Tiger Attack (U.S. Hist Chan) Repeats 10 p.m. PDT tonight

[John Kettler]

If you missed it before, here's your chance--unless you don't want to hear and see Otto Carius, a guy blown out of his tank by Michael Wittmann, or a Russian tanker's views on how close he had to get to have a chance.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Herr Oberst]

Good show, but rankled me to no end seeing a pseudo-Tiger made on top of a T-34 chassis... with no mention of the inacuracy on the show. Could the running gear be more different??? Body size??? Track width???

Grrr...

The RL films were great, the re-enactment shots hokey.

[Splinty]

I think that's the same fake Tiger they used in Saving Private Ryan.

[WEAPON42]

Ive seen this show twice now and liked it very much.My only question is why the tiger does not live up to its awsome real world reputation in the game?

not moddeled correctly in cmbb?

reputation gained early in 42&43on eastern front and not as good against late war allied tanks?

most tiger crews were crack or elite and in the game ther mostly regular and that was the real difference?

can anyone explain this to me?

[JasonC]

Why is the Tiger I not as fearsome as its reputation in CMBO? A fair question. First, yes that reputation was mostly gained on the Russian front earlier in the war - also in places like Tunisia, Sicily, and Italy in 1943. But in addition, Tiger Is were feared in Normandy, more than they are in CM. It is fair to ask why.

One reason is that Allied players take upgunned AT shooters because of the threat of such things, when in the real deal they did have such assets but not in every tactical fight. Short 75 Shermans or Cromwells, bazookas, and 57mm ATGs (US anyway) are all bounced by the Tiger I's front armor. The Brits did have 17 pdrs, but in limited numbers, so if they were lost things could go south quickly.

But there is another reason, which in my opinion stem from a few marginal mismodelings in CMBO. HEAT penetration is comparatively generous in CMBO. And that includes the bazooka.

If you look at its stats, it can be expected to routinely KO T-34s (45mm at 60 deg, let alone reduced for armor quality). We know that in fact they regularly bounced off T-34s, from early Korean AARs. They also can get through Panther lower front hulls. Some reports of actual bazooka vs. Panther engagements make clear that only side hits really worked. And they can KO even King Tigers from the side (because the lower armor quality rating, correct for the thick front plate but not for the thinner sides, counteracts the slope of the armor).

Now, real world AARs of bazookas against Tiger Is do show that penetrations were possible from the side. But they were rare. In CM, you can get KTs, and T1s from fairly wide angles from the side - a 60 degree arc or better. But since the zook numbers are probably high (as T-34s etc show), the real vunerable arc to the sides was probably smaller.

A second case is Brit 6 pdrs. They get T ammo (really APDS), that easily penetrates Tigers from the front. But they only cost 1 pt more than US 6 pdrs which do not get such rounds. I believe they were relatively rare, and probably not distributed 1-3 per gun to deal with exactly the scale of threat commonly seen on the CMBO battlefield. But even if the rounds are right, the price can't be, because they are a lot more valuable than 1 pt as an addition to the US 57mm.

A third case is probably the most important, and has to do with the evolution of US 75mm ammo over the course of the campaign. The CMBO 75mm penetration numbers are between the realistic numbers for two different, common rounds - plain AP and APCBC (M61). The plain AP underperforms compared to CMBO stats, the APCBC outperforms. Historically, there wasn't any APCBC in Normandy, but it became more common by the time of the Bulge. So, US short 75 Shermans have more punch than they should in Normandy, less punch than they should in the Bulge.

This is a marginal thing, but there are two cases that are close enough to the line that they turn on the round type fired out of the same gun. One is the side of Tiger Is, which APCBC would get through routinely, but with AP had little chance against unless the side angle was particularly flat (or against the rear). The other is the side of KTs, which shouldn't be weakened by armor quality (as noted above). APCBC could still get through with a flat enough side angle. AP would be hopeless.

So, what you ought to see in the early Normandy cases is that both bazookas and Sherman 75s need particularly flat side shots, or rear shots, to get through the Tiger I. While by the time of the Bulge, Sherman 75s should be as lethal against KTs as they are now (APCBC and armor quality counteracting each other), while bazookas should be hopeless against them. Bulge era Sherman 75s would be effective against Tiger Is, but there were not that many Tiger Is left by then (a few, to be sure).

If you bring up any TD with 76mm, though, you can get through the beastie. It can also get through you, anything but a Jumbo or thick Churchill.

I still find Tiger Is pretty effective in CMBO. They do cost twice as much as a Hetzer, but it is the Hezter that is underpriced. The HE is powerful. Distraction issues are annoying with the slow turret; it will be nice to have armor arc and covered arc orders to address that, and in CMBB there they are.

Against T-34/76s they will be at least as effective as they are against Sherman 75s. The T-34 gun is no more powerful and less accurate than the Sherman, and the Tiger's 88L56 penetrates the T-34s armor as easily as it does plain Shermans. The rough equalizer for the Russians will be the T-34/85, but that is not common until 1944, and from the front will need to be at reasonable ranges. Before then, SU-85s will help deal with them, in the fall of 1943. Russian QB players may wind up reaching for those in much the same way CMBO Allies reach for upgunned TDs.

The period of clearest ascendency is right after their introduction, through to Kursk or so, before 85mm and upward Russian AFVs appear in any numbers. After that, the Russians had TDs to deal with them but those may be rare. The bulk of the Russian armor was still plain T-34/76s still. The Russians do have large caliber SUs already (SU-122 and SU-152), though with lower velocity guns (less accurate at range). The high velocity big ISUs don't appear until 1944, around the same time as the T-34/85s.

So, 1944 the Russians have good enough stuff that the Tiger Is will not be a terror, though still a capable tank. Before then, in the period of the war's decisive battles in the south (from Stalingrad to the Dnepr bend) they will be.