Nobody_Holme wrote: Or perhaps selg-propelled guns like the StuG III, or y'know, the vindicator. Tank destroyers were also generally cheaper to produce than their medium/heavy counterpart. A tank destroyer was far more effective at destroying armour/fortifications that a normal medium or heavy tank, but the lack of a turret was a serious threat in any kind of offensive maneuvers. So it was really a mix of technological limitations and supply/production issues. The Germans did the same with their Jagpanthers, Jagtigers and so on, based on the Panther and King Tiger chassis respectively. So they developed a tank destroyer on the chassis of the T-34 (SU-85 and 100) which mounted larger guns (85mm and 100mm cannons) which were more effective at destroying heavy german armour. While an effective tank, its gun didn't have the punch to get through the like of a Tiger of Panther by the mid-late war. The Russians produced the famous T-34, which was armed with a 57mm cannon. The advantage of this was the ease of building the casement rather than the turret, and that the lack of a turret meant for larger gun mountings. Many of these vehicles were similarly armoured to their medium or heavy tank counterpart, but were casemate style vehicles meaning they had no turret, just a simple crew compartment. The Soviets and Germans engineered purpose built tank destroyers that were often fully enclosed. To add on to generalchaos34's comment not every tank destroyer was lightly armoured.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |