I don’t understand, the biggest problem of the Japanese camp is air power rather than tanks
And DF launched another HORI to make money? !
Why are you obsessed with this unproduced thing? The Japanese camp has so many planes waiting to be added to the game, why waste time on fictional tanks?
What’s next? Nazi UFO? Ice aircraft carrier? Soviet KV6?
12 Likes
Well, its very easy for DF to introduce this tank because the model already exists from War Thunder, they can just reuse the assets and make money with them.
not to play devil’s advocate but:
well, because the most hardcore japan veteran will pretty much get a second ho-ri for his/her line up.
it’s… strategical.
well, always has been, and they always will.
because the averange joe doesn’t fully know what ww2 is, or how has been fought.
and since there’s only finite ammount of actual things that exists in the game, and to prolongue it’s life, they add protos or less realistic things.
because such airplanes wouldn’t be sold as prem.
hence, as a filler, ( and to get some bucks ) the ho-ri was opted.
which;
beside, a major update is somewhere near.
so sooner or later, those planes will come.
it’s just a matter of how much patience can someone have.
( but… even then, that’s kinda up to them releasing stuff. we don’t really have a choice )
2 Likes
There isn’t some sort of fixations imo, mostly I see this as a weaponry escalation because every time new stuff are added each faction need something similar and most of time especially for end game equipment, that something similar are prototype or paper stuff
I understand
I usually regard blueprints and unproduced weapons as a supplement
When the most basic gameplay of a camp has been perfected, some interesting blueprints or unproduced weapons may make this camp more interesting
So I don’t have too many objections to some interesting blueprint weapons in the American camp, the German camp or the Soviet camp. I think they enrich the gameplay and are beneficial
But the Japanese camp is different… It has a lot of problems, because it is a young camp, and it still has a lot to be improved compared to the other three camps
So it’s not fun to rush to give too many blueprint weapons
It’s like when you go to dinner, the dessert may be served before the main course is served, which is a bit bad
4 Likes
Very correct, some core Japanese players will buy it.
The reason for buying it is simple, this faction lacks too many things, and it is even difficult to deploy a second tank that meets the strength of BRV.
Just like many players buy Ki-61, including me.
But I hate this practice.
Because this is a deficiency that should be improved by the developers themselves, but now it is used as a means of making money. This is annoying.
2 Likes
. Cause most of Enlisted’s player base can’t or won’t fly, planes don’t take or hold area, i did not say capture/defend on purpose.
1 Like
Please stop power creeping the game for no reason
Half the nations have massive, horrible holes in their available equipment around BR 3, it’s years worth of stuff to be released and backfilled there
1 Like
I didn’t really understand the outrage when there was this rumour of them adding the Japanese Tiger to the game. Like we still have some documentation regarding that tank as in Japan was supposed to get one from Germany. It is another issue whatsoever as to whether it reached mainland Japan or not. It could still be a top tier event reward for Japan much like the T-34-100 for the Soviets. On top of that it would help fill up a niche in the BR V Japanese vehicle tree. Also with the Americans already having access to the T26 Pershing it would be a fair and even fight. These are the kind of event rewards that we need in-game to make people truly interested.
Even if they got it that is one tank
one tank they cannot repair,
one tank they cannot resupply,
one tank they cannot make more of,
one tank they cannot transport in numbers.
ect ect the point is even if received it would be at best one or a handful. Japan could not send even one much less more and Japan could not make its own
1 Like
Short answer? Players demand balance. Even if Japan was fighting BR3 and 4 US stuff with BR1 and 2, historically (in land war), players think that OP is defined as “something good I don’t have”. Sure, the M26 probably never saw service the the Pacific, historically, but in the game it sure does and it would make for rather one sided matches if the most powerful Japanese tank cannon can almost frontally pen an M4A2.
Part of the problem is that the European war and the Pacific war were very different. Logistics were different, the battles were different; the equipment was REAL different. Since the game switched to the BR system; the theaters aren’t different, so they have to be balanced, even if that means putting in equipment that never saw mass production.
I get your arguement. But I am approaching this issue purely from the perspective of gameplay. The Japanese Tiger would actually be something unique than yet another Ho Ri. Plus as I already mentioned it will help fill up a void of there not being a good turreted tank at BR V Japan.
1 Like
The VK 36.01 (H) was an experimental German heavy tank, developed during World War II.[1] The VK 36.01 H was further development of the VK 30.01 (H) experimental medium tank, and subsequently lead to the development of the VK 45.01 (H).
There were only 8 chassis and one complete prototype built, all by Henschel. At the time Henschel was assigned with developing a breakthrough weapon that would help defeat the Soviet Union. Other experimental heavy tanks and super-heavy tanks were built, designed, and tested by Henschel. The development of the VK 36.01 (H) lead to the development of the VK 45.01 (H), the prototype immediately preceding, and approved for production into, the Tiger I. 
VK 45.01 (H) was a German tank which was the final prototype of the Panzer VI Tiger I, evolved from the VK 36.01 (H), designed by Henschel. It was selected by Adolf Hitler over the competing VK 45.01 (P) from Porsche for production into the Tiger I. It came in two variants, the VK 45.01 (H) H2 with a 75 mm L/70 gun, and the VK 45.01 (H) H1 with an 88 mm L/56 gun.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger Ausf. E
.2.jpg)
Tiger I in northern France, March 1944
Type Heavy tank
Place of origin Nazi Germany
Service history
In service 1942–1945
Used by See Operators
Wars World War II
Production history
Designer Erwin Aders
Henschel & Son
Designed 1938–1941
Manufacturer Henschel
Unit cost 250,700 ℛ︁ℳ︁[1][a][2][b]
Produced 1942–1944
No. built 1,347[c]
Specifications (RfRuK VK 4501H Ausf.E, Blatt: G-330)
Mass 54 tonnes (60 short tons)[4]
57 tonnes (63 short tons) (Ausf. E)[5] (Combat weight)[6]
Length 6.316 m (20 ft 8.7 in)
8.45 m (27 ft 9 in) gun forward
Width 3.56 m (11 ft 8 in)
Height 3.00 m (9 ft 10 in)
Crew 5 (commander, gunner, loader, driver, radio operator)
Armour 25–120 mm (0.98–4.72 in)[7][8]
Main
armament 1× 8.8 cm KwK 36 L/56
92 AP and HE rounds
Secondary
armament 2× 7.92 mm MG 34
4,500 rounds
4,800 rounds (Ausf. E)[9]
Engine Maybach HL230 P45 V-12 petrol engine
700 PS (690 hp, 515 kW)
Power/weight 13 PS (9.5 kW) / tonne
Transmission Maybach Olvar Typ OG 40 12 16 (8 forward and 4 reverse)[10]
Suspension Torsion bar
Ground clearance 0.47 m (1 ft 7 in)
Fuel capacity 540 liters
Operational
range Road: 195 km (121 mi)[5]
Cross country: 110 km (68 mi)[5]
Maximum speed 45.4 km/h (28.2 mph) on roads[11][d]
20–25 km/h (12–16 mph) cross country[5]
The Tiger I (German: [ˈtiːɡɐ] ⓘ) was a German heavy tank of World War II that began operational duty in 1942 in Africa and in the Soviet Union, usually in independent heavy tank battalions. It gave the German Army its first armoured fighting vehicle that mounted the 8.8 cm (3.5 in) KwK 36 gun (derived from the 8.8 cm Flak 36, the famous “eighty-eight” feared by Allied troops). 1,347 were built between August 1942 and August 1944.[12] After August 1944, production of the Tiger I was phased out in favour of the Tiger II.
While the Tiger I has been called an outstanding design for its time,[13] it has also been called overengineered,[14] using expensive materials and labour-intensive production methods. In the early period, the Tiger was prone to certain types of track failures and breakdowns. It was expensive to maintain, but generally mechanically reliable.[15] It was difficult to transport and vulnerable to immobilisation when mud, ice, and snow froze between its overlapping and interleaved Schachtellaufwerk-pattern road wheels, often jamming them solid.
The tank was given its nickname “Tiger” by the ministry for armament and ammunition by 7 August 1941,[16] and the Roman numeral was added after the Tiger II entered production. It was classified with ordnance inventory designation Sd.Kfz. 182. The tank was later re-designated as Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausführung E (abbreviated as Pz.Kpfw. VI Ausf. E) in March 1943, with ordnance inventory designation Sd.Kfz. 181.
Today, only nine Tiger I tanks survive in museums and private collections worldwide. As of 2021, Tiger 131 (captured during the North African campaign) at the UK’s Tank Museum is the only example restored to running order.
Design history
[edit]
Earlier designs
[edit]
Henschel & Sohn began the development of a large tank design in January 1937 when the Waffenamt requested Henschel to develop a Durchbruchwagen (“breakthrough vehicle”) in the 30–33 tonne range.[17] Only one prototype hull was ever built, and it was never fitted with a turret. The Durchbruchwagen I’s general shape and suspension resembled the Panzer III, while the turret resembled the early Panzer IV C turret with the short-barrelled 7.5 cm (3.0 in) L/24 cannon.
Before Durchbruchwagen I was completed, a request was issued for a heavier 30-tonne class vehicle with thicker armour, the Durchbruchwagen II, which would have had 50 mm (2.0 in) of frontal armour and mounted a Panzer IV turret with a short-barrelled (24 calibres long) 7.5 cm KwK 37 gun. The overall weight would have been 36 tonnes. Only one hull was built, and no turret was fitted. Further development of the Durchbruchwagen was dropped in 1938 in favour of the larger and better-armoured VK 30.01 (H) and VK 36.01 (H) designs.[e] Both the Durchbruchwagen I and II prototype hulls were used as test vehicles until 1941.[citation needed]
Another attempt
[edit]
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
The VK 30.01 (H) medium tank and the VK 36.01 (H) heavy tank designs pioneered the use of the complex Schachtellaufwerk track suspension system of torsion bar-sprung, overlapped and interleaved main road wheels for tank use. This concept was already standard on German half-tracks such as the Sd. Kfz. 7. The VK 30.01 (H) was intended to mount a low-velocity 7.5 cm L/24 infantry support gun, a 7.5 cm L/40 dual-purpose anti-tank gun, or a 10.5 cm (4.1 in) L/28 field gun in a Krupp turret. Overall weight was to be 33 tonnes. The armour was designed to be 50 mm (2.0 in) on frontal surfaces and 30 mm (1.2 in) on the side surfaces. Four prototype hulls were completed for testing. Two of these were later modified to build the “Sturer Emil” (12.8 cm (5.0 in) Selbstfahrlafette L/61) self-propelled anti-tank gun.
The VK 36.01 (H) was intended to weigh 40 tonnes, with 100 mm (3.9 in) of armour on front surfaces, 80 mm (3.1 in) on turret sides and 60 mm (2.4 in) on the hull sides. The VK 36.01 (H) was intended to carry a 7.5 cm L/24, a 7.5 cm L/43, or a 7.5 cm L/70, or a 12.8 cm L/28 cannon in a Krupp turret that looked similar to an enlarged Panzer IV Ausf. C turret. The hull for one prototype was built, followed later by five more. The six turrets built were never fitted and were used as part of the Atlantic Wall. The VK 36.01 (H) project was discontinued in early 1942 in favour of the VK 45.01 project.
Further improvements
[edit]
Combat experience against the French SOMUA S35 cavalry tank and Char B1 heavy tank, and the British Matilda II infantry tanks during the Battle of France in June 1940 showed that the German Army needed better armed and armoured tanks.[18]
On 26 May 1941, Henschel and Ferdinand Porsche were asked to submit designs for a 45-tonne heavy tank, to be ready by June 1942.[19] Porsche worked on an updated version of their VK 30.01 (P) Leopard tank prototype while Henschel worked on an improved VK 36.01 (H) tank. Henschel built two prototypes: a VK 45.01 (H) H1 with an 8.8 cm L/56 cannon, and a VK 45.01 (H) H2 with a 7.5 cm L/70 cannon.
Final designs
[edit]
On 22 June 1941, Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the Soviet Union. The Germans encountered large numbers of Soviet T-34 medium and KV-1 heavy tanks.[20] According to Henschel designer Erwin Aders, “There was great consternation when it was discovered that the Soviet tanks were superior to anything available to the Heer.”[21]
Weight increase to 45 tonnes and an increase in gun calibre to 8.8 cm (3.5 in) were ordered for it on 26 May 1941.[22] The due date for the new prototypes was set for 20 April 1942, Adolf Hitler’s 53rd birthday. Unlike the Panther tank, the designs did not incorporate sloped armour.
Porsche and Henschel submitted prototype designs, each making use of the Krupp-designed turret. They were demonstrated at Rastenburg in front of Hitler. The Henschel design was accepted, mainly because the Porsche VK 4501 (P) prototype design used a troubled petrol-electric transmission system which needed large quantities of copper for the manufacture of its electrical drivetrain components, a strategic war material of which Germany had limited supplies with acceptable electrical properties for such uses.[23] Production of the Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf. H began in August 1942. Expecting an order for his tank, Porsche built 100 chassis. After the contract was awarded to Henschel, they were used for a new turretless, casemate-style tank destroyer; 91 hulls were converted into the Panzerjäger Tiger (P) in early 1943.
.jpg)
Early Tiger with tall cupola
The Tiger was still at the prototype stage when it was first hurried into service, and therefore changes both large and small were made throughout the production run. A redesigned turret with a lower cupola was the most significant change. The river-fording submersion capability and an external air-filtration system were dropped to cut costs.[citation needed]
Design
[edit]
The Tiger differed from earlier German tanks principally in its design philosophy. Its predecessors balanced mobility, armour and firepower and were sometimes outgunned by their opponents.
While heavy, this tank was not slower than the best of its opponents. Although the general design and layout were broadly similar to the Panzer IV medium tank, the Tiger weighed more than twice as much. This was due to its substantially thicker armour, the larger main gun, greater volume of fuel and ammunition storage, larger engine, and a more solidly built transmission and suspension.
Armour
[edit]
.jpg)
The Tiger I’s armour was up to 200 mm on the gun mantlet.
The Tiger I had frontal hull armour 100 mm (3.9 in) thick, frontal turret of 100 mm and gun mantlet with a varying thickness of 120 to 200 mm (4.7 to 7.9 in).[24] The Tiger had 60 mm (2.4 in) thick hull side plates and 80 mm (3.1 in) armour on the side superstructure/sponsons, while turret sides and rear were 80 mm. The top and bottom armour was 25 mm (1 in) thick; from March 1944, the turret roof was thickened to 40 mm (1.6 in).[7] Armour plates were mostly flat, with interlocking construction. This flat construction encouraged angling the Tiger hull roughly 30-45° when firing in order to increase effective thickness.
Gun
[edit]
Turmzielfernrohr TZF 9c gun sight
Main article: 8.8 cm KwK 36
The 56-calibre long 8.8 cm KwK 36 was chosen for the Tiger. A combination of a flat trajectory from the high muzzle velocity and precision from the Leitz Turmzielfernrohr TZF 9b sight (later replaced by the monocular TZF 9c) made it very accurate. In British wartime firing trials, five successive hits were scored on a 16 by 18 in (410 by 460 mm) target at a range of 1,200 yards (1,100 m).[21] Compared with the other contemporary German tank guns, the 8.8 cm KwK 36 had superior penetration to the 7.5 cm KwK 40 on the Sturmgeschütz III and Panzer IV but inferior to the 7.5 cm KwK 42 on the Panther tank[25] under ranges of 2,500 metres. At greater ranges, the 8.8 cm KwK 36 was superior in penetration and accuracy. British trials found the gun took from 6 to 16 seconds to reload varying on turret position and consequently which storage bin was being used.[26]
The ammunition for the Tiger had electrically fired primers. Four types of ammunition were available but not all were fully available; the PzGr 40 shell used tungsten, which was in short supply as the war progressed.
- PzGr. 39 (armour-piercing, capped, ballistic cap)
- PzGr. 40 (armour-piercing, composite rigid)
- Hl. Gr. 39 (high explosive anti-tank)
- sch. Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (incendiary shrapnel)
Engine and drive
[edit]
,_Wartung.jpg)
Crew working on the engine through the hatch on the rear hull roof
The rear of the tank held an engine compartment flanked by two separate rear compartments each containing a fuel tank and radiator. The Germans had not developed an adequate diesel engine, so a petrol (gasoline) powerplant had to be used instead. The original engine used was a 21.35 L (1,303 in3) 12-cylinder Maybach HL210 P45 developing 485 kW (650 hp) at 3,000 rpm and a top speed of 38 km/h (24 mph).[27] It was found to be underpowered for the vehicle from the 251st Tiger onwards. It was replaced by the upgraded HL 230 P45, a 23.095 L (1,409 in3) engine developing 521 kW (699 hp) at 3,000 rpm.[28] The main difference between these engines was that the original Maybach HL 210 used an aluminium engine block while the Maybach HL 230 used a cast-iron engine block. The cast-iron block allowed for larger cylinders (and thus, greater displacement) which increased the power output to 521 kW (699 hp). The engine was in V-form, with two cylinder banks set at 60 degrees. An inertia starter was mounted on its right side, driven via chain gears through a port in the rear wall. The engine could be lifted out through a hatch on the rear hull roof. In comparison to other V12 and various vee-form gasoline engines used for tanks, the eventual HL 230 engine was nearly 4 L (240 in3) smaller in displacement than the Allied British Rolls-Royce Meteor V12 AFV power plant, itself adapted from the RR Merlin but de-rated to 448 kW (601 hp) power output; and the American Ford-designed precursor V12 to its Ford GAA V-8 AFV engine of 18 litre displacement, which in its original V12 form would have had the same 27 L (1,600 in3) displacement as the Meteor.
The 501st Heavy Panzer Battalion (sPzAbt 501) reported in May 1943:
…Regarding the overheating engines, the HL 210 engine caused no troubles during the recent time. All occurring breakdowns resulted from the low quality of driver training. In several cases engine failures have to be put down to the missing remote engine thermometer. Five engines have reached more than 3,000 km without essential failures. A good driver is essential for the successful deployment of the Tiger, he must have a good technical training and has to keep his nerve in critical situations…[29][30]
The engine drove the front sprockets through a drivetrain connecting to a transmission in the front portion of the lower hull; the front sprockets had to be mounted relatively low as a result. The Krupp-designed 11-tonne turret had a hydraulic motor whose pump was powered by mechanical drive from the engine. A full rotation took about a minute.
Another new feature was the Maybach-Olvar hydraulically controlled semi-automatic pre-selector gearbox. The extreme weight of the tank also required a new steering system. Germany’s Argus Motoren, where Hermann Klaue had invented a ring brake[31] in 1940, supplied them for the Arado Ar 96[32] and also supplied the 55 cm (22 in) disc.[33] Klaue was acknowledged in the patent application that he had improved, it can even be traced back to British designs dating to 1904. It is unclear whether Klaue’s patent ring brake was used in the Tiger brake design.
The clutch-and-brake system, typical for lighter vehicles, was retained only for emergencies. Normally, steering depended on a double differential, Henschel’s development of the British Merritt-Brown system[34] first encountered in the Churchill tank. The vehicle had an eight-speed gearbox, and the steering offered two fixed radii of turns on each gear, thus the Tiger had sixteen different radii of turn. In first gear, at a speed of a few km/h, the minimal turning radius was 3.44 m (11 ft 3 in). In neutral gear, the tracks could be turned in opposite directions, so the Tiger I pivoted in place.[35] There was a steering wheel instead of either a tiller – or, as most tanks had at that time, twin braking levers – making the Tiger I’s steering system easy to use, and ahead of its time.[34]
Powered turret traverse was provided by the variable speed Boehringer-Sturm L4 hydraulic motor, which was driven from the main engine by a secondary drive shaft. On early production versions of the Tiger maximum turret traverse was limited to 6 degrees per second, whilst on later versions a selectable high speed traverse gear was added. Thus, the turret could be rotated 360 degrees at up to 6 degrees per second in low gear independent of engine rpm (same as on early production versions), or up to 19 degrees per second with the high-speed setting and engine at 2,000 rpm, and at over 36 degrees per second at the maximum allowable engine speed of 3,000 rpm. The direction and speed of traverse was controlled by the gunner through foot pedals, the speed of traverse corresponding to the level of depression the gunner applied to the foot pedal. This system allowed for very precise control of powered traverse, a light touch on the pedal resulting in a minimum traverse speed of 0.1 degrees per second (360 degrees in 60 minutes), unlike in most other tanks of the time (e.g., the US M4 Sherman or Soviet T-34) this allowed for fine laying of the gun without the gunner needing to use his traverse handwheel.[36]
1 Like
Suspension
[edit]
Clear view of the Tiger I’s Schachtellaufwerk overlapping and interleaved road wheels during production
The suspension used sixteen torsion bars, with eight suspension arms per side. To save space, the swing arms were leading on one side and trailing on the other side; this is called an H suspension[37] setup. There were three road wheels (one of them double, closest to the track’s centre) on each arm, in a so-called Schachtellaufwerk overlapping and interleaved arrangement, similar to that pioneered on German half-tracked military vehicles of the pre-World War II era, with the Tiger I being the first all-tracked German AFV built in quantity to use such a road wheel arrangement. The wheels had a diameter of 800 mm (31 in) in the Schachtellaufwerk arrangement for the Tiger I’s suspension, providing a high uniform distribution of the load onto the track, at the cost of increased maintenance.
,_Reparatur.jpg)
Wheel and track maintenance in muddy conditions
Removing an inner wheel that had lost its solid rubber tire (a common occurrence) required the removal of up to nine other wheels first. During the rainy period that brought on the autumn rasputitsa mud season and onwards into the winter conditions on the Eastern front, the roadwheels of a Schachtellaufwerk-equipped vehicle could also become packed with mud or snow that could then freeze.[citation needed] Presumably, German engineers, based on the experience of the half-tracks, felt that the improvement in off-road performance, track and wheel life, mobility with wheels missing or damaged, plus additional protection from enemy fire was worth the maintenance difficulties of a complex system vulnerable to mud and ice. This approach was carried on, in various forms, to the Panther and the non-interleaved wheel design for the Tiger II. Eventually, a new 80 cm diameter ‘steel’ wheel design with an internally sprung steel-rim tire was substituted. As these new wheels could carry more weight, the outermost wheel on each suspension arm was removed. The same wheels would also be used on the Tiger II.[38]
Tiger at the Henschel plant is loaded onto a special rail car. The outer road wheels have been removed and narrow tracks put in place to decrease vehicle width, allowing it to fit within the loading gauge of the German rail network.
To support the considerable weight of the Tiger, the tracks were 725 mm (28.5 in) wide. To meet rail-freight size restrictions, narrower 520 mm (20 in) wide ‘transport’ tracks (Verladeketten) could be installed.[39][34][40] For Tigers equipped with rubber-tired wheels, this also required the outermost roadwheel on each axle (16 total) to be removed.[41][38] The track replacement and wheel removal took 30 minutes for each side of the tank.[42] However, in service, Tigers were frequently transported by rail with their combat tracks fitted, as long as the train crew knew there were no narrow tunnels or other obstructions on the route that would prevent an oversized load from passing, despite this practice being strictly forbidden.[43]
Fording system
[edit]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
The Tiger tank’s combat weight of 56 tons was often too heavy for small bridges which had 35 ton weight limits, so it was designed to ford bodies of water up to 5 m (15 ft) deep.[6] This required unusual mechanisms for ventilation and cooling when underwater. At least 30 minutes of set-up time was required, with the turret and gun being locked in the forward position, and a large snorkel tube raised at the rear. An inflatable doughnut-shaped ring sealed the turret ring. The two rear compartments (each containing a fuel tank, radiator and fans) were floodable.[citation needed] However, this ability was found to be of limited practical value for its high cost and was removed from production lines in August 1943.[6][44] As a result, only the first 495 units were fitted with this deep fording system;[44] all later models were capable of fording water only two metres deep.[citation needed]
Crew compartment
[edit]
The internal layout was typical of German tanks. Forward was an open crew compartment, with the driver and radio-operator seated at the front on either side of the gearbox. Behind them the turret floor was surrounded by panels forming a continuous level surface. This helped the loader to retrieve the ammunition, which was mostly stowed above the tracks. Three men were seated in the turret; the loader to the right of the gun facing to the rear, the gunner to the left of the gun, and the commander behind him. There was also a folding seat on the right for the loader. The turret had a full circular floor and 157 cm (62 in) headroom. Early versions of the Tiger I’s turret included two pistol ports; however, one of these was replaced with a loader escape hatch and the other was removed from later designs.[45]
Post-war testing by the Allies found the tank to be uncomfortable and spartan. For example, the gunner suffered from clumsy controls and a cramped area.[46] This was in contrast to German crews who found them to be spacious and comfortable.[47]
Cost
[edit]
A substantial problem with the Tiger was that its production required considerable resources in terms of manpower and material, which led to it being expensive: the Tiger I cost over twice as much as a Panzer IV and four times as much as a StuG III assault gun.[48] Partly because of their high cost, only 1,347 Tiger I and 492 Tiger II tanks were produced.[49] The closest counterpart to the Tiger from the United States was the M26 Pershing (around 200 deployed to the European Theater of Operations (ETO) during the war[50][page needed]) and the IS-2 from the USSR (about 3,800 built during the conflict).
From a technical point of view, it was better than its contemporaries.[51] Despite the low number produced, shortages in qualified crew and the considerable fuel consumption in the face of ever shrinking resources, Tigers (including Tiger IIs) destroyed at least 10,300 enemy tanks and 11,380 anti-tank guns and artillery pieces for the loss of 1,725 Tigers[clarification needed] (including large numbers of operational and strategic losses, i.e. abandoned, broken down, etc.).[52]
Production history
[edit]
Installing the turret
Production of the Tiger I began in August 1942 at the factory of Henschel und Sohn in Kassel,[53] initially at a rate of 25 per month and peaking in April 1944 at 104 per month. An official document of the time stated that the first Tiger I was completed on 4 August. 1,355 had been built by August 1944, when production ceased. Deployed Tiger I’s peaked at 671 on 1 July 1944.[54] It took about twice as long to build a Tiger I as another German tank of the period. When the improved Tiger II began production in January 1944, the Tiger I was soon phased out.
In 1943, Japan bought several specimens of German tank designs for study. A single Tiger I was apparently purchased, along with a Panther and two Panzer IIIs, but only the Panzer IIIs were actually delivered.[55] The undelivered Tiger was loaned to the German Wehrmacht by the Japanese government.
.jpg)
Tiger I Ausf. H1 covered in Zimmerit anti-magnetic mine paste in Greece, 1944.
Many modifications were introduced during the production run to improve automotive performance, firepower and protection. Simplification of the design was implemented, along with cuts due to raw material shortages. In 1942 alone, at least six revisions were made, starting with the removal of the Vorpanzer (frontal armour shield) from the pre-production models in April. In May, mudguards bolted onto the side of the pre-production run were added, while removable mudguards saw full incorporation in September. Smoke discharge canisters, three on each side of the turret, were added in August 1942. In later years, similar changes and updates were added, such as the addition of Zimmerit (a non-magnetic anti-mine coating), in late 1943.[56][57][58] Due to slow production rates at the factories, incorporation of the new modifications could take several months.
The humorous and somewhat racy crew manual, the Tigerfibel, was the first of its kind for the German Army and its success resulted in more unorthodox manuals that attempted to emulate its style.
Variants
[edit]
Among other variants of the Tiger, a heavily armoured casemate self-propelled rocket projector, today commonly known as the Sturmtiger, was built, which mounted a 38 cm (15 in) rocket launcher.[59] A tank recovery version of the Porsche Tiger I (Bergetiger), and one Porsche Tiger I, was issued to the 654th Heavy Tank Destroyer Battalion, which was equipped with the Ferdinand/Elefant. In Italy, a demolition carrier version of the Tiger I without a main gun was built by maintenance crews in an effort to find a way to clear minefields. It is often misidentified as a BergeTiger recovery vehicle. As many as three may have been built. It carried a demolition charge on a small crane on the turret in place of the main gun. It was to move up to a minefield and drop the charge, back away, and then set the charge off to clear the minefield. There is no verification of any being used in combat.
Another variant was the Fahrschulpanzer VI Tiger tanks (driving school Tiger tanks). These tanks were Tigers with modified engines to run on either compressed Towngas gas (Stadtgas System) or wood gas (Holzgas System). This was due to shortages in fuel supply. They used a mixture of turreted and turretless hulls. They were used to train Tiger tank crews, and were not used in combat.
Designations
[edit]
Tigers under construction. This hull rests on a jig (1944)
Assembly facility; the vehicles are fitted with the narrower transport tracks (1943)
Designations of Tiger I[citation needed]|Designation|Reference|Date|
| — | — | — |
|Prototypes|
|VK 45.01|Henschel|28 July 1941|
|Pz.Kpfw. VI Ausf. H1 (VK 4501)|Wa Prüf 6[f]|21 October 1941|
|VK 4501 (H)|Wa J Rue (WuG 6)[g]|5 January 1942|
|Tiger H1 (VK 4501 – Aufbau fur 8,8 cm Kw.K.Krupp-Turm)|Wa Prüf 6|February 1942|
|Pz.Kpfw. VI (VK 4501/H Ausf. H1 (Tiger))|Wa Prüf 6|2 March 1942|
|Pz.Kpfw. “Tiger” H|Wa J Rue (WuG 6)|20 June 1942|
|Pz.Kpfw. VI
VK 4501 (H)
Tiger (H) Krupp-Turm mit 8.8 cm Kw.K. L/56 fur Ausf. H1|Wa Prüf 6|1 July 1942|
|Production|
|Panzerkampfwagen VI H (Sd.Kfz. 182)|KStN 1150d[60]|15 August 1942|
|Tiger I|Wa Prüf 6|15 October 1942|
|Pz.Kpfw. VI H Ausf. H1 (Tiger H1)|–|1 December 1942|
|Panzerkampfwagen VI H Ausf. H1
Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. E|D656/21+ (Tank manual)|March 1943|
|Pz.Kpfw. Tiger (8,8 cm L/56) (Sd.Kfz. 181)|KStN 1176e[61]|5 March 1943|
|Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. E (Sd.Kfz. 181)
Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. E|D656/22 (Tank manual)|7 September 1944|
---------------Just no straight port of the Tiger I’s we have 
Waffentrager 8.8cm KwK 43 L/71 (Krupp-Steyr). No copy-pasta be nice to see some cats drown
1 Like
Thanks for the detailed information. Appreciate it.
Sorry parade/shopping (small town life)