Pz IV tactics?

[Abteilung]

The publication itself is only about 20.00 USD, so I'll be purchasing it in the coming month. I'll be looking specifically for more information wrt the vorpanzer. Unless, of course, someone already has the publication and/or information wrt the vorpanzer and its use (or lack thereof) and is willing to share with us. Here's a link to the site:

Link

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Abteilung:

IIRC, the 8.0cm on the hull and superstructure was pushing the envelope insofar as the chassis' ability to handle the extra weight was concerned; then again I think they were referring to the jagdpanzer variants and not the turreted tank. The jagdpanzers seem to be carrying a lot more metal due to the revised superstructure, so I don't know if the suspension limits would necessarily apply to the turreted tank.

I wonder what the weight of additional armor on the turret front would have been.

Awful, the troops reports in Nov 1942 noted a greater difficulty in driving the new 8cm hulled PIV, and the chassis itself was noted as overburdened. The turret it self had already seen a growth in gun weight and increased front armour going from 2cm to 5cm meaning that it's centre of gravity had changed quite a bit since it's initial design in the 30s. The only other turret available, the Rheinmetall "Tiger H1" or Panther turret was a failure when fitted to the PIV chassis.

The PIV chassis itself was continuously derided as overburdened resulting in continuous and mostly successful attempts to shift production to StuGs (including Panzerjager). The shift can be seen in 1944 when only one factory (Nibelungenwerke) produced 3274 PIV out of a total of 3554, other former major producers such as Alkett and Vomag were focusing on StuGs (and PIV/70) based on the PIV chassis.

Krupp engineers were also in direct opposition to the Waffenamet in sticking with leaf spring suspension as opposed to the state of the art torsion systems seen on the PIII, Tiger and Panther. Attempts to upgrade the suspension and increasing ground clearance all met with failure. The PIV was at the end of its development potential in 1943....

[ March 01, 2004, 01:38 AM: Message edited by: Bastables ]

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Abteilung:

Question: Why wasn't the turret up-armored on the Pz.IV? The Pz.III had its turret improved, as did the Pz.II and Pz.38(t). Why not the Pz.IV? It seems counter-productive to me, given its overall production numbers and importance to the panzertruppen.

It was, the ausf A had 2cm of turret armour and the G had 5cm of turret armour.

The decision to go to 8cm hull armour was a personal one by Hitler made inspite of protests that the PIV was already an overloaded chassis.

[Mr. Tittles]

I have never seen any Panzer IVs equipped with that spaced armor. There is much evidence that they used tracks as additional armor.

The Panzer IV turret should have been redesigned to make its front narrower. The 50mm turret front sections were initially used as viewing ports and as an alternate MG position for the loader. This was later dropped.

I dont believe a turret redesign would have increased weight.

[Bone_Vulture]

Originally posted by Mr. Tittles:

I dont believe a turret redesign would have increased weight.

Weight was just one of many factors. From what I read about the battle of Kursk, German tanks usually won tank duels with superior optics & range.