Jump to content

Dead Iron


Mr King

Recommended Posts

 

Destroyed Armenian T-72s. Looks like all of them were hit on top of the tower.

 

 

 

 

Spike? Is this the first time it's been used against tanks in combat?

 

 

Very possible. Armenians confirmed the loss of 14 tanks, a serious number IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 913
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

A Pz IV split in half

 

Another one

 

That was pretty common, certainly with the late ones anyway. There is a whole host of PZIVs in 'Panzers in Normandy' and something like half of them in the book came unglued when the ammunition detonated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A Pz IV split in half

 

Another one

 

That was pretty common, certainly with the late ones anyway. There is a whole host of PZIVs in 'Panzers in Normandy' and something like half of them in the book came unglued when the ammunition detonated.

 

Agreed, also noted that. IIRC the 76mm armed T34s had a habit of popping their turrets under the same circumstances which has carried over to T72s, presumably due to the autoloader stowage?

 

BillB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A Pz IV split in half

 

Another one

 

That was pretty common, certainly with the late ones anyway. There is a whole host of PZIVs in 'Panzers in Normandy' and something like half of them in the book came unglued when the ammunition detonated.

 

 

Yeah; a couple pages back I posted a picture of one who's top half is hanging in a nearby tree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi...

Lots of images of Sherman tanks with the turrets blown off, as well.

 

Kind of to be expected...fuel and ammunition cooking off in a confined space.

 

There do seem to be somewhat fewer images of Tigers and Panthers missing turrets...obviously, it happened to them as well. Perhaps the larger heavier turrets simply didn't leave the vehicle as often...or maybe the fact that there were fewer of those vehicles limits the opportunity to photograph examples of such destruction.

 

What has always interested me is the relatively small numbers of T-34s we see with penetrations of the front glacis plate. Same holds true of SU-85s and SU-100s.

As fond as the Germans were of photographing destroyed Soviet armor, you would think that more such photos would exist. Of course, as the war turned against the Germans they would have fewer and fewer opportunities to examine destroyed T34s, as the Soviets would recover their damaged and destroyed vehicles as they advanced.

 

I'm sure the Soviets photographed many of their own destroyed vehicles for research purposes but, there would be no value in publicizing such photos for morale or propaganda purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deleted....double post.

Edited by scj1014
Link to comment
Share on other sites


What has always interested me is the relatively small numbers of T-34s we see with penetrations of the front glacis plate. Same holds true of SU-85s and SU-100s.



SU-85 and SU-100 I am not surprised. As you said, they were fielded in 1943-45, when Germany was retreating. This meant that there were no chances for photographs and souvenirs. Soviet soldiers did not have many photo cameras.


This not only applies to SU-85/100 or T-34. There are not that many Panzer IV/V either... I guess large numbers were simply abandoned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A Pz IV split in half

 

Another one

That was pretty common, certainly with the late ones anyway. There is a whole host of PZIVs in 'Panzers in Normandy' and something like half of them in the book came unglued when the ammunition detonated.

 

How were turrets secured on German tanks, I would have thought that the turret should have 'popped off' first before ripping apart the whole tank?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi...

Lots of images of Sherman tanks with the turrets blown off, as well.

 

Kind of to be expected...fuel and ammunition cooking off in a confined space.

 

There do seem to be somewhat fewer images of Tigers and Panthers missing turrets...obviously, it happened to them as well. Perhaps the larger heavier turrets simply didn't leave the vehicle as often...or maybe the fact that there were fewer of those vehicles limits the opportunity to photograph examples of such destruction.

 

I dont recall seeing that many pictures of turret-less Shermans? I was under the impression, that in many cases, ammunition fires tended to blow out the bottom of the sponsons, venting the pressure that way. IIRC you see the same thing with Panthers.

 

In case of the Panzer IV, the superstructure was in two parts, both designed to be unbolted and lifted of the hull. So possibly, the turret had a stronger hold on the superstructure than the superstructure had on the hull. That would not be the case with the Panther and Tiger I/II.

 

And of course, some times the really bad damage does not come from battle damage but from demolition charges.

 

There is a series of Panzer III wreck pictures here, that shows several variations:

 

- Turret roof blown off

- Turret blown off

- Superstructure blown off

 

If the website is to be believed, the worst damage comes from demolition jobs.

Edited by cbo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reference to the Pz IV pictures earlier. The original design was to allow the upper hull and turret to be unbolted for railroad transport. As far as I know that was never done however also the capability was never removed. So the bolts and the seam would be weaker than the wielding around the superstructure and usually release first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...