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