±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: 805
Total: 805
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Community Forums
03: Community Forums
04: Photo Gallery
05: Community Forums
06: Photo Gallery
07: Downloads
08: Community Forums
09: Community Forums
10: Photo Gallery
11: Community Forums
12: Statistics
13: Home
14: Community Forums
15: Photo Gallery
16: Statistics
17: Downloads
18: Community Forums
19: Community Forums
20: Community Forums
21: Community Forums
22: Community Forums
23: Community Forums
24: Community Forums
25: Your Account
26: Community Forums
27: Community Forums
28: Community Forums
29: Photo Gallery
30: Community Forums
31: Community Forums
32: Home
33: News
34: Home
35: Community Forums
36: Photo Gallery
37: Home
38: Community Forums
39: Community Forums
40: Photo Gallery
41: Community Forums
42: Photo Gallery
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: Community Forums
46: Community Forums
47: Photo Gallery
48: Community Forums
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Community Forums
53: Community Forums
54: Community Forums
55: Community Forums
56: Community Forums
57: Community Forums
58: Community Forums
59: Community Forums
60: Your Account
61: Photo Gallery
62: Home
63: Community Forums
64: News
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: Home
68: Community Forums
69: Community Forums
70: Community Forums
71: Community Forums
72: Community Forums
73: Downloads
74: Community Forums
75: Community Forums
76: Home
77: Home
78: Community Forums
79: Community Forums
80: Photo Gallery
81: Member Screenshots
82: Photo Gallery
83: Community Forums
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: Downloads
87: Home
88: Community Forums
89: Community Forums
90: Community Forums
91: Community Forums
92: Community Forums
93: Community Forums
94: Home
95: Statistics
96: Photo Gallery
97: CPGlang
98: Community Forums
99: Photo Gallery
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Community Forums
104: Community Forums
105: Home
106: Community Forums
107: Member Screenshots
108: Home
109: Community Forums
110: Community Forums
111: Community Forums
112: Community Forums
113: Your Account
114: Community Forums
115: Photo Gallery
116: Community Forums
117: Community Forums
118: LinkToUs
119: Community Forums
120: Photo Gallery
121: Community Forums
122: CPGlang
123: Community Forums
124: Community Forums
125: Photo Gallery
126: Photo Gallery
127: Home
128: Community Forums
129: Photo Gallery
130: Community Forums
131: Community Forums
132: Statistics
133: Photo Gallery
134: Home
135: Community Forums
136: Community Forums
137: Community Forums
138: Community Forums
139: Community Forums
140: Community Forums
141: Photo Gallery
142: Community Forums
143: Community Forums
144: Member Screenshots
145: Photo Gallery
146: Statistics
147: Community Forums
148: Photo Gallery
149: Home
150: News Archive
151: Member Screenshots
152: Community Forums
153: Community Forums
154: Your Account
155: Community Forums
156: Downloads
157: Community Forums
158: Home
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: Community Forums
162: Home
163: Home
164: Community Forums
165: Member Screenshots
166: Community Forums
167: News
168: Community Forums
169: Community Forums
170: Community Forums
171: Your Account
172: Your Account
173: Community Forums
174: Community Forums
175: Member Screenshots
176: Home
177: Home
178: Home
179: Community Forums
180: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Photo Gallery
183: Photo Gallery
184: Community Forums
185: Community Forums
186: Community Forums
187: Community Forums
188: Statistics
189: Photo Gallery
190: Photo Gallery
191: Photo Gallery
192: Community Forums
193: Community Forums
194: CPGlang
195: Community Forums
196: Community Forums
197: Community Forums
198: Community Forums
199: Photo Gallery
200: Member Screenshots
201: Photo Gallery
202: Photo Gallery
203: Home
204: Community Forums
205: Community Forums
206: Home
207: Community Forums
208: Community Forums
209: Home
210: Home
211: Community Forums
212: Community Forums
213: Home
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: Photo Gallery
217: Community Forums
218: Community Forums
219: CPGlang
220: Member Screenshots
221: Community Forums
222: Photo Gallery
223: Home
224: Downloads
225: Community Forums
226: Community Forums
227: Community Forums
228: Home
229: Photo Gallery
230: Community Forums
231: Community Forums
232: Statistics
233: Community Forums
234: Home
235: Photo Gallery
236: Community Forums
237: Community Forums
238: Community Forums
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: Community Forums
242: Community Forums
243: Photo Gallery
244: Community Forums
245: Community Forums
246: Home
247: Community Forums
248: Photo Gallery
249: Community Forums
250: Community Forums
251: Community Forums
252: Home
253: Community Forums
254: News
255: Community Forums
256: Community Forums
257: Photo Gallery
258: Community Forums
259: Photo Gallery
260: Photo Gallery
261: Community Forums
262: Community Forums
263: Community Forums
264: Downloads
265: Downloads
266: Photo Gallery
267: Community Forums
268: Treasury
269: News Archive
270: Community Forums
271: Photo Gallery
272: Community Forums
273: Community Forums
274: Community Forums
275: Community Forums
276: Community Forums
277: Community Forums
278: Community Forums
279: Community Forums
280: Community Forums
281: Community Forums
282: Community Forums
283: Community Forums
284: CPGlang
285: Community Forums
286: Community Forums
287: Downloads
288: Home
289: Downloads
290: Photo Gallery
291: Photo Gallery
292: Community Forums
293: CPGlang
294: Home
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Downloads
298: News
299: Downloads
300: Community Forums
301: Home
302: Community Forums
303: Community Forums
304: Your Account
305: Community Forums
306: Community Forums
307: Your Account
308: Community Forums
309: News
310: Community Forums
311: News
312: Community Forums
313: Community Forums
314: Community Forums
315: Community Forums
316: Photo Gallery
317: Community Forums
318: Community Forums
319: Photo Gallery
320: Community Forums
321: Community Forums
322: Community Forums
323: Community Forums
324: Community Forums
325: Community Forums
326: Community Forums
327: Community Forums
328: Community Forums
329: Home
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: Community Forums
333: Home
334: Community Forums
335: Home
336: Community Forums
337: Community Forums
338: Community Forums
339: Photo Gallery
340: Home
341: Community Forums
342: Community Forums
343: Community Forums
344: Community Forums
345: Community Forums
346: Community Forums
347: Community Forums
348: Community Forums
349: Community Forums
350: News
351: Community Forums
352: Community Forums
353: CPGlang
354: Community Forums
355: Community Forums
356: Community Forums
357: Community Forums
358: Home
359: Home
360: Community Forums
361: Community Forums
362: Photo Gallery
363: Photo Gallery
364: Community Forums
365: Home
366: Photo Gallery
367: Community Forums
368: Photo Gallery
369: Community Forums
370: Home
371: Community Forums
372: Home
373: Community Forums
374: Community Forums
375: Home
376: Community Forums
377: Member Screenshots
378: Community Forums
379: Home
380: Community Forums
381: Community Forums
382: Community Forums
383: Community Forums
384: Community Forums
385: Downloads
386: Community Forums
387: Community Forums
388: Home
389: Community Forums
390: Home
391: Community Forums
392: Your Account
393: Photo Gallery
394: Community Forums
395: Community Forums
396: Community Forums
397: Community Forums
398: Community Forums
399: Community Forums
400: Community Forums
401: Community Forums
402: Photo Gallery
403: Community Forums
404: Community Forums
405: Downloads
406: Community Forums
407: Community Forums
408: Photo Gallery
409: Community Forums
410: Community Forums
411: Community Forums
412: Photo Gallery
413: Community Forums
414: Community Forums
415: Downloads
416: Home
417: Community Forums
418: Community Forums
419: Photo Gallery
420: Community Forums
421: Community Forums
422: Community Forums
423: Community Forums
424: Photo Gallery
425: Photo Gallery
426: Home
427: Community Forums
428: Community Forums
429: Home
430: Community Forums
431: Community Forums
432: Downloads
433: News
434: Photo Gallery
435: Community Forums
436: Community Forums
437: Home
438: Community Forums
439: Community Forums
440: Community Forums
441: Photo Gallery
442: Community Forums
443: Community Forums
444: Member Screenshots
445: Community Forums
446: Photo Gallery
447: Community Forums
448: Home
449: Photo Gallery
450: Downloads
451: Home
452: Member Screenshots
453: Community Forums
454: Community Forums
455: Community Forums
456: Community Forums
457: Community Forums
458: Community Forums
459: Community Forums
460: Home
461: Photo Gallery
462: Community Forums
463: Community Forums
464: Photo Gallery
465: Community Forums
466: Community Forums
467: Community Forums
468: Members List
469: Downloads
470: Community Forums
471: Community Forums
472: Community Forums
473: Home
474: Community Forums
475: Community Forums
476: Your Account
477: Community Forums
478: Community Forums
479: Photo Gallery
480: Community Forums
481: Photo Gallery
482: Community Forums
483: Photo Gallery
484: Community Forums
485: Community Forums
486: Community Forums
487: Photo Gallery
488: Home
489: Community Forums
490: Community Forums
491: Your Account
492: Community Forums
493: Community Forums
494: Photo Gallery
495: Community Forums
496: Community Forums
497: Community Forums
498: Community Forums
499: Community Forums
500: Community Forums
501: Statistics
502: Your Account
503: Community Forums
504: Community Forums
505: Community Forums
506: Photo Gallery
507: Photo Gallery
508: Community Forums
509: Community Forums
510: Community Forums
511: Community Forums
512: Community Forums
513: Community Forums
514: Community Forums
515: Home
516: Photo Gallery
517: Community Forums
518: Your Account
519: Community Forums
520: Community Forums
521: Your Account
522: Home
523: Community Forums
524: Home
525: Downloads
526: Community Forums
527: Community Forums
528: Community Forums
529: Photo Gallery
530: Home
531: Community Forums
532: Home
533: Home
534: Community Forums
535: Photo Gallery
536: Community Forums
537: Community Forums
538: Community Forums
539: Community Forums
540: Photo Gallery
541: Photo Gallery
542: Community Forums
543: Photo Gallery
544: Community Forums
545: Community Forums
546: Community Forums
547: Community Forums
548: Photo Gallery
549: Community Forums
550: Community Forums
551: Your Account
552: Your Account
553: Community Forums
554: Photo Gallery
555: Home
556: Downloads
557: Community Forums
558: Community Forums
559: Community Forums
560: Community Forums
561: Member Screenshots
562: Your Account
563: Community Forums
564: Statistics
565: Community Forums
566: Photo Gallery
567: Community Forums
568: Community Forums
569: Community Forums
570: Home
571: Community Forums
572: Community Forums
573: Community Forums
574: Community Forums
575: Community Forums
576: Community Forums
577: Home
578: CPGlang
579: Community Forums
580: Community Forums
581: Photo Gallery
582: Community Forums
583: Community Forums
584: Community Forums
585: Community Forums
586: Community Forums
587: Community Forums
588: Community Forums
589: Photo Gallery
590: Community Forums
591: Community Forums
592: Home
593: Community Forums
594: Community Forums
595: Community Forums
596: Community Forums
597: Community Forums
598: Community Forums
599: Community Forums
600: Community Forums
601: Photo Gallery
602: Home
603: Downloads
604: Community Forums
605: Community Forums
606: Community Forums
607: Photo Gallery
608: Community Forums
609: Home
610: Photo Gallery
611: Community Forums
612: Community Forums
613: Community Forums
614: Community Forums
615: Community Forums
616: Community Forums
617: Community Forums
618: Downloads
619: Downloads
620: Community Forums
621: Community Forums
622: Community Forums
623: Community Forums
624: Contact
625: Photo Gallery
626: Community Forums
627: Community Forums
628: Community Forums
629: Community Forums
630: CPGlang
631: Community Forums
632: Community Forums
633: Photo Gallery
634: Community Forums
635: Community Forums
636: Photo Gallery
637: Community Forums
638: Community Forums
639: Community Forums
640: Community Forums
641: Downloads
642: Home
643: Downloads
644: Photo Gallery
645: Community Forums
646: Community Forums
647: Downloads
648: Photo Gallery
649: Community Forums
650: Community Forums
651: Photo Gallery
652: Community Forums
653: CPGlang
654: Photo Gallery
655: Your Account
656: Community Forums
657: Community Forums
658: Community Forums
659: Your Account
660: Statistics
661: Community Forums
662: Community Forums
663: Community Forums
664: Photo Gallery
665: Community Forums
666: Community Forums
667: Photo Gallery
668: Community Forums
669: Community Forums
670: Community Forums
671: Community Forums
672: Community Forums
673: Your Account
674: Community Forums
675: Community Forums
676: News
677: Community Forums
678: Community Forums
679: Home
680: Photo Gallery
681: Community Forums
682: Community Forums
683: Home
684: Home
685: Photo Gallery
686: Home
687: Photo Gallery
688: Community Forums
689: Community Forums
690: Your Account
691: Photo Gallery
692: Your Account
693: Community Forums
694: Home
695: Community Forums
696: Search
697: Your Account
698: Community Forums
699: Photo Gallery
700: Community Forums
701: CPGlang
702: Community Forums
703: Photo Gallery
704: Community Forums
705: Community Forums
706: Community Forums
707: Photo Gallery
708: Photo Gallery
709: Community Forums
710: Community Forums
711: Your Account
712: Community Forums
713: Community Forums
714: Community Forums
715: Your Account
716: Community Forums
717: Community Forums
718: Community Forums
719: Home
720: Community Forums
721: Community Forums
722: Community Forums
723: Home
724: Community Forums
725: Community Forums
726: Community Forums
727: Home
728: Community Forums
729: Community Forums
730: Home
731: Community Forums
732: Your Account
733: News
734: Community Forums
735: Home
736: Community Forums
737: Home
738: Home
739: Community Forums
740: News Archive
741: Community Forums
742: Community Forums
743: Community Forums
744: Community Forums
745: Community Forums
746: Community Forums
747: Community Forums
748: Photo Gallery
749: Community Forums
750: CPGlang
751: Home
752: Community Forums
753: Home
754: Community Forums
755: Photo Gallery
756: Community Forums
757: Community Forums
758: Downloads
759: Community Forums
760: Photo Gallery
761: Downloads
762: Community Forums
763: Community Forums
764: Photo Gallery
765: Community Forums
766: Community Forums
767: CPGlang
768: Photo Gallery
769: Photo Gallery
770: Community Forums
771: Community Forums
772: Community Forums
773: Home
774: Community Forums
775: Community Forums
776: Community Forums
777: Community Forums
778: Community Forums
779: Community Forums
780: Community Forums
781: Photo Gallery
782: Community Forums
783: Downloads
784: Community Forums
785: Community Forums
786: Community Forums
787: Community Forums
788: Community Forums
789: Community Forums
790: Community Forums
791: Downloads
792: Home
793: Member Screenshots
794: Photo Gallery
795: Photo Gallery
796: Photo Gallery
797: Photo Gallery
798: Community Forums
799: Home
800: Community Forums
801: Photo Gallery
802: Photo Gallery
803: Community Forums
804: Community Forums
805: 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