Of interest I'd thought I'd post some first hand accounts of the Jagdpanzer-IV and Pzkpfw-IV/70(V) in action: "The Jagdpanzer-IV is completely protected against 7,62cm rounds and anti-tank rifles. In spite of numerous hits from Russian [anti-tank] weapons, the Abteilung has not yet lost a single one of our 21 Jagdpanzers through enemy action...[In] the role of protecting our own units from enemy tanks and supporting infantry, [the Jagdpanzers] were successful in all cases. During attacks it was possible to hold large areas without support of other units." (With regard to its mechanical reliability the report notes): "the majority of mechanical breakdowns can be repaired in a few hours or sometimes a day, so that Jagdpanzers are returned to the troops [soon] for action." - Nachtrichtenblatt der Panzertruppen, November 1944. With regard to the Pzkpfw-IV/70(V), original German first hand accounts state the following: "In late January 1945 the company received fourteen Panzer-IV/70(V) at the Neuhammer troop training grounds near Sagen. The vehicles were quickly inspected...test driven, & fired. This Jagdpanzer was the best armored vehicle in which I sat in or fought throughout the entire war, especially when it came to anti-tank defense." (Within the report the commander gives the an account of their defense of the bridgehead on the Oder by Stettin.) "At exactly 11:00 hours...signal flairs were fired and the enemy attacked...T34 and SU85 rolled into view of our Jagdpanzers in defiladed positions. Our knowledgeable and experienced gunners, who were the oldest corporals and sergents of the Abteilung, could hardly miss [at this range]...Our Jagdpanzer received many hits during this engagement. We still remained [in combat] and continued to fight until the end of the engagement until the last enemy tanks retreated." - After action Report: 6. Kompanie, II/9. Panzer Regiment, March 1945. Another original German report about the Pzkpfw-IV/70(V): "As ordered by the Heersgruppe, the Abteilung (schwere Heers Panzerjager) was to receive their weapons in Soldau...Orders were changed and the issued weapons (24 Jagdpanzer-IV 7,5cm Pak42 and 18 Jagdpanthers) were sent to Allenstein. These were to be used to outfit two Kompanien with 12 Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak42 each and one Kompanie with 9 Jagdpanthers plus 3.Kp.Abt. PzJr.616 with 9 Jagdpanthers. The shortages of crews [were made up for] with stragglers...Due to the short time available, the panzers could only be superficially examined by the Ersatzabteilung. Range firing [training] was not possible. The personnel were completely exhausted. On the 21st of January the Abteilung marched into action...the Abteilung engaged in battles North of Allenstein and south west of Guttstadt, and is currently fighting near Wormditt. [So far] the Abteilung has knocked out 58 enemy armored vehicles and lost one Jagdpanther and four Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak.42 to enemy action. In addition, the Abteilung has lost eight Jagdpanthers and four Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak.42 to fuel shortages (blown up), one Jagdpanther and eight Jagdpanzer-IV blown up after being stuck [in the mud], and three Jagdpanther and five Jagdpanzer-IV blown up due to long term repair." - commander of the schwere Heers Panzerjager Abteilung 563, 31st January 1945. The following is an account of a Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) the crew of which, commanded by an officer Hartman, was awarded the Ritterkreutz in the defense of the city Breslau: "On 18th April 1945...Lieutenant Hartman drove forward to recon and determine that Russian tanks had advanced over the railway...three Sturmgeschutz and Hartman in his Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) rolled through the railway underpass to the Obertor rail station...Hartman observed through his Schere (periscope) several ISU-152. He opened fire and set the first one aflame. [He] fired all of his Panzergranaten (AP rounds) at them destroying five. Both his accomplices (ie StuG) likewise produced kills...Hartman drove back and reloaded his ammunition...[Afterward] all the Sturmgeschutz again advanced to attack. By itself, the Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) of Hartman shot up 13 enemy AFV including [the five] ISU152. Altogether the enemy lost 25 vehicles and failed to reach their objective...if the enemy had obtained his goal, the island would have been lost and the army would not have been able to hold Breslau." - After action account: 3.Batterie/Sturmgeschutz Brigade 311
@@ivoferin8176 They're from T.Jenz's Panzer Tracts series. The publications, and all his work from the 90s on, were from original WW2 German documentation.
@@ivoferin8176 These quotes are all from Panzer Tracts No. 9-2: Jagdpanzer-IV, Panzer-IV/70(V) & Panzer-IV/70(A) - specifically: pp.9.2.36, 9.2.56, & 9.2.75
Basically, they were very potent tank destroyers, but their army was already in such a bad condition that they couldn't get the most potential out of these TD's.
Thank you guys for posting !. Although both Jagdpanzer IV/70 and US sherman are equipped with 75mm gun, Comparing the size of the ammo, you'll be surprised how massive the ammo of this Jagdpanzer is !.
Very successful? The Germans themselves during the war already concluded it was a complete failure, difficult to steer, severely nose heavy already with the L/48 let alone the L/70 gun.
Who told you that it was not successful? It was basically a StuG III on steroids as Hilary Doyle mentioned that it was not supposed to drive around like a Panzer with a turret as it was supposed to be heavily camouflaged ready to shoot the incoming enemy tanks at a good distance with it's powerful gun. It was not very effective like at the battle of the Bulge not so much because it was nose heavy but because of the long gun positioned so low that requiring careful driving and thick forest. It was far more suitable on the Eastern Front....
@@paoloviti6156 German reports tell that it isn't a successful vehicle. They were not impressed by the vehicle and were almost immediately when it was fielded looking for a better solution.
It's a myth that the Germans concluded that the Jagdpanzer-IV and Pzkpfw-IV/70(V) were "failures" although there is some truth to the belief. The "Guderian Duck" rumor was probably derived from an Allied post war confusion between the differences between the original German reports on the Jagdpanzer-IV & Pzkpfw-IV/70(A). First, the Jagdpanzer-IV didn't show any particular unusual mechanical failures for a Pzkpfw-IV based AFV. Original troop reports give good accounting of the vehicle: "The Jagdpanzer-IV is completely protected against 7,62cm rounds and anti-tank rifles. In spite of numerous hits from Russian [anti-tank] weapons, the Abteilung has not yet lost a single one of our 21 Jagdpanzers through enemy action...[In] the role of protecting our own units from enemy tanks and supporting infantry, [the Jagdpanzers] were successful in all cases. During attacks it was possible to hold large areas without support of other units." (With regard to its mechanical reliability the report notes): "the majority of mechanical breakdowns can be repaired in a few hours or sometimes a day, so that Jagdpanzers are returned to the troops [soon] for action." - Nachtrichtenblatt der Panzertruppen, November 1944. With regard to the Pzkpfw-IV/70(V), original German first hand accounts state the following: "In late January 1945 the company received fourteen Panzer-IV/70(V) at the Neuhammer troop training grounds near Sagen. The vehicles were quickly inspected...test driven, & fired. This Jagdpanzer was the best armored vehicle in which I sat in or fought throughout the entire war, especially when it came to anti-tank defense." (Within the report the company commander gives the an account of their defense of the bridgehead on the Oder by Stettin.) "At exactly 11;00 hours...signal flairs were fired and the enemy attacked...T34 and SU85 rolled into view of our Jagdpanzers in defiladed positions. Our knowledgeable and experienced gunners, who were the oldest corporals and sergents of the Abteilung, could hardly miss [at this range]...Our Jagdpanzer received many hits during this engagement. We still remained [in combat] and continued to fight until the end of the engagement when the last enemy tanks retreated." - Operational Report: 6. Kompanie, II/9. Panzer Regiment, March 1945. Another original German report also shows the Pzkpfw-IV/70(V) performed well, particularly considering the poor combat conditions underwhich the unit operated. "As ordered by the Heersgruppe, the Abteilung (schwere Heers Panzerjager) was to receive their weapons in Soldau...Orders were changed and the issued weapons (24 Jagdpanzer-IV 7,5cm Pak42 and 18 Jagdpanthers) were sent to Allenstein. These were to be used to outfit two Kompanien with 12 Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak42 each and one Kompanie with 9 Jagdpanthers plus 3.Kp.Abt. PzJr.616 with 9 Jagdpanthers. The shortages of crews [were made up for] with stragglers...Due to the short time available, the panzers could only be superficially examined by the Ersatzabteilung. Range firing [training] was not possible. The personnel were completely exhausted. On the 21st of January the Abteilung marched into action...the Abteilung engaged in battles North of Allenstein and south west of Guttstadt, and is currently fighting near Wormditt. [So far] the Abteilung has knocked out 58 enemy armored vehicles and lost one Jagdpanther and four Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak.42 to enemy action. In addition, the Abteilung has lost eight Jagdpanthers and four Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak.42 to fuel shortages (blown up), one Jagdpanther and eight Jagdpanzer-IV blown up after being stuck [in the mud], and three Jagdpanther and five Jagdpanzer-IV blown up due to long term repair." - commander of the schwere Heers Panzerjager Abteilung 563, 31st January 1945. (As a side note: five Jagdpanzer-IV in long term repair out of 24 (21%) was typical for Pzkpfw-IV and Pzkpfw-IV based vehicles. Panther and Tiger Abteilungs, by contrast, usually experienced about 30% to 50% breakdowns at any given time. While Pzkpfw-II, Nashorn & Pzkpfw-38 based AFV had the lowest breakdown rate at roughly 15%.) By contrast, original German reports on the larger and heavier 28 ton Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) showed poor results. In a review of new Krupp proposed AFV designs in early 1945 the conclusions about the vehicle were commented near the end of the report: "[With regard to] Jagdpanzer-38 mit 7,5cm Pak42 L/70, installation of the weapon in the proposed design would cause considerable difficulties...Armor protection would be completely insufficient. However with sufficient armor it would weigh 18 tons [and have] the same characteristics as the Panzer-IV Lang A [Pzkpfw-IV/70(A)] which is a failure based on reports from the front." - Heinz Guderian Generalinspekteur der Panzertruppen, 20th January, 1945 It should be noted that just before this report, on January 15th 1945, Guderian determined that the Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) was "Nicht Fronttauglich" or not combat serviceable and that the Panzer-IV J should be produced in its place. Finally, yes the Germans did look for replacements for the Jagdpanzer-IV by mid 1944, but this had nothing to do with the performance of the Jagdpanzer-IV itself, but rather due to the fact that the whole Pzkpfw-IV series was being phased out of production. Its role, and all other Pzkpfw-IV designs, being replaced by the Pzkpfw-V and Pzkpfw-38 series to streamline German production.
Interior looks surprisingly roomy for WWII armor.
Of interest I'd thought I'd post some first hand accounts of the Jagdpanzer-IV and Pzkpfw-IV/70(V) in action:
"The Jagdpanzer-IV is completely protected against 7,62cm rounds and anti-tank rifles. In spite of numerous hits from Russian [anti-tank] weapons, the Abteilung has not yet lost a single one of our 21 Jagdpanzers through enemy action...[In] the role of protecting our own units from enemy tanks and supporting infantry, [the Jagdpanzers] were successful in all cases. During attacks it was possible to hold large areas without support of other units."
(With regard to its mechanical reliability the report notes):
"the majority of mechanical breakdowns can be repaired in a few hours or sometimes a day, so that Jagdpanzers are returned to the troops [soon] for action."
- Nachtrichtenblatt der Panzertruppen, November 1944.
With regard to the Pzkpfw-IV/70(V), original German first hand accounts state the following:
"In late January 1945 the company received fourteen Panzer-IV/70(V) at the Neuhammer troop training grounds near Sagen. The vehicles were quickly inspected...test driven, & fired. This Jagdpanzer was the best armored vehicle in which I sat in or fought throughout the entire war, especially when it came to anti-tank defense."
(Within the report the commander gives the an account of their defense of the bridgehead on the Oder by Stettin.)
"At exactly 11:00 hours...signal flairs were fired and the enemy attacked...T34 and SU85 rolled into view of our Jagdpanzers in defiladed positions. Our knowledgeable and experienced gunners, who were the oldest corporals and sergents of the Abteilung, could hardly miss [at this range]...Our Jagdpanzer received many hits during this engagement. We still remained [in combat] and continued to fight until the end of the engagement until the last enemy tanks retreated."
- After action Report: 6. Kompanie, II/9. Panzer Regiment, March 1945.
Another original German report about the Pzkpfw-IV/70(V):
"As ordered by the Heersgruppe, the Abteilung (schwere Heers Panzerjager) was to receive their weapons in Soldau...Orders were changed and the issued weapons (24 Jagdpanzer-IV 7,5cm Pak42 and 18 Jagdpanthers) were sent to Allenstein. These were to be used to outfit two Kompanien with 12 Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak42 each and one Kompanie with 9 Jagdpanthers plus 3.Kp.Abt. PzJr.616 with 9 Jagdpanthers. The shortages of crews [were made up for] with stragglers...Due to the short time available, the panzers could only be superficially examined by the Ersatzabteilung. Range firing [training] was not possible. The personnel were completely exhausted. On the 21st of January the Abteilung marched into action...the Abteilung engaged in battles North of Allenstein and south west of Guttstadt, and is currently fighting near Wormditt. [So far] the Abteilung has knocked out 58 enemy armored vehicles and lost one Jagdpanther and four Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak.42 to enemy action. In addition, the Abteilung has lost eight Jagdpanthers and four Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak.42 to fuel shortages (blown up), one Jagdpanther and eight Jagdpanzer-IV blown up after being stuck [in the mud], and three Jagdpanther and five Jagdpanzer-IV blown up due to long term repair."
- commander of the schwere Heers Panzerjager Abteilung 563, 31st January 1945.
The following is an account of a Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) the crew of which, commanded by an officer Hartman, was awarded the Ritterkreutz in the defense of the city Breslau:
"On 18th April 1945...Lieutenant Hartman drove forward to recon and determine that Russian tanks had advanced over the railway...three Sturmgeschutz and Hartman in his Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) rolled through the railway underpass to the Obertor rail station...Hartman observed through his Schere (periscope) several ISU-152. He opened fire and set the first one aflame. [He] fired all of his Panzergranaten (AP rounds) at them destroying five. Both his accomplices (ie StuG) likewise produced kills...Hartman drove back and reloaded his ammunition...[Afterward] all the Sturmgeschutz again advanced to attack. By itself, the Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) of Hartman shot up 13 enemy AFV including [the five] ISU152. Altogether the enemy lost 25 vehicles and failed to reach their objective...if the enemy had obtained his goal, the island would have been lost and the army would not have been able to hold Breslau."
- After action account: 3.Batterie/Sturmgeschutz Brigade 311
May I ask where did you found those accounts?
@@ivoferin8176 They're from T.Jenz's Panzer Tracts series. The publications, and all his work from the 90s on, were from original WW2 German documentation.
@@calessel3139 thanks. I have many... didnt recalled they had that kind of info.
@@ivoferin8176 These quotes are all from Panzer Tracts No. 9-2: Jagdpanzer-IV, Panzer-IV/70(V) & Panzer-IV/70(A) - specifically: pp.9.2.36, 9.2.56, & 9.2.75
Basically, they were very potent tank destroyers, but their army was already in such a bad condition that they couldn't get the most potential out of these TD's.
i'd like to see a tour of the outside of this vehicle.
Thank you guys for posting !. Although both Jagdpanzer IV/70 and US sherman are equipped with 75mm gun, Comparing the size of the ammo, you'll be surprised how massive
the ammo of this Jagdpanzer is !.
Why is there daylight coming through the rear hull behind Sofilein's head ? Is there a hatch there ?
Louvers at the rear to aid ventilation...
Nice talk.
I believe her white/brown hair is whiter than his LOL!
Very successful? The Germans themselves during the war already concluded it was a complete failure, difficult to steer, severely nose heavy already with the L/48 let alone the L/70 gun.
Who told you that it was not successful? It was basically a StuG III on steroids as Hilary Doyle mentioned that it was not supposed to drive around like a Panzer with a turret as it was supposed to be heavily camouflaged ready to shoot the incoming enemy tanks at a good distance with it's powerful gun. It was not very effective like at the battle of the Bulge not so much because it was nose heavy but because of the long gun positioned so low that requiring careful driving and thick forest. It was far more suitable on the Eastern Front....
@@paoloviti6156 German reports tell that it isn't a successful vehicle. They were not impressed by the vehicle and were almost immediately when it was fielded looking for a better solution.
It's a myth that the Germans concluded that the Jagdpanzer-IV and Pzkpfw-IV/70(V) were "failures" although there is some truth to the belief. The "Guderian Duck" rumor was probably derived from an Allied post war confusion between the differences between the original German reports on the Jagdpanzer-IV & Pzkpfw-IV/70(A).
First, the Jagdpanzer-IV didn't show any particular unusual mechanical failures for a Pzkpfw-IV based AFV. Original troop reports give good accounting of the vehicle:
"The Jagdpanzer-IV is completely protected against 7,62cm rounds and anti-tank rifles. In spite of numerous hits from Russian [anti-tank] weapons, the Abteilung has not yet lost a single one of our 21 Jagdpanzers through enemy action...[In] the role of protecting our own units from enemy tanks and supporting infantry, [the Jagdpanzers] were successful in all cases. During attacks it was possible to hold large areas without support of other units."
(With regard to its mechanical reliability the report notes):
"the majority of mechanical breakdowns can be repaired in a few hours or sometimes a day, so that Jagdpanzers are returned to the troops [soon] for action."
- Nachtrichtenblatt der Panzertruppen, November 1944.
With regard to the Pzkpfw-IV/70(V), original German first hand accounts state the following:
"In late January 1945 the company received fourteen Panzer-IV/70(V) at the Neuhammer troop training grounds near Sagen. The vehicles were quickly inspected...test driven, & fired. This Jagdpanzer was the best armored vehicle in which I sat in or fought throughout the entire war, especially when it came to anti-tank defense."
(Within the report the company commander gives the an account of their defense of the bridgehead on the Oder by Stettin.)
"At exactly 11;00 hours...signal flairs were fired and the enemy attacked...T34 and SU85 rolled into view of our Jagdpanzers in defiladed positions. Our knowledgeable and experienced gunners, who were the oldest corporals and sergents of the Abteilung, could hardly miss [at this range]...Our Jagdpanzer received many hits during this engagement. We still remained [in combat] and continued to fight until the end of the engagement when the last enemy tanks retreated."
- Operational Report: 6. Kompanie, II/9. Panzer Regiment, March 1945.
Another original German report also shows the Pzkpfw-IV/70(V) performed well, particularly considering the poor combat conditions underwhich the unit operated.
"As ordered by the Heersgruppe, the Abteilung (schwere Heers Panzerjager) was to receive their weapons in Soldau...Orders were changed and the issued weapons (24 Jagdpanzer-IV 7,5cm Pak42 and 18 Jagdpanthers) were sent to Allenstein. These were to be used to outfit two Kompanien with 12 Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak42 each and one Kompanie with 9 Jagdpanthers plus 3.Kp.Abt. PzJr.616 with 9 Jagdpanthers. The shortages of crews [were made up for] with stragglers...Due to the short time available, the panzers could only be superficially examined by the Ersatzabteilung. Range firing [training] was not possible. The personnel were completely exhausted. On the 21st of January the Abteilung marched into action...the Abteilung engaged in battles North of Allenstein and south west of Guttstadt, and is currently fighting near Wormditt. [So far] the Abteilung has knocked out 58 enemy armored vehicles and lost one Jagdpanther and four Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak.42 to enemy action. In addition, the Abteilung has lost eight Jagdpanthers and four Jagdpanzer-IV/Pak.42 to fuel shortages (blown up), one Jagdpanther and eight Jagdpanzer-IV blown up after being stuck [in the mud], and three Jagdpanther and five Jagdpanzer-IV blown up due to long term repair."
- commander of the schwere Heers Panzerjager Abteilung 563, 31st January 1945.
(As a side note: five Jagdpanzer-IV in long term repair out of 24 (21%) was typical for Pzkpfw-IV and Pzkpfw-IV based vehicles. Panther and Tiger Abteilungs, by contrast, usually experienced about 30% to 50% breakdowns at any given time. While Pzkpfw-II, Nashorn & Pzkpfw-38 based AFV had the lowest breakdown rate at roughly 15%.)
By contrast, original German reports on the larger and heavier 28 ton Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) showed poor results. In a review of new Krupp proposed AFV designs in early 1945 the conclusions about the vehicle were commented near the end of the report:
"[With regard to] Jagdpanzer-38 mit 7,5cm Pak42 L/70, installation of the weapon in the proposed design would cause considerable difficulties...Armor protection would be completely insufficient. However with sufficient armor it would weigh 18 tons [and have] the same characteristics as the Panzer-IV Lang A [Pzkpfw-IV/70(A)] which is a failure based on reports from the front."
- Heinz Guderian Generalinspekteur der Panzertruppen, 20th January, 1945
It should be noted that just before this report, on January 15th 1945, Guderian determined that the Pzkpfw-IV/70(A) was "Nicht Fronttauglich" or not combat serviceable and that the Panzer-IV J should be produced in its place.
Finally, yes the Germans did look for replacements for the Jagdpanzer-IV by mid 1944, but this had nothing to do with the performance of the Jagdpanzer-IV itself, but rather due to the fact that the whole Pzkpfw-IV series was being phased out of production. Its role, and all other Pzkpfw-IV designs, being replaced by the Pzkpfw-V and Pzkpfw-38 series to streamline German production.
@Herbert Ackermans - Your opinion is wrong. Entirely.
@@calessel3139 Well said and documented.