CMBB v CMAK

[Mad Russian]

I told you to ask Steven Zaloga about those people. He knows Svirin surely, he is the leading historian and expert in Soviet tank development and, as far as I understood, consulted Zaloga on some issues.

ROFL!!!!! Maybe in Russia or Lithuania you can call up and just talk with anyone you like. That doesn't work here. While I have talked to Mr. Zaloga on a couple of occasions he doesn't take calls just everyday to discuss an issue of what he used for references in his books....lol..that's why they are listed in the back.

Again: you have proved nothing, because you refuse to understand, that tank duels is not the thing, most oftenly happening in the war. And number of tanks alone does not mean everything.

I know all about tank duels. I served in an armored division when I was younger. Believe me I know about tank duels.

Tell me this, what part of my statement don't you understand?

I made two of them.

1st statement. If the T-34's had been fully equipped with the number of AP rounds they were supposed to carry they would have killed more German tanks.

2nd statement. This would have an impact on CMBB games if the QB generator used that instead of giving them normal AP loadouts in early 1941.

About Panther Tiger and T-34 threat. Germans planned and developed their AT guns like 50 and 75mm paks much earlier, than they entered USSR.

STOP!!! You are talking about Panthers and Tigers and in the same breath move on the development of AT guns. They are not one and the same thing. There are lots of sources about the developmental histories for both of those tanks.

Here is the very first line in Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two by Chamberlain and Doyle. Again this is considered the bible for German armored vehicles.

After a study had been made of the Russian T-34 Hitler ordered the development of a similar vehicle in the 30 ton class.

No, nothing about this being the vehicle made after the PzIV, or anything such as that. The T-34 is mentioned in the very first line as being the major factor in the production of the Panther.

Idea of Tiger is also tracked earlier, than June 1941. Panther is a tank, that evolved from initial technical specifications, issued considering future developments of Allies tanks. Its gun penetration, armor, cost and complexity of production was simple overkill for T-34s of models, present at the moment PzV appeared. PzIV with long 75mm gun was already better armored (starting from 80mm) and gunned, than T-34s. it also had very good mobility, which, in fact, is comparable or even better, than T-34s (this was impression from people, who had chances to drive both tanks). Again: the only influence of T-34 on Panther was its slopped armor, which was unusual decision for German tank design.

I never said the Tiger was produced in response to the T-34. The Panther was. The Tiger was produced as an assault tank with heavy armour and a big gun to upgun the PzIV and give the tank a better chance at surviving assault situations.

Of course the Panther was better than the T-34. Why would you design and build a tank that wasn't better than the threat you wanted it to counter?

I understood you are tanking production figures from GABTU reports (I had some), but I would like to take time to re-check.

Take your time.

Ordered OOB and actual OOB are two different things.

That's exactly what I said. The issue with the T-34's that were operational at any one time, vs the production figures, seems to be an issue as well. So I'll address that here too.

We know exactly how many tanks were produced at any given time. We have no idea without a detailed study of how many tanks were operational at any given time. I have that information for the Germans but not the Soviets. Since I can't quote those the only figures I have are production.

In certain instances we know the operational status of certain units. I posted the Operational status for the Military Districts on 22 June 1941 in an earlier post. BUT the operational status of vehicles changes by the hour. So they are worthless except for very specific points in time...such as the start of Operation Barbarossa, Operation Zitadelle, Operation Bagration...etc...very specific points in time. They aren't even correct for those starting points because the reports were handed in at whatever time before the operation started and some tanks would have either been broken down or repaired in the time it took to make the report. The reports are obsolete the very next day.

That's just the way operational figures work. The best that you can do is try to get the points in time figures. They will be close enough for what we want anyway. We have two possibly different sets of figures. That's not all that unusual either. If you look at some of the most documented combat operations in world history Normany and the Battle of the Bulge they sources often don't agree. Good solid sources. Anyone that has ever tried to research many battles will tell you the same thing.

So if you want to build a case on operational tanks you will need a very large study and data base to do it.

So what are we left with? Trying to figure out 66 years later what happened in a five month period of history. Your answer earlier is the only correct one. Read all you can. Reason with what you read and make your judgements from those books. Some authors are better than others. Some are considered at the top of their subject. Like Glantz and Zaloga. Others are sometimes not so good.

If you want to continue to discuss early war tank battles/ developments that's fine.

Good Hunting.

MR