±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: HighestAce
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6648

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

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