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