Tank Hunter and Tank Destroyer

[PJungnitsch]

From what I understand while the 75mm L/43 and L/48 Stugs went to the anti tank role, the 105mm L/28 StuH carried on the 'pure' infantry support tradition of the original Stug assault guns.

On the note of Stug effectiveness I've come upon some interesting accounts from Drs S and R Hart:

"244th Assault gun brigade, which distiguished itself (Battle of the Bulge) by destroying 54 American tanks for the loss of only 2 assault guns"

"190th Assault Gun Brigade..defensive fighting in West Prussia..on 26 February 1945 alone, claimed a staggering 104 tank kills for the loss of only 4 vehicles...3rd March passed its one-thousandths tank kill since it's debut."

These would be of course exceptional accounts, but not bad for a vehicle in the last year of the war that production wise was basically a simplified Panzer III.

[Sergei]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1:
Stug's were more often then not German Inf's only mobile AT defense. So while they retained the title of 'Assault gun', they were generaly tacticly employed in an tank destroyer role.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's true. It just shows that staring blindly into the the types of these AFV's won't reveal the whole story. Often turretless vehicles were used in roles of Panzers in lack of anything better, like Ferdinand's in Kursk. Sometimes it worked.

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by machineman:
From what I understand while the 75mm L/43 and L/48 Stugs went to the anti tank role, the 105mm L/28 StuH carried on the 'pure' infantry support tradition of the original Stug assault guns.

On the note of Stug effectiveness I've come upon some interesting accounts from Drs S and R Hart:

"244th Assault gun brigade, which distiguished itself (Battle of the Bulge) by destroying 54 American tanks for the loss of only 2 assault guns"

"190th Assault Gun Brigade..defensive fighting in West Prussia..on 26 February 1945 alone, claimed a staggering 104 tank kills for the loss of only 4 vehicles...3rd March passed its one-thousandths tank kill since it's debut."

These would be of course exceptional accounts, but not bad for a vehicle in the last year of the war that production wise was basically a simplified Panzer III.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats true to a point Machine but the Germans also developed an SC round for the 105mm armed Sturmhaubitze specificly to give them AT capability. It was found when they attempted to use the 105mm Sturmhaubitze in an AT role they faired poorly.

This led to the decision to discontinue the 105mm version. As the 7.5 cm Stugs were able to fill both roles & as the war progressed the AT capability took an higher priority, then HE/SC capability. Stug's alone are credited with the destruction of over 20,000 AFVs during WW2.

Theirs an report * from Pz.Rgt 36 from the Eastren Front from Oct,28 - Dec 01 1943. III./Pz.Regt 36 consisted of 2 Co of PzKpfw IV lang, & 2 Co of Sturmgeschutze. The Regt had a total of 49 PzKpfw IV & 44 StuG.

In 16 days of combat The mixed Abt was credited with the destruction of 211 tanks, 176 AT guns, 101 ATR, 54 Arty pieces, 41 motor vehichles & 1700 enemy personel.

III.Pz.Regt 36 losses as in total write offs for 16 days of operations was, 20 PzKpfw IV & 16 StuG. The workshop Plt reapired an total of 52 PzKpfw IV & 74 StuG, in this period.


*See Jentz, Thomas L,Panzer Truppen Vol 2 p.122

Regards, John Waters

[ 07-07-2001: Message edited by: PzKpfw 1 ]

[Sirocco]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken:
In the same way that antitank rifles were not for 'defense against tanks' but for 'attacking tanks'... [img]smile.gif[/img]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And "Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank" became "Projector, Infantry, Tank-Attack".

As a point of interest, I've always wondered, how do you pronounce the "jagd" in "jagdpanzer", "jagdpanther" and "jagdtiger"?

[Username]

I had a knock down drag-out multi-threaded fight with Steve from BTS over this. My contention is that the 75L48 still retained its infantry HE capabilities because the shells were the same (although at the cost of some stowage), artillerymen, (the sturmartillerie), manned these and many had previous training/experience and were good shots (although panzermen also manned some).

Stugs, and the roles they performed, were really a seperate arm/function. Its a subtle point because the average CM type battle doesnt care where the assault gun came from. They did excel at tank killing because of the changing tide of war, but retained the artillerie function to support the infantry.

Since the german arty was never as good and flexible as the US, german infantry assaults came to rely on the stealthy assault guns to "shoot them onto the target".

Lewis

[offtaskagain]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sirocco:


And "Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank" became "Projector, Infantry, Tank-Attack".

As a point of interest, I've always wondered, how do you pronounce the "jagd" in "jagdpanzer", "jagdpanther" and "jagdtiger"?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It kind of depends on your accent but most pronounce it as "yaygd".

[PJungnitsch]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1:
Stug's alone are credited with the destruction of over 20,000 AFVs during WW2<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One of the things that seemed to come out of the optics thread was that rangefinders would give an edge, especially when fighting defensively, and use may have been common on Stugs, a branch of artillery that they were. Any info on that in the Jentz book, or was it just folding periscopes without the ranging function that were used?

[PJungnitsch]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sirocco:
As a point of interest, I've always wondered, how do you pronounce the "jagd" in "jagdpanzer", "jagdpanther" and "jagdtiger"?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The German J is pronouced as the English Y, and A's are not any different, so I'd guess 'jagdpanther' is 'yagdpanther'.

Paul Jungnitsch
[img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 07-07-2001: Message edited by: machineman ]

[offtaskagain]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by machineman:


One of the things that seemed to come out of the optics thread was that rangefinders would give an edge, especially when fighting defensively, and use may have been common on Stugs, a branch of artillery that they were. Any info on that in the Jentz book, or was it just folding periscopes without the ranging function that were used?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Many pictures of Stugs that I have seen show them using the forked artillery range finders.

[Redwolf]

Regarding the German designations:

The designations "Panzerjaeger" and "Jagdpanzer" have just the two subwords exchanged, but nontheless they mean entirely different things, grammatics-wise.

"Panzerjaeger" says "this is something that hunts a tank", but it does not say what this thing is or that this thing is itself a tank. It may be a duck trained to hit tanks.

"Jagdpanzer" says "this is a tank that hunts something", explicityly saying what kind of thing it is, but not saying anything about what it hunts. This one could hunt ducks.

The Panzerjaeger are the thin-skinned Marder and Nashorn things. The Jagdpanzer are the ones with the thick front plates.

The thin-skinned Panzerjaeger must essentially used like a towed gun (only that it can hit the road when things get nasty). But while the Jagdpanzer is built to be able to withstand hits from enemy tanks, from what I read the usage was exactly the same. Drive around behind the infantry in cover and shoot tanks that show up to support the enemy infantry.

Active roles were the duty of tanks with turrets. On the other hand, often you have to use what's available.