Community Forums
74: Your Account
75: Home
76: Community Forums
77: Photo Gallery
78: Community Forums
79: Community Forums
80: Downloads
81: Community Forums
82: Community Forums
83: Community Forums
84: CPGlang
85: Community Forums
86: Community Forums
87: Home
88: Photo Gallery
89: Photo Gallery
90: Community Forums
91: Community Forums
92: Photo Gallery
93: Downloads
94: Downloads
95: Community Forums
96: Community Forums
97: Photo Gallery
98: Community Forums
99: Home
100: Your Account
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Downloads
104: Community Forums
105: Downloads
106: Community Forums
107: Community Forums
108: Community Forums
109: Photo Gallery
110: Community Forums
111: Home
112: Community Forums
113: Photo Gallery
114: Community Forums
115: Community Forums
116: Downloads
117: Photo Gallery
118: Community Forums
119: Community Forums
120: Community Forums
121: Photo Gallery
122: Community Forums
123: Home
124: Home
125: Home
126: Community Forums
127: Downloads
128: Photo Gallery
129: Community Forums
130: Community Forums
131: Member Screenshots
132: Community Forums
133: Community Forums
134: Downloads
135: Community Forums
136: Community Forums
137: Photo Gallery
138: Downloads
139: Community Forums
140: Downloads
141: Community Forums
142: Community Forums
143: Photo Gallery
144: Photo Gallery
145: Photo Gallery
146: Downloads
147: Community Forums
148: Photo Gallery
149: Community Forums
150: Community Forums
151: Community Forums
152: Community Forums
153: Community Forums
154: Downloads
155: Community Forums
156: Photo Gallery
157: Community Forums
158: Downloads
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: CPGlang
162: News Archive
163: Community Forums
164: Community Forums
165: Community Forums
166: Downloads
167: Photo Gallery
168: CPGlang
169: Community Forums
170: Community Forums
171: Member Screenshots
172: Community Forums
173: CPGlang
174: Community Forums
175: Community Forums
176: Downloads
177: Community Forums
178: Downloads
179: Community Forums
180: Community Forums
181: Your Account
182: Community Forums
183: Community Forums
184: Community Forums
185: Photo Gallery
186: Photo Gallery
187: News Archive
188: Home
189: Community Forums
190: Member Screenshots
191: Community Forums
192: Community Forums
193: Community Forums
194: Community Forums
195: Community Forums
196: Community Forums
197: Community Forums
198: Photo Gallery
199: Photo Gallery
200: Statistics
201: Downloads
202: Home
203: Community Forums
204: Community Forums
205: Community Forums
206: Community Forums
207: Home
208: Photo Gallery
209: Community Forums
210: Community Forums
211: Downloads
212: Community Forums
213: Photo Gallery
214: Downloads
215: Community Forums
216: Home
217: Downloads
218: Community Forums
219: Community Forums
220: Home
221: Community Forums
222: Community Forums
223: Photo Gallery
224: Community Forums
225: Community Forums
226: Downloads
227: Community Forums
228: Community Forums
229: Community Forums
230: Downloads
231: Community Forums
232: Photo Gallery
233: Photo Gallery
234: Community Forums
235: Community Forums
236: Photo Gallery
237: Community Forums
238: Community Forums
239: Community Forums
240: Downloads
241: Community Forums
242: Photo Gallery
243: Community Forums
244: Member Screenshots
245: Community Forums
246: Community Forums
247: Community Forums
248: Home
249: Community Forums
250: Downloads
251: Photo Gallery
252: Downloads
253: Community Forums
254: Photo Gallery
255: Downloads
256: Community Forums
257: Community Forums
258: Downloads
259: Downloads
260: Home
261: Community Forums
262: Community Forums
263: Community Forums
264: Community Forums
265: Community Forums
266: Your Account
267: Community Forums
268: Community Forums
269: Community Forums
270: Photo Gallery
271: Community Forums
272: Downloads
273: Downloads
274: Downloads
275: Home
276: Community Forums
277: Your Account
278: Photo Gallery
279: Community Forums
280: Community Forums
281: Community Forums
282: Community Forums
283: Community Forums
284: Community Forums
285: Community Forums
286: CPGlang
287: Community Forums
288: Downloads
289: Community Forums
290: Community Forums
291: Community Forums
292: Community Forums
293: Community Forums
294: Community Forums
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Downloads
298: Community Forums
299: Photo Gallery
300: News Archive
301: Photo Gallery
302: Photo Gallery
303: CPGlang
304: Community Forums
305: Community Forums
306: Community Forums
307: Community Forums
308: Your Account
309: Home
310: Home
311: Your Account
312: Home
313: Downloads
314: Your Account
315: Downloads
316: Downloads
317: Community Forums
318: Community Forums
319: Community Forums
320: Community Forums
321: Community Forums
322: Downloads
323: Downloads
324: Photo Gallery
325: Community Forums
326: Community Forums
327: Photo Gallery
328: Photo Gallery
329: Community Forums
330: Downloads
331: Photo Gallery
332: Photo Gallery
333: Photo Gallery
334: Community Forums
335: Community Forums
336: CPGlang
337: Downloads
338: Home
339: Member Screenshots
340: Community Forums
341: Community Forums
342: Community Forums
343: Home
344: CPGlang
345: Community Forums
346: Photo Gallery
347: Home
348: Community Forums
349: Your Account
350: Community Forums
351: Community Forums
352: Statistics
353: Community Forums
354: Community Forums
355: Community Forums
356: Home
357: Photo Gallery
358: Downloads
359: Photo Gallery
360: Community Forums
361: Community Forums
362: Your Account
363: Downloads
364: Community Forums
365: Photo Gallery
366: Photo Gallery
367: Community Forums
368: Your Account
369: Community Forums
370: Photo Gallery
371: Photo Gallery
372: Community Forums
373: Community Forums
374: Community Forums
375: Community Forums
376: Downloads
377: Community Forums
378: Community Forums
379: Community Forums
380: Community Forums
381: Community Forums
382: Community Forums
383: Downloads
384: Community Forums
385: CPGlang
386: Community Forums
387: Community Forums
388: Photo Gallery
389: Downloads
390: Community Forums
391: Home
392: News
393: Downloads
394: Community Forums
395: Downloads
396: Photo Gallery
397: Home
398: Home
399: Community Forums
400: Community Forums
401: Downloads
402: Community Forums
403: Community Forums
404: Downloads
405: Photo Gallery
406: Community Forums
407: Community Forums
408: Community Forums
409: Community Forums
410: Community Forums
411: Photo Gallery
412: Community Forums
413: Community Forums
414: Photo Gallery
415: Home
416: Home
417: Community Forums
418: Your Account
419: Community Forums
420: Community Forums
421: Community Forums
422: Community Forums
423: Home
424: Community Forums
425: Photo Gallery
426: Home
427: Community Forums
428: Community Forums
429: Downloads
430: Photo Gallery
431: Community Forums
432: Community Forums
433: Photo Gallery
434: Photo Gallery
435: Photo Gallery
436: Community Forums
437: Photo Gallery
438: Community Forums
439: Downloads
440: Photo Gallery
441: Community Forums
442: Home
443: Photo Gallery
444: Home
445: Community Forums
446: Downloads
447: Home
448: Your Account
449: Community Forums
450: Community Forums
451: Community Forums
452: Downloads
453: Community Forums
454: Community Forums
455: Community Forums
456: Home
457: Community Forums
458: Community Forums
459: Downloads
460: Community Forums
461: Statistics
462: Community Forums
463: Your Account
464: Downloads
465: Downloads
466: Downloads
467: Community Forums
468: Community Forums
469: Community Forums
470: Community Forums
471: Community Forums
472: Downloads
473: Photo Gallery
474: Downloads
475: Community Forums
476: Downloads
477: Photo Gallery
478: Community Forums
479: Community Forums
480: Community Forums
481: Downloads
482: Downloads
483: Community Forums
484: Community Forums
485: Community Forums
486: Downloads
487: Home
488: Community Forums
489: Community Forums
490: Home
491: Community Forums
492: Your Account
493: Community Forums
494: Home
495: Downloads
496: Community Forums
497: Photo Gallery
498: Community Forums
499: Downloads
500: Community Forums
501: Photo Gallery
502: News Archive
503: Community Forums
504: Community Forums
505: Community Forums
506: Community Forums
507: Member Screenshots
508: Photo Gallery
509: Community Forums
510: Community Forums
511: Home
512: Community Forums
513: Photo Gallery
514: Community Forums
515: Community Forums
516: Community Forums
517: Photo Gallery
518: Home
519: Community Forums
520: Community Forums
521: Photo Gallery
522: Community Forums
523: Community Forums
524: Community Forums
525: Member Screenshots
526: Community Forums
527: Community Forums
528: Downloads
529: Community Forums
530: Community Forums
531: Photo Gallery
532: Photo Gallery
533: Community Forums
534: Community Forums
535: Community Forums
536: Community Forums
537: Community Forums
538: Community Forums
539: Community Forums
540: News
541: Community Forums
542: Community Forums
543: Community Forums
544: Downloads
545: Community Forums
546: Your Account
547: Community Forums
548: Community Forums
549: Community Forums
550: Downloads
551: Community Forums
552: Downloads
553: Photo Gallery
554: Community Forums
555: Community Forums
556: Downloads
557: Community Forums
558: Community Forums
559: Community Forums
560: Community Forums
561: Community Forums
562: Photo Gallery
563: Photo Gallery
564: Community Forums
565: Community Forums
566: Community Forums
567: Community Forums
568: Photo Gallery
569: Community Forums
570: Community Forums
571: Downloads
572: Home
573: Community Forums
574: Member Screenshots
575: Community Forums
576: Community Forums
577: Photo Gallery
578: Your Account
579: Community Forums
580: Community Forums
581: Home
582: Photo Gallery
583: Community Forums
584: Community Forums
585: Community Forums
586: Home
587: Photo Gallery
588: Downloads
589: Community Forums
590: Community Forums
591: Community Forums
592: Community Forums
593: Community Forums
594: Home
595: Community Forums
596: Downloads
597: Community Forums
598: Home
599: Home
600: Downloads
601: Photo Gallery
602: Downloads
603: Photo Gallery
604: Photo Gallery
605: Community Forums
606: Downloads
607: Downloads
608: Downloads
609: Community Forums
610: Your Account
611: Downloads
612: Community Forums
613: Community Forums
614: Photo Gallery
615: Community Forums
616: Community Forums
617: Community Forums
618: Downloads
619: Community Forums
620: Community Forums
621: Photo Gallery
622: Photo Gallery
623: Community Forums
624: Community Forums
625: Downloads
626: Community Forums
627: Community Forums
628: Downloads
629: Community Forums
630: Community Forums
631: Community Forums
632: Photo Gallery
633: Community Forums
634: Photo Gallery
635: Community Forums
636: Community Forums
637: Community Forums
638: Downloads
639: Community Forums
640: Community Forums
641: Home
642: Community Forums
643: Downloads
644: Photo Gallery
645: Community Forums
646: Downloads
647: Community Forums
648: Community Forums
649: Community Forums
650: Downloads
651: Community Forums
652: CPGlang
653: Community Forums
654: Community Forums
655: Community Forums
656: Community Forums
657: Photo Gallery
658: Community Forums
659: Home
660: Photo Gallery
661: Community Forums
662: Photo Gallery
663: Community Forums
664: Community Forums
665: Community Forums
666: Community Forums
667: Photo Gallery
668: Community Forums
669: Community Forums
670: Downloads
671: Community Forums
672: Community Forums
673: Photo Gallery
674: Home
675: News
676: Home
677: Downloads
678: Home
679: Community Forums
680: Community Forums
681: Community Forums
682: Community Forums
683: Community Forums
684: Community Forums
685: Home
686: Photo Gallery
687: Community Forums
688: Photo Gallery
689: Community Forums
690: Downloads
691: Community Forums
692: Your Account
693: Downloads
694: Community Forums
695: Community Forums
696: Community Forums
697: Downloads
698: Community Forums
699: Community Forums
700: Community Forums
701: Community Forums
702: Community Forums
703: Home
704: News
705: Community Forums
706: Downloads
707: Community Forums
708: Community Forums
709: Community Forums

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
Tiger I – pathetic reliability?
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
lehr
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Feb 24, 2006
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:16 pm
Post subject: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

This was posted on a forum on BoardGameGeek (I have the quote below so you do not have to use the link - for some reason BGG web pages can take a long time to download).

Geek List: wargames worth pre-ordering

The game’s designer gives some history of one of the units:

BTW, a little history of that counter....

That counter is schwere Panzer-Kompanie Hummel (K.St.N. 1176(f.g)) and was equipped with 14 PzKpfw VI Tiger Is...

It was formed in July 1944 at the Pz.Ers.Abt.500 in Paderborn, Germany as an "Alarmeinheit". After recovering from wounds in Italy, Hauptmann Hans Hummel was placed in command. Hummel selected his subcommanders available at PzErsAbt 500 from the officers present he knew from fighting in Italy with Pz.Abt 504.

His unit was alerted at around 12:30am on September 18th and was ordered to report to the Arnhem area. The unit arrived at Bocholt station on the morning of the 19th.

With the rail line blocked from allied air interdiction and other traffic proceeding in both directions, and with no tank transporters available, Hummel was ordered to proceed the 80 kms with the Tigers under their own power.

Tigers, as many of you might know, are not the most reliable of tanks under heavy use and all but 2 broke down during the trip. The two lucky tanks to make the trip without braking down were commanded by Leutnant Knaack and Feldwebel Barneki. They arrived around nightfall of the 19th at the Arnhem bridge perimeter.

The entire unit was not fully formed until the 24th - sans 3 Tigers.


Only 2 out of 14 Tiger Is (14%) made the 80km (50 mile) trip without breakdown. Compared with many other theaters of WWII, Holland in September does not seem like it would have the most demanding terrain or weather.

Is this reliability typical of Tiger Is?

What about other WWII tanks?

If 14 Shermans set out on the same trip how many would make it without breaking down?

What about 14 T-34s?

What about 14 AFVs with which you have personal experience (including post WWII)?

I am sure a lot depends on the condition of the tanks at the start of the trip, but the above performance just seems really bad. It seems like reliability like this would greatly reduce the effectiveness of an AFV especially on the offensive.

Any comments, knowledge and experience greatly appreciated.
Back to top
View user's profile
Sabot
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 380
Location: Kentucky
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:54 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

The Tiger got a bad reputation (mechanically) at Kursk because they were deployed without first working all of the bugs out of them. Additionally, in wintery muddy weather, the mud would freeze between the road wheels overnight and immobilize the tank.

It also suffered from poor fuel consumption. I do not know the range of the tank off hand, but I believe it was less than 100 miles.

The Sherman was a mechanically sound vehicle and a 50 mile trip would have been easy to accomplish. The Sherman came with about four different engine types and fuel efficiency and reliability depended on which engine was being used.

_________________
RobG
Back to top
View user's profile AIM Address
PattonCurator
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 8:38 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

Agree about the Shermans - very reliable - probably 13 of the 14 would make the 50 mile trip (and the 14th would probably make it late after the crew repaired it. The T34 also has the same rugged reliability.

Charles
Back to top
View user's profile
Dubliner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 94

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

nt


Last edited by Dubliner on Sat Mar 24, 2007 2:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile
clausb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:45 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

- lehr
Only 2 out of 14 Tiger Is (14%) made the 80km (50 mile) trip without breakdown. Compared with many other theaters of WWII, Holland in September does not seem like it would have the most demanding terrain or weather.

Is this reliability typical of Tiger Is?


The Tiger was a heavy and fairly complicated vehicle which needed a lot of maintenance to operate properly. IIRC the operation manuals for the Tiger states that the crew has to check a number of things on the vehicle for every 15km of road march and fix any problems encountered. So you need crews that know their mount, you need conditions that allows the crew to take care of the vehicle and of course you need spares and maintenance units to fix any problems that occur during the roadmarch. Once you start removing some of those prerequisites for keeping your Tiger happy, chances are there will be trouble.

Tigers of s.SS-PzAbt 101 travelled about 300 kilometers on the road from Northern France to Normandy in June 1944, starting out with 45 tanks on June 7th and was down to 17 operational Tigers on June 12th. Most of the reminder had broken down along the road. It is evident that once tanks start to brake down along a 300 kilometer journey, it is impossible for the maintenance company to help everyone and things will start to fall apart. I has to be said that this battalion did come under allied air attack as well, which clearly didn't help the situation any. AFAIK no Tigers were lossed to allied airpower until June 13th.
A major problem for s.SS-PzAbt 101 was that their new Tiges used the steel-rimmed wheels which were very hard on the tracks, particularily the tracks pins, when travelling on hard surfaces.

IIRC Kompanie Hummel took over their Tigers from Pz.Ers.u.Ausb.Abt 500, a training formation, so they might have been well used vehicles to begin with.

- lehr
What about other WWII tanks?

If 14 Shermans set out on the same trip how many would make it without breaking down?

What about 14 T-34s?


WWII tanks were generally fragile beasts compared with modern equipment, but neither the Sherman nor the T-34 were as heavy and complex as the Tiger I. They would probably suffer a lot less from the strains of a long roadmarch and the Sherman in particular would benefit from its rubber rimmed wheels and rubber-bushed track pins.

That said, T-34s were not really known for their production quality or reliability, at least through parts of the war, so my money would be on the Sherman as the more reliable, everything else being equal.

- lehr
I am sure a lot depends on the condition of the tanks at the start of the trip, but the above performance just seems really bad. It seems like reliability like this would greatly reduce the effectiveness of an AFV especially on the offensive.


Indeed. But I think we have to keep in mind the day and age of these machines. In WWI, you could start with 400 tanks and in a couple of days you would have very few left in operational condition, the rest being mostly broken down or stuck rather than destroyed. That lesson was carried over to WWII which is why early war German armoured divisions had up to 350 tanks. That way they could afford to have half of them out of order and still pack a punch. That was clearly demonstrated during the Battle for France when a division could drop to 50% of its strength in a few days of operation and then raise the figure to 80% after a day or two of maintenance and repair.

My 2 ørers worth anyway

Claus B

PS: Sabot, the Tiger was first employed around Leningrad in November 1942, I think you are confusing it with the Panther, which had some serious issues during its combat debut at Kursk in 1943 (and several months after that as well, but that's a different issue).
Back to top
View user's profile
mike_Duplessis
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 236

PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:22 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

I rather wonder if it was less a problem with the Tigers and more a problem with German maintenance units. You hear about American tank maintenance units doing heroic work all night long in order to get the tanks back up and running in the morning. Now that i recall, the book "Deathtraps" had some especially nasty things to say about the original Sherman radial engine. In that book I recall he broke-down what proportion of men in a Tank Battalion were involved in vehicle maintenance, and it was a grotesquely large number. By '44 Germany probably couldn't afford the manpower for an effective maintenance section.
Back to top
View user's profile
J.McGillivray
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 149

PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

The following is from “German Tanks of World War II� by Dr. S. Hart and Dr. R. Hart.(p.123-124)

“One engagement, during the 1944 Allied campaign in Italy, highlights the difficulties the Germans faced thanks to the poor cross-country performance, mechanical unreliability and the sheer physical bulk of the Tiger I tank. Between 23 and 25 May 1944, the 16Tigers of the 3rd Company, 506th Heavy Tank Battalion fought a costly engagement around Cori. On 23 May, the company advanced across a railway embankment and engaged Allied armour, but during the crossing three Tigers were disabled, two with track problems and one with gearbox failure. The Tiger's 2.02m (6ft Sin) barrel-overhang also proved a problem, as two other Tiger tanks accidentally jammed their guns into the soil as they came down the steep-sided embankment and had to be towed clear. Eventually 13 Tigers continued the advance during which they knocked out six Sherman tanks. During this attack, however, Allied artillery damaged another Tiger which withdrew back to a German workshop. The next day Allied anti-tank fire disabled another Tiger which was blown up by its crew.

“The company was then ordered to withdraw. While five Tigers held back an Allied attack, the remaining six tanks tried to tow away the three disabled Tigers by the embankment. However, the strain caused four of the six towing Tigers to break down. The Germans then had to destroy the three disabled tanks by the embankment and use the remaining two Tigers to tow back the four that had broken down. By the time the company had withdrawn to Cori, two of its five rearguard tanks had been disabled (one by Allied fire and the other because of a gearbox fault) while one of the two towing tanks had also broken down. Hence, while the three operational rearguard Tigers continued to block the Allied advance, back at Cori the company commander could deploy just one working Tiger and six disabled ones. With the rearguard now unable to stop the Allied advance into Cori, and with recovery vehicles unable to reach the company in time, the commander ordered the destruction of the six disabled Tigers to prevent them falling into Allied hands, while his remaining four tanks withdrew north. The company had lost 12 Tigers, but only three had been disabled by Allied fire. Clearly, the Tiger's mechanical unreliability was more of a threat than Allied fire.�
Back to top
View user's profile
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 11:54 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

As a career Tanker, I can only imagine the utter frustration of the crews. Knowing that they man such a powerful vehicle, but having to 'scuttle' them due to mechanical unreliability.

_________________
"Gonna hold my breath until Armor returns home..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
clausb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 6:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

- J.McGillivray
The following is from “German Tanks of World War II� by Dr. S. Hart and Dr. R. Hart.(p.123-124)

“One engagement, during the 1944 Allied campaign in Italy, highlights the difficulties the Germans faced thanks to the poor cross-country performance, mechanical unreliability and the sheer physical bulk of the Tiger I tank. Between 23 and 25 May 1944, the 16Tigers of the 3rd Company, 506th Heavy Tank Battalion fought a costly engagement around Cori.


In all fairness, this particular example is one of the worst performances of a Tiger unit and hardly typical. The unit was 3. Kompanie s.PzAbt 508 and there are at least two different accounts of what happened.

The company was caught in the middle of a major allied advance and apparently had no backup from the battalion maintenance company which had the heavy recovery vehicles. In the end, tanks with even minor damage, combat or mechanical, had to blown up or left to the enemy as the allies were advancing past the damaged vehicles. In such situations, armour losses are always high, regardless of type.

If you look at the incident, you start with three tanks breaking down on May 23rd. Two threw their tracks, which was not, to my knowledge, a common complaint with the Tiger, so it should probably not be put down to unreliability but rather accident (bad maintenance, bad driving, bad terriain or bad luck). One had transmission trouble, which is more like the kind of fault you would ascribe to mechanical deficiencies.

Then they try to recover the three broken down tanks by towing them after six other Tigers. AFAIK this procedure was actually forbidden unless there was imminent danger of the damaged tank falling into enemy hands. Tigers were not designed for such work, they had enough trouble shifting their own weight around.
Here the stories start to differ. In the Hart & Hart account, four of the towing tanks brakes down with transmission damage and one additional tank brakes down towing while two Tigers are trying to tow four other Tigers - a somewhat dubious claim, I think! In any case, this means that five Tigers broke down with transmission damage from towing.
In the report quoted by Jentz, four tanks of the six towing brakes down and then gets towed in turn by four other Tigers. These four Tigers make it, but later two of them brakes down transmission damage as well and it is tempting to assume that this had to do with the fact that they had been acting as recovery vehicles for most of the day. Another one of these four also brakes down later in the day with unspecified "technical problems".

Hart & Hart mentions another, non-towing Tiger braking down with transmission trouble later as well, which makes it two "unprovoked" transmission failures. In the Jentz account, you can argue that only one tank suffered from "unprovoked" transmission trouble while all the others broke down because of misuse.

When the allied forces neared the collection point for the damaged vehicles, the Tigers were blown up - six according to Hart & Hart, nine according to the Jentz report.

One could argue that if the company had the support from the necessary recovery vehicles, they might have lost between five and seven fewer tanks, namely those that broke down trying to recover the other losses.

During its time in Italy prior to this incident (from mid-february), the battalion managed to keep about 57% of its vehicles operational on average, with a low of 17% and a high of 93%. And it did see a fair amount of combat in the period.

Bottom line is that I think this story is more about the Tigers mechanical fragility than it unreliability. It did not stand up well to abuse, but does that make it unreliable? And of course it speaks of the problems involved in being overrun by the enemy!

Claus B
Back to top
View user's profile
lehr
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Feb 24, 2006
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:52 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

Thanks to all for your replies. It's easy to see the importance of firepower, armor and mobility, but now I have a greater appreciation for the importance of reliability and maintenance support.
Back to top
View user's profile
Dirk
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 115
Location: South Africa
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:26 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

great thread - interesting discussion .

My 2 cents - The Tiger did the job it was designed for and thus could perhaps be viewed as a success.

Only thing was that the support system for the Tiger was not implemented , IIRC from a post-graduate course in Logistics Engineering I had :

Support the design and design the support .

My humble opinion Wink

Dirk
Back to top
View user's profile
mike_Duplessis
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 236

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:31 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

One problem the late Tiger II chassis' had to worry about that I don't think the early Tiger I chassis did was slave labor teams being forced to assemble them. I recall (working of distant memory here) there's an account in the big 653rd book of Jadgtigers leaving the factory near war's en and hardly making it 40 miles out of town before most of them had broken down. It seems the radiators were so shoddily constructed that coolant flow was drastically restricted, quickly causing breakdowns due to overheating. It's tempting to imagine a heroic slave laborer risking death while purposefully soldering the radiators half-shut.

Its funny comparing this discussion with contemporary Allied accounts of German armor. It seems the grass in always greener on the other side. From the U.S. side the German tanks appeared to have better flotation (ground pressure), maneuverability, optics, armor, guns, engines (compared to the old radial), and pretty much everything else! Well, The U.S. tankers did prefer their own radios, turret drives, and HC smoke shell. But that's about it.
Back to top
View user's profile
clausb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 2:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

- mike_Duplessis
One problem the late Tiger II chassis' had to worry about that I don't think the early Tiger I chassis did was slave labor teams being forced to assemble them. I recall (working of distant memory here) there's an account in the big 653rd book of Jadgtigers leaving the factory near war's en and hardly making it 40 miles out of town before most of them had broken down. It seems the radiators were so shoddily constructed that coolant flow was drastically restricted, quickly causing breakdowns due to overheating. It's tempting to imagine a heroic slave laborer risking death while purposefully soldering the radiators half-shut.


Or just doing sloppy work due to lack of training, skill, and motivation. But definately a factor - in one German plant (MAN Nürnberg), 55% of the work was made by foreign labour, non-Germans drafted as workers in the occupied countries.

- mike_Duplessis
Its funny comparing this discussion with contemporary Allied accounts of German armor. It seems the grass in always greener on the other side. From the U.S. side the German tanks appeared to have better flotation (ground pressure), maneuverability, optics, armor, guns, engines (compared to the old radial), and pretty much everything else! Well, The U.S. tankers did prefer their own radios, turret drives, and HC smoke shell. But that's about it.


That is really a different issue. Reliability, logistics and production concerns probably becomes a moot point if you are in the field, looking down the barrel of a bigger and badder enemy tank. On the other hand, if reliability, logistics and production does not work, you wont even have a tank, at least not at working one Smile

Claus B
Back to top
View user's profile
J.McGillivray
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 149

PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:31 pm
Post subject: Re: Tiger I – pathetic reliability?

Robin Neillands in his book “The Desert Rats 7th Armoured Division 1940 – 1945� sums things up nicely as followers:

“At this point it may be necessary to explain to a section of the readership that the successful development of a new weapon is far from being the end of the story. The weapon will have a designed range of technical features and benefits, but at least half the effectiveness of any weapon in battle will depend on how it is used, manned, serviced and deployed in battle….. How a weapon is used is therefore as critical to its success as its designed technical performance.�

People who sing the praises of the German cats often talk of their performance under ideal theoretical conditions; although those conditions were seldom encountered in the field. One must take into consideration the actual conditions there the cats were used, or misused.

For example the Panthers with their excellent gun and well sloped armoured, were often thrown into reckless, rushed, poorly planned and poorly supported counter attacks, in Normandy; which exposed the weaknesses of their design.

The most important fact that one must consider is that the Germans, in spite of their Tigers and Panthers, still lost the war. In other words the big cats failed to get the job done!
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 6 Hours



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum