Panther with skirts

[The_Enigma]

for example the model A early states it has skirts while A doesnt, yet there is no skirts or on the models ingame. I dotn understand?

the same applies to the other models.

So what exactly is the skirts the panthers are supose to have?

[Wicky]

My early A in CMAK has shirts (visualy and stated in info) - my A doesn't and none mentioned in info- Have you added mods where they might have pinkied out the skirts?

It was generally a field modification and therefore some did, some didn't, some had them fall off etc.

See the link to a german armour picture gallery for examples. here

[Mattias]

Could be, like Wicky says, that you have a mod or indeed that we have mods, at least all my early Panthers (D early, D and A early) have skirts on the in game models.

Far from being field modifications all production Panthers had facility mount hangers, and on the hangers the skirts. If you had the hangers and the skirts you could mount them. But since they fell off from time to time you would see tanks lacking a few or indeed all. Personally I think they might not have been deemed absolutely necessary as the 40 mm armour they protected was a bit on the thick side for ATR:s (skirts originally being fitted as protection from, primarily, ATR:s).

Why BFC decided to have the early three Panthers carry skirts, but not the late three versions I don't know. Perhaps they found a source stating that skirts were removed in the field (just as muzzle breaks were removed on some guns), I for one have pictures of Panthers of all models, including the "F" prototype, with skirts on them.

Cheers!

M.

[The_Enigma]

yea i think i added some mods but not for all of them :S ... hmm confusing.

[Rob Murray]

I think they left the skirts off the late versions probably to easily differentiate (sp?) between the early & late versions (D's & A's anyway, not the early & late G's - that's easy enough to spot).

I can't remember remember off hand, but does the late D have smoke grenade launchers on each side of the turret? According to my sources these were discontinued in July 1943 (along with the second headlight).

[simovitch]

Originally posted by Mattias:

Personally I think they might not have been deemed absolutely necessary as the 40 mm armour they protected was a bit on the thick side for ATR:s (skirts originally being fitted as protection from, primarily, ATR:s).

M.

The "skirts" were also effective in reducing the effect of high explosive anti tank (HEAT) rounds on the main armor, namely that which is fired from a bazooka. The pre-detonation of the HEAT shell casing on the skirt diminished the penetration ability of the remaining shell core, or something like that.

Does anyone know whether or not the application of "skirts" on an AFV has been modelled in CM?

[flamingknives]

Of course they have. Although, I think that the original intention of the skirts was to protect the vulnerable running gear from small calibre AT fire, such as that from ATRs and HMGs.

[Mattias]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Of course they have. Although, I think that the original intention of the skirts was to protect the vulnerable running gear from small calibre AT fire, such as that from ATRs and HMGs.

Yup, I for one am fully convinced, after the matter was weathered here on the forum, that that indeed was the case. I have never seen a German source from the time 41/42 that claims that HEAT type weapons was taken into consideration when the Schuertzen were designed.

For a perspective of the ATR gunners view of a Pz III, check out this source:

Russian Battlefield, parts of the ATR section

Armoured surfaces under, around, 30 mm thickness that weren’t sloped were also vulnerable to ATR fire.

Cheers!

M.

[Andreas]

Mattias - drop me an email please.

Happy New Year.

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by simovitch:

The "skirts" were also effective in reducing the effect of high explosive anti tank (HEAT) rounds on the main armor, namely that which is fired from a bazooka. The pre-detonation of the HEAT shell casing on the skirt diminished the penetration ability of the remaining shell core, or something like that.

There is no shell core in HEAT rounds, the round relies on.. wait for it.. heat!

[ColumbusOHGamer]

Damn! I thought this was a kitty porn thread...

get it, KITTY PORN .... (chirp, chirp, chirp)

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

There is no shell core in HEAT rounds, the round relies on.. wait for it.. heat!

Unless you want to count the jet as a 'core'. It isn't even molten.

[simovitch]

The caption under this photo from Hugh Cole's "The Ardennes: The Battle of the Bulge" Chapter 6, reads:

"WRECKED GERMAN TANK SHOWING "BAZOOKA PANTS," a defense against rockets"

Apparently at least by the end of 1944 the Germans were investigating some aspect of the "skirt" protection against shaped charge weapons. Note that steel mesh is used in lieu of plating. Hardly the choice material for protection against small arms fire.

[Buq-Buq]

Actually, the Schürzen, or skirts -- both in plate-form and wire mesh -- were designed solely with the idea of cutting down losses from Soviet ATRs. This passage from Walter J. Spielberger's "Sturmgeschütz & Its Variants" discusses their design and intent:

"The previously mentioned Schürzen side-skirts became a topic of discussion during the Führer's conference on 6 and 7 February 1943. Hitler was quite in agreement with mounting skirts on the Panzer III, IV and Sturmgeschütz to provide protection against Russian anti-tank rifles.

"Test firings on Schürzen protective skirts (wire and steel plates) were reported on February 20, 1943. Firing tests utilizing the Russian 14.5mm anti-tank rifle at a distance of 100m (90 degrees) showed no tears or penetrations of the 30mm side armor, when protected either by plates or wire mesh. When testing was conducted with the 75mm high explosive shell (Charge 2) from a field gun, there was no damage to the sides of the hull armor when protected by the wire or plates. Wire mesh and plates had indeed been penetrated and even torn away, but, they still remained usable.

"The decision to utilize the plates as opposed to the wire mesh (although both had proven effective and the mesh was lighter) was based on the fact that the wire mesh required the design of a new mount, which would have required additional time to be developed.

"Additionally, the procurement of wire mesh for the side skirts was difficult. The skirts were not tested against shaped charges, nor were they intended as protection against this type of shaped charge (HEAT) shells."

Thomas L. Jentz' "Germany's Panther Tank: The Quest for Combat Supremacy" echoes this position on Schürzen (because both Spielberger and Jentz use the same source material). Jentz points out that the lower hull sides of the Panther -- 40mm armor plate -- had proved vulnerable to Soviet ATRs firing from close range. He also mentions that if Schürzen had not provided the level of protection it did against ATRs, the Panther would have been replaced in production by the Panther II (with a lower hull side armor of 60mm) -- an indication of the level of danger the Germans felt that Soviet ATRs posed.

That having been said, it does remain that Schürzen would have certainly provided some degree of protection for HEAT warheads due to the stand-off that they provided. I find it interesting that the quote mentions the benefit of the skirts against standard HE warheads -- something that I don't think I have ever seen modeled in a wargame.

Mark

[simovitch]

Good stuff buq buq, thanks for the clarifications.

[Holman]

The original question:

for example the model A early states it has skirts while A doesnt, yet there is no skirts or on the models ingame. I dotn understand?

the same applies to the other models.

The "skirts" on Panthers are much smaller (and closer to the body of the vehicle) than the large stand-off skirts on (e.g.) some Pz IV models in CM. You can see the Panther skirts just above the treads.

My question is, do these Panther skirts offer the same protection in the game that larger skirts do for other tanks? It would be great if they were modeled differently.

[bruceb]

wicky--

cool pics...

thanks for the link

--bruceb

[Aco4bn187inf]

Those are cool pics indeed at that site, but not all the vehicles are identified correctly. The "fine picture of a panzer IV" suffers a bit from the fact that it depicts a panzer III. I wondered why everybody was smiling in those pictures, until I saw Guderian there and realized these are, I guess, propaganda shots.

[hoolaman]

More than cool, there are some really beautiful B&W photos there. The captions are cut off and repetitive, so should be taken with a grain of salt. Have a look at the brushed-in swatika on bw_056.jpg.

Low light or full light seem to show off B&W photos to their fullest potential.