The wear rate on the normal/standard track was very high. The drive sprocket having half the number of teeth compared to the late track shown would wear our out very quickly because the loading was double on each drive tooth compared to the late track. I have seen many examples of this having worked on King Tiger components for many years. Hi Hilary, hope you are keeping well. Another great video.
If Krupp built the turrets for either Henschel or Porsche Tiger II, then they weren't really repurposed. They just switched to a more effective and easier to produce turret after the first turret design. Right?
I knew they had to take the tracks off of this tank and tiger , but first time I'v ever heard about the fenders having to be removed . Does anyone have photos of railcars with the fenders stored . Did they just disregard shipping the fenders. Perhaps thats the reason for so many tiger & king tigers without fenders mounted. I would have loved a picture of the king tiger next to the panzer I beside it is.
Yes, there are several photos of them loaded into railcars without the fenders, so they could it in tunnels, etc. The fenders go over the track, so in the same way the tracks are "to big" for the railcars to be able to over on a tunnel, the fender would also be on the way.
8:25 where, just where I can find that elusive "mud freezing between Tiger/Panther wheels" reference? Everyone "cites" it, but no proofs provided at all...
It probably originates in an extensive report by the Inspector General of Panzer Troops in March 1944 on the Panther in service. I don't recall seeing it quoted but that report is quite detailed about improvements and problems in service, so *most* likely that is where it comes from. Jentz's book may have the quote but I don't recall it.
official German designation was Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. B but although improperly I do prefer to call it Königtiger as it is easier for me to to pronounce! That said it is safe to say that the Tiger B was a much heavier tank fitted with more powerful 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 than the Tiger I fitted with the 8.8 cm KwK 36 gun. If possible the great issue was that it was powered by the same Maybach HL230 engine, sufficient for the Tiger I but hardly moving the Königtiger. Very interesting video as always 👌 👍👍
FYI: Date Organisation Designation 16 april 1942 Wa. Prüf. 6 VK 45.02 (H) 18 september 1942 Wa. Prüf. 6 Tiger II für VK 45.02 (H) 12 october 1942 Wa. Prüf. 6 Tiger III (VK 45.03) 28 october 1942 Henschel VK 45.03 10 december 1942 Henschel Tiger III 8 january 1943 Wa. Prüf. 6 Henschel Tiger B 2 february 1943 Henschel Tiger 3 2 march 1943 Henschel Tiger II 3 march 1943 Wa. Prüf. 6 Tiger II für VK 45.03 5 march 1943 In. 6 Pz.Kpfw. Tiger (8,8 cm Kw.K L/71)(Sd.Kfz. 182) 8 march 1943 Henschel Tiger 2 2 june 1943 Wa. Prüf. 6 Pz.Kpfw. Tiger Ausf. B 2 June 1943 Wa. Prüf. 6 Pz.Bef.Wg. Tiger Ausf. B 11 december 1944 Reichsministerium für Bewaffnung und Munition Königstiger
@@AKUJIVALDO the Tiger I and the Tiger B both shared the semi-automatc hydraulic gearbox, but not the same to accommodate the much heavier Tiger B. That said 30 km/h wasn't, possibly only the Comet and the M18 Hellcat was really fast!
Oow, come on Hilary, you know better than that! Krupp designed the turret for both the Porsche AND Henschel successors of the Tiger Ausf. E. Porsche entered work for that earlier than Henschel because they were not producing their Tiger Ausf. P, but Krupp stated in their financial report 1942/1943 that the turret was for both the Porsche and Henschel chassis being developed at that time.
Field commanders hated these tanks . They actually were more of a burden , than a help . They used too much fuel , they were slow , they were very limited to what bridges they could cross , they were prone to break downs . They would have been far better off to design a good , simple , easy to produce , medium tank , like the Sherman , or T34 . Then they would have had a chance to keep armored units equipped , and in the field , where they were needed .
1 king Tiger was the same cost as 18 stugs with the long barrel 75. Any Panzer division would have taken 180 stug's over 10 King Tigers but Hitler loved his wonder weapons.
The wear rate on the normal/standard track was very high. The drive sprocket having half the number of teeth compared to the late track shown would wear our out very quickly because the loading was double on each drive tooth compared to the late track.
I have seen many examples of this having worked on King Tiger components for many years.
Hi Hilary, hope you are keeping well. Another great video.
If Krupp built the turrets for either Henschel or Porsche Tiger II, then they weren't really repurposed. They just switched to a more effective and easier to produce turret after the first turret design. Right?
Two very knowledgeable experts of armor.
I knew they had to take the tracks off of this tank and tiger , but first time I'v ever heard about the fenders having to be removed . Does anyone have photos of railcars with the fenders stored . Did they just disregard shipping the fenders. Perhaps thats the reason for so many tiger & king tigers without fenders mounted. I would have loved a picture of the king tiger next to the panzer I beside it is.
Yes, there are several photos of them loaded into railcars without the fenders, so they could it in tunnels, etc. The fenders go over the track, so in the same way the tracks are "to big" for the railcars to be able to over on a tunnel, the fender would also be on the way.
Thank you for sharing
🏆🇺🇲🙏🤗
My father called it the Tiger Royal. Excellent video. Thank you
8:25 where, just where I can find that elusive "mud freezing between Tiger/Panther wheels" reference?
Everyone "cites" it, but no proofs provided at all...
Yes even if so tanks powerful enough to overcome Froben mud and move off ??
It probably originates in an extensive report by the Inspector General of Panzer Troops in March 1944 on the Panther in service. I don't recall seeing it quoted but that report is quite detailed about improvements and problems in service, so *most* likely that is where it comes from. Jentz's book may have the quote but I don't recall it.
I saw a bulldozer frozen to the ground in 1974. They were putting fires around the tracks when I passed by.
@trappenweisseguy27 yes when I was in Alaska a D7 frozen on the concrete floor,we use charcoal to heat the tracks and 2 # rose buds
The sprocket on V2 is the first version 18 teeth one, not the later modified one for the Kgs 73/800/152 single link tracks.
Very good video about a legendary tank
man i was just there! missed it!
I can see emergencies in transport tracks combat is it unique to KT x 2 traxs
official German designation was Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. B but although improperly I do prefer to call it Königtiger as it is easier for me to to pronounce! That said it is safe to say that the Tiger B was a much heavier tank fitted with more powerful 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71 than the Tiger I fitted with the 8.8 cm KwK 36 gun. If possible the great issue was that it was powered by the same Maybach HL230 engine, sufficient for the Tiger I but hardly moving the Königtiger. Very interesting video as always 👌 👍👍
FYI:
Date Organisation Designation
16 april 1942 Wa. Prüf. 6 VK 45.02 (H)
18 september 1942 Wa. Prüf. 6 Tiger II für VK 45.02 (H)
12 october 1942 Wa. Prüf. 6 Tiger III (VK 45.03)
28 october 1942 Henschel VK 45.03
10 december 1942 Henschel Tiger III
8 january 1943 Wa. Prüf. 6 Henschel Tiger B
2 february 1943 Henschel Tiger 3
2 march 1943 Henschel Tiger II
3 march 1943 Wa. Prüf. 6 Tiger II für VK 45.03
5 march 1943 In. 6 Pz.Kpfw. Tiger (8,8 cm Kw.K L/71)(Sd.Kfz. 182)
8 march 1943 Henschel Tiger 2
2 june 1943 Wa. Prüf. 6 Pz.Kpfw. Tiger Ausf. B
2 June 1943 Wa. Prüf. 6 Pz.Bef.Wg. Tiger Ausf. B
11 december 1944 Reichsministerium für Bewaffnung und Munition Königstiger
40 Kilometres per hour isn't "hardly moving"...
@@AKUJIVALDO the Tiger I and the Tiger B both shared the semi-automatc hydraulic gearbox, but not the same to accommodate the much heavier Tiger B. That said 30 km/h wasn't, possibly only the Comet and the M18 Hellcat was really fast!
Porshe turret version. That shot trap just looks scary!
Nah its sexxxy AF
this tank is a beauty - designed in a wind tunnel ;-)
The porsche turret had steeper Àngles than the henschel turret thats why the TCs coupla protrudes henschel turret was wìder and cover TCs coupla
Oow, come on Hilary, you know better than that!
Krupp designed the turret for both the Porsche AND Henschel successors of the Tiger Ausf. E. Porsche entered work for that earlier than Henschel because they were not producing their Tiger Ausf. P, but Krupp stated in their financial report 1942/1943 that the turret was for both the Porsche and Henschel chassis being developed at that time.
Demonstrating a touch of grace and respect is a more effective strategy when you pick your nits.
Porsche turret sharper sloped than henschel thats why.TCs coupla sticks out
More to come ??
Surprising that the remaining models didn't get a diesel engine upgrade and get used after all the French used panther after ww2 for some years
True WWII monster
Compare the Tiger II with the Panzer I sitting next to it. 😆
Ouch 👍
Field commanders hated these tanks . They actually were more of a burden , than a help . They used too much fuel , they were slow , they were very limited to what bridges they could cross , they were prone to break downs . They would have been far better off to design a good , simple , easy to produce , medium tank , like the Sherman , or T34 . Then they would have had a chance to keep armored units equipped , and in the field , where they were needed .
1 king Tiger was the same cost as 18 stugs with the long barrel 75. Any Panzer division would have taken 180 stug's over 10 King Tigers but Hitler loved his wonder weapons.
Well maybe next time Sweden don't destroy the Tiger 2 you have, you don't rate to have such history that you do not even respect in the first place.