|
|
|
|
Tiger I
|
| |
|
| |
The Tiger I was a German heavy tank used in World War II, from late 1942 until the German surrender in 1945. The tank design served as the basis for other armoured vehicles: the Sturmtiger heavy self-propelled gun and the Bergetiger armoured recovery vehicle.
The Tiger's crew training manual, the Tigerfibel, became a souvenir item after the war.
The tank was given its nickname by designer Ferdinand Porsche, and the Roman numeral was added after the later Tiger II entered production.
Discussion
Ask a question about 'Tiger I' Start a new discussion about 'Tiger I' Answer questions from other users |
Encyclopedia
The Tiger I was a German heavy tank used in World War II, from late 1942 until the German surrender in 1945. The tank design served as the basis for other armoured vehicles: the Sturmtiger heavy self-propelled gun and the Bergetiger armoured recovery vehicle.
The Tiger's crew training manual, the Tigerfibel, became a souvenir item after the war.
The tank was given its nickname by designer Ferdinand Porsche, and the Roman numeral was added after the later Tiger II entered production. The initial official German designation was Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausführung H (‘Panzer VI version H’, abbreviated PzKpfw VI Ausf. H), but the tank was redesignated as PzKpfw VI Ausf. E in March 1943. The tank also had the ordnance inventory designation SdKfz 181.
Design
The Tiger differed from earlier German tanks principally in its design philosophy. Its predecessors balanced mobility, protection, and firepower. They were sometimes outgunned by their opponents.
The Tiger I represented a new approach that emphasised firepower and armour at the expense of mobility. Design studies for a new heavy tank had been started in the late 1930s, without any production planning. The real impetus for the Tiger was provided by the quality of the Soviet T-34. Although the general design and layout were broadly similar to the previous medium tank the Panzer IV, the Tiger weighed more than twice as much. This was due to its substantially thicker armour, the larger main gun, and the consequently greater volume of fuel and ammunition storage, larger engine, and more solidly-built transmission and suspension.
The Tiger I had frontal hull armour 100 mm thick and frontal turret armour of 110 mm, as opposed to the 80 mm frontal hull and 50 mm frontal turret armour of contemporary models of the Panzer IV. It also had 80 mm thick armour on the sides and rear. The top and bottom armour was 25 mm thick; later, the turret roof was thickened to 40 mm. Armour plates were mostly flat, with interlocking construction. The armour joints were of high quality, being stepped and welded rather than riveted.
The tank was too heavy for most bridges, so it was designed to ford four-meter deep water. This required unusual mechanisms for ventilation and cooling when underwater. At least 30 minutes of setup was required, with the turret and gun being locked in the forward position, and a large snorkel tube raised at the rear. Only the first 495 units were fitted with this deep fording system; all later models were capable of fording only two meters.
The rear of the tank held an engine room flanked by two floodable rear compartments each containing a fuel tank, radiator, and fans. The petrol (gasoline) engine was a 21-litre 12-cylinder Maybach HL 210 P45 with 650 PS (641 hp, 478 kW). Although a good engine, it was inadequate for the vehicle. From the 250th Tiger, it was replaced by the uprated HL 230 P45 (23 litres) of 700 PS (690 hp, 515 kW). The engine was in V-form, with two cylinder banks at 60 degrees. An inertial 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 hull roof.
The engine drove front sprockets, which were mounted quite low. The eleven-ton turret had a hydraulic motor powered by mechanical drive from the engine. A full rotation took about a minute. The suspension used sixteen torsion bars. To save space, the swing arms were leading on one side and trailing on the other. There were three road wheels on each arm, giving a good cross-country ride. The wheels had a diameter of 800 mm and were interleaved. Removing an inner wheel that had lost its tire (a common occurrence) required the removal of several outer wheels also. The wheels could become packed with mud or snow that could then freeze. Eventually, a new 'steel' wheel design, closely resembling those on the Tiger II, with an internal tire was substituted.
The tracks were an unprecedented 725 mm wide. To meet rail-freight size restrictions, the outer row of wheels had to be removed and special 520 mm wide transport tracks installed. With a good crew, a track change took 20 minutes.
The internal layout was typical of German tanks. Forward was an open crew compartment, with the driver and radio-operator seated at the front, 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. Two men were seated in the turret; the gunner to the left of the gun, and the commander behind him. There was also a folding seat for the loader. The turret had a full circular floor and 157 cm headroom.
The gun breech and firing mechanism were derived from the famous German "88" dual purpose flak gun. The 88 mm Kwk 36 L/56 gun was the variant chosen for the Tiger and was, along with the Tiger II's 88 mm Kwk 43 L/71, one of the most effective and feared tank guns of World War II. The Tiger's gun had a very flat trajectory and extremely accurate Zeiss Turmzielfernrohr TZF 9b sights (later replaced by the monocular TZF 9c). In British wartime firing trials, five successive hits were scored on a 16"x18" target at a range of 1,200 yards. Tigers were reported to have knocked out enemy tanks at ranges greater than a mile (1,600 m), although most World War II engagements were fought at much closer range.
Another new feature was the Maybach-Olvar hydraulically-controlled pre-selector gearbox and semi-automatic transmission. The extreme weight of the tank also required a new steering system. Instead of the clutch-and-brake designs of lighter vehicles, a variation on the British Merritt-Brown single radius system was used. The Tiger's steering system was of twin radius type, meaning that two different, fixed radii of turn could be achieved at each gear; the smallest radius on the first gear was four meters. Since the vehicle had an eight-speed gearbox, it thus had sixteen different radii of turn. If a smaller radius was needed, the tank could be turned by using brakes. The steering system was easy to use and ahead of its time. However, the tank's automotive features left much to be desired. When used to tow an immobilised Tiger, the engine often overheated and sometimes resulted in an engine breakdown or fire, so Tiger tanks were forbidden by regulations to tow crippled comrades. The low-mounted sprocket limited the obstacle-clearing height. The tracks also had a bad tendency to override the sprocket, resulting in immobilisation. If a track overrode and jammed, two Tigers were normally needed to tow the tank. The jammed track was also a big problem itself, since due to high tension, it was often impossible to disassemble the track by removing the track pins. It was sometimes simply blown apart with an explosive charge. The standard German Famo recovery tractor could not tow the tank; up to three tractors were usually needed to tow one Tiger.
Although the Tiger I was one of the most heavily armed and armoured tanks of the war, and a formidable opponent of Allied tanks, the design was conservative and had some serious drawbacks. The flat armour plates were unsophisticated in comparison to the sloped armour of the Soviet T-34, requiring a massive increase in weight to provide for sufficient protection. The tank's weight put severe stress on the suspension, whose complexity made maintenance difficult. The sophisticated transmission system was also prone to breakdowns.
A major problem with the Tiger was its very high production cost. During the Second World War, over 40,000 American Sherman and 58,000 Soviet T-34s were produced, compared to 1,355 Tiger I and 478 Tiger II tanks. The German designs were expensive in terms of time, raw materials and Reichsmarks, the Tiger I costing over twice as much as a contemporary Panzer IV and four times as much as a Stug III assault gun. The closest counterpart to the Tiger from the United States was the M26 Pershing (around 200 deployed during the war) and IS-2 from the USSR (about 3,800 built during the war).
Design history
Henschel & Sohn began development of the vehicle that would eventually become the Tiger I in January 1937 when the Waffenamt requested Henschel to develop a Durchbruchwagen (Breakthrough vehicle) in the 30 ton range. Only one prototype hull was ever built and it never was mounted with a turret. The Durchbruchwagen I general shape and suspension greatly resembled the Panzer III while the turret would have greatly resembled the early Panzer IV C turret with the short barreled 7.5 cm L/24 cannon. Before Durchbruchwagen I was completed a new request was issued for a heavier 30 ton class vehicle with thicker armour.
This was Durchbruchwagen II which would have carried 50 mm of frontal armour and mounted a Panzer IVC turret with the 7.5 cm L/24 cannon. Overall weight would have been approximately 36 tons. Only one hull was ever built and a turret was not fitted. Development of this vehicle was dropped in Fall of 1938 in favour of the more advanced VK3001(H) and VK3601(H) designs. Both the Durchbruchwagen I and II prototype hulls were used as test vehicles until 1941.
On September 9 1938 Henschel & Sohn received permission to continue development of a VK3001(H) medium tank and a VK3601(H) heavy tank, both of which apparently pioneered the overlapping main road wheel concept, for tank chassis use, that were already being used on German military half tracked vehicles such as the SdKfz 7. The VK3001(H) was intended to mount a 7.5 cm L/24 low velocity infantry support gun, a 7.5 cm L/40 dual purpose anti-tank gun, or a 10.5 cm L/28 artillery piece in a Krupps turret. Overall weight was to be 33 tons. armour was designed to be 50 mm on frontal surfaces and 30 mm on the side surfaces. Only four prototype hulls were completed for testing. Two of these were used to create the 12.8 cm Selbstfahrlafette L/61, also known as Sturer Emil.
The VK3601(H) was intended to weigh 40 tons, carry 100 mm on front surfaces, 80 mm on turret sides and 60 mm on hull sides. The VK3601(H) was intended to carry a 7.5 cm L/24, or a 7.5 cm L/43, or a 7.5 cm L/70, or a 12.8 cm L/28 cannons in a Krupp's turret that looked very similar to an enlarged PzIVC turret. One prototype hull was built followed later by five more prototype hulls. The six turrets intended for the prototype hulls were never fitted and ended up being used as static defences along the Atlantic Wall. Development of the VK3601(H) project was discontinued in early 1942 in favour of the VK4501 project.
German combat experience with the French Somua S35 cavalry tanks, Char B1 heavy tanks, and the Matilda I and Matilda II infantry tanks in June 1940 showed that the German Army's Panzer arm needed a better armed tank with better armour protection. Superior German tactics overcame the problems with the superior enemy armoured units but the Germans did take notice.
On May 26 1941, at an armaments meeting, Henschel and Porsche were asked to submit designs for a 45 ton heavy tank to be ready by June 1942. Porsche worked to submit a updated version of their VK3001(P) Leopard tank prototype while Henschel worked to develop an improved VK3601(H)tank. Henschel built two prototypes. A VK4501(H) H1 which used the 88 mm L/56 cannon and a VK4501(H) H2 which used the 75 mm L/70 cannon.
Unlike the Panther tank, the designs did not incorporate any of the innovations of the T-34: the width benefits of sloping armour were absent but the thickness and weight of the Tiger's armour made up for this.
On June 22, 1941 Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the Soviet Union. The Germans were surprised to find themselves opposed by Soviet designs that completely outclassed anything they were currently fielding. These were the T-34 medium tank and the KV-1 heavy tank. The T34 was almost immune to everything but the 7.5 cm L/46 PAK40 anti tank gun and the legendary 88 mm gun flak 18/36. Panzer III's with the 5 cm L/60 and the 5 cm PaK 38 anti tank guns could penetrate the sides of a T-34 but had to be very close. The KV-1 was immune frontally to all but the 88 mm FLAK 18/36.
The emergence of the Soviet T-34 was a great shock; 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". An immediate weight increase to 45 tons and an increase in gun calibre to 88 mm was ordered. The due date for new prototypes was set for 20 April 1942, Adolf Hitler's birthday.
Porsche and Henschel submitted prototype designs and they were compared at Rastenburg before Hitler. The Henschel design was accepted as the best overall design, especially because of the problem-burdened Porsche gasoline-electric power unit and its use of large quantities of copper, a strategic war material. Production of the Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf. E began in August 1942. Porsche, awaiting orders for his Tiger tank, had built 100 chassis with some of them used for his Tiger prototypes. After not winning the contract it was ordered to use these chassis for a new heavy assault gun/tank hunter. In Spring 1943 ninety-one hulls were converted into the Panzerjäger Tiger (P), also known as Ferdinand, and after Hitler's orders of 1 February and 27 February 1944, Elefant.
The Tiger was essentially still at the prototype stage when first hurried into service, and therefore changes both small and large were made throughout the production run. A redesigned turret with a lower, safer cupola was the most significant change. To cut costs, the submersion capability and an external air-filtration system were dropped.
Production history
Production of the Tiger I began in August 1942, and 1,355 were built by August 1944 when production ceased. Production started at a rate of 25 per month and peaked in April 1944 at 104 per month. Strength peaked at 671 on 1 July 1944. Generally speaking, it took about twice as long to build a PzKpfw VI as another German tank of the period. When the improved PzKw VI Ausf B Tiger II began production in January 1944, the Tiger I was soon phased out.
Combat history
Tigers were capable of destroying the American M4 Sherman or British Churchill IV at ranges exceeding 2,000 m. In contrast, the Soviet T-34 equipped with the 76.2 mm gun could not penetrate the Tiger frontally at any range, but could achieve a side penetration at approximately 500 m firing the BR-350P APCR ammunition. The T34-85's 85 mm gun could penetrate the Tiger from the side at about range 1,000 m. The IS-2's 122 mm gun could destroy the Tiger at ranges beyond 1,000 m including frontal aspect.
From a 30 degree angle of attack the M4 Sherman's 75 mm gun could not penetrate the Tiger frontally at any range, and needed to be within 100 m to achieve a side penetration against the 80 mm upper hull superstructure. The British 17-pounder as used on the Sherman Firefly, firing its normal APCBC ammunition, could penetrate frontally out to over 1,000 m. The US 76 mm gun, if firing the APCBC M62 ammunition, could penetrate the Tiger frontally out to just over 500 m, and could be at ranges in excess of 1,000 m to achieve penetration against the upper hull superstructure. Using HVAP ammunition, which was in constant short supply and primarily issued to tank destroyers, frontal penetrations were possible out to just over 1,500 m. It is worth mentioning that many of the penetration capabilities at longer ranges had little relevance compared to combat engagements of the real war, especially that which was fought in Western Europe, where engagements rarely happened outside of one kilometer due to dispersion and chance for human error, which is amplified greatly as range increases regardless of the ability of any cannon. For example, while a 17pdr could penetrate the front armor of a Tiger I at one kilometer in tests, during real combat, a 17pdr gunner would probably never find himself in a position to actually attempt such a feat.
As range decreases in combat, all guns can penetrate more armour (with the exception of HEAT ammunition, which was rare in World War II). The great penetrating power of the Tiger's gun meant that it could destroy many of its opponents at ranges at which they could not respond. In open terrain, this was a major tactical advantage. Opposing tanks were often forced to make a flanking attack in order to knock out a Tiger.
The Tiger was first used in action in September 1942 near Leningrad. Under pressure from Hitler, the tank was put into action months earlier than planned and many early models proved to be mechanically fragile. In its first action on 23 September 1942, many of the first Tigers broke down. Others were knocked out by dug-in Soviet anti-tank guns. One tank was captured largely intact, which gave the Soviets a chance to study the tank and prepare a response.
In the Tiger's first actions in North Africa, the tank was able to dominate Allied tanks in the wide-open terrain. However, mechanical failures meant that there were rarely more than a few in action. In a replay of the Leningrad experience, at least one Tiger was knocked out by towed British six-pounder antitank guns.
The tank's extreme weight limited the bridges it could cross and made drive-throughs of buildings, which may have had basements, risky. Another weakness was the slow traverse of the hydraulically-operated turret. The turret could also be traversed manually, but this option was rarely used, except probably for a fix of a few mils.
Early Tigers had a top speed of about 45 km/h over optimal terrain. This was not recommended for normal operation, and was discouraged in training. Crews were told to not exceed 2600RPM due to reliability problems of the early Maybach engines at their maximum 3000RPM output. To combat this, the Tiger's top speed was reduced to about 38 km/h through the installation of an engine governor, capping the RPM of the Maybach HL 230 to 2600rpm (HL 210s were used on early models). Despite being slower than medium tanks of the time, which averaged a top speed of about 45 km/h, the Tiger still had a very respectable speed for a tank of its size and weight, being nearly twice as heavy as a Sherman or T-34. The Tiger had reliability problems throughout its service life; Tiger units frequently entered combat understrength due to breakdowns. It was rare for any Tiger unit to complete a road march without losing vehicles due to breakdown. The tank also had poor radius of action (distance a combat vehicle can travel and return, in normal battle conditions, without refueling). Due to its very wide tracks, the Tiger had a lower ground pressure bearing than many smaller tanks, the most notable exception being the Soviet T-34.
The Tiger's armour and firepower, however, were feared by all its opponents. In tactical defence, its poor mobility was less of an issue. Whereas Panthers were the more serious threat to Allied tanks, Tigers had a bigger psychological effect on opposing crews, causing a "Tiger phobia". Allied tankers would sometimes evade rather than confront a Tiger, even a tank that only looked like one, such as the Panzer IV with turret skirts applied. In the Normandy campaign, it could take four to five Shermans to knock out a single Tiger tank by maneuvering to its weaker flank or rear armour; the Soviet T-34s fared similarly against the German tanks, as had the German Panzer III earlier against the Soviet heavy tanks. An accepted Allied tactic was to engage the Tiger as a group, one attracting the attention of the Tiger crew while the others attacked the sides or rear of the vehicle. Since the ammunition and fuel were stored in the sponsons, a side penetration often resulted in a kill. This was a risky tactic, and often resulted in the loss of several Allied vehicles. It took a great deal of tactical skill to eliminate a Tiger.
Tigers were usually employed in separate heavy tank battalions (schwere-Panzer-Abteilung) under army command. These battalions would be deployed to critical sectors, either for breakthrough operations or, more typically, counterattacks. A few favoured divisions, such as the Grossdeutschland or some of the low-numbered Waffen-SS divisions had a handful of Tigers. The Tiger was originally designed to be offensive breakthrough weapon but by the time they came into action, the military situation had changed dramatically, and their main use was on the defensive as mobile gun batteries. Unfortunately this also meant rushing the Tigers constantly from location to location causing excessive mechanical issues. As a result there are almost no instances where a Tiger Batallion went into combat at anything close to full strength. Furthermore, against the Soviet and Western Allied production numbers, even a 10:1 kill ratio would not have been sufficient for the Tigers. Some Tiger units did exceed the 10:1 kill ratio, including 13. Kompanie/Panzer-Regiment Großdeutschland (16.67:1), schwere SS-Panzer-Abteilung 103 (12.82:1) and schwere Panzer-Abteilung 502 (13.08:1). These numbers must be set against the opportunity cost of building the expensive Tiger. Every Tiger built cost as much as four Sturmgeschütz III assault guns.
On 7 July 1943, a single Tiger tank commanded by SS-Oberscharführer Franz Staudegger from the 2nd Platoon of 13th Panzer Company of 1st SS Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler engaged a group of about 50 T-34s around Psyolknee (the southern sector of the German salient in the Battle of Kursk). Staudegger used all his ammunition in destroying 22 Soviet tanks, while the rest retreated. For this, Staudegger was awarded the Knight's Cross.
On 8 August 1944,it is claimed a single Tiger commanded by SS-Unterscharführer Willi Fey from the 1st Company of sSSPzAbt 102, engaged a British tank column, destroying some 14 out of 15 Shermans, followed by one more later in the day using his last two rounds of ammunition. Fey claims the Shermans were from 23rd Hussars but neither the Unit War Diary or the Regimental History (The Story Of The Twenty-Third Hussars 1940-1946. published April 1946) mention any such losses. In fact the Regiment saw very limited action on only one the 2 different dates Fey gives for this action. In his English language book 'Armor Battles Of The Waffen SS' the date is given as August 7th but the original German account uses August 8th. It appears it is just an unsourced and unreferenced claim. sSSPzAbt 102 lost all of its Tigers during fighting in Normandy, but claimed 227 Allied tanks destroyed in six weeks.
The Tiger is particularly associated with SS-Haupsturmführer Michael Wittmann of schwere SS-Panzerabteilung 101. He worked his way up, commanding various vehicles and finally a Tiger I. In the Battle of Villers-Bocage, he destroyed over two dozen Allied vehicles including several tanks; and single-handedly held up the advance of the entire 7th Armoured Division until his tank was knocked out and abandoned.
Over 10 Tiger tank commanders had over 100 vehicle kills on their account, including: Kurt Knispel with 168 kills, Otto Carius with 150+ kills, Johannes Bölter with 139+ kills, and Michael Wittmann with 138 kills.
The captured Tiger of 1943 - Tiger 131
On 21 April 1943, a Tiger of the 504th German heavy tank battalion with turret number 131 was captured on a hill called Djebel Djaffa, in Tunisia. Shots from Churchill tanks of the British 48th Royal Tank Regiment had jammed its turret traverse and injured the commander, but the crew bailed out. The tank was repaired and displayed in Tunisia before being sent to England for a thorough inspection. The Western Allies, however, did little to prepare for combat against the Tiger despite their assessment that the newly-encountered German tank was superior to their own. This conclusion was partly based on the correct estimate that the Tiger would be produced in relatively small numbers. It was also based on the doctrine of the United States Army, which did not place emphasis on tank-versus-tank combat, relying instead on the use of tank destroyers.
In contrast, the more experienced British had observed the gradual increase in German AFV armor and firepower since 1940 and had anticipated the need for more powerful anti-tank guns. Work on the Ordnance QF 17 pounder had begun in late 1940 and 100 early-production guns were rushed to North Africa help counter the new Tiger threat. So great was the haste that they were sent before proper carriages had been developed, and the guns had to be mounted in the carriages of 25-pounder gun-howitzers.
Efforts were hastened to get Cruiser tanks armed with 17 pounder guns into operation. The A30 Challenger was already at the prototype stage in 1942, but this tank was poorly protected and unreliable, and was fielded in only limited numbers. The 17 pounder-armed Sherman, the Sherman Firefly, was a notable success even though it was only intended to be a stopgap design. Fireflies were successfully used against Tigers (in one famous engagement, a single Firefly destroyed three) and over 2000 were built during the war. Six different, 17-pounder-armed, British tanks and tank-destroyers would see combat.
On 25 September 1951, the captured tank was officially handed over to the Bovington Tank Museum at Bovington Camp in the UK, by the British Ministry of Supply. In June 1990, preparations were made for restoring the Tiger to full running order. In December 2003, Tiger 131 returned to the museum with a fully operational engine after extensive restoration by the Army Base Repair Organisation (ABRO).
The Soviet response
The Tiger had in part been a response to Soviet heavy tanks, namely the KV-1, as well as the medium T-34 which had some notable successes against lighter German tanks of the time.
The first production Tigers were sent to the Eastern Front in December 1942, and a tank captured in January 1943 led the Soviets to respond. Until the appearance of the Tiger, the Soviet focus had been on production numbers; quality improvements were foregone since they would disrupt production. The Soviet response took a few forms. The crash development of a 152 mm self-propelled gun was ordered. Contrary to belief, the SU-152 was planned before the Tiger was encountered, rather than being a stop-gap initiated after the fact. Indeed it was created out of the dire need for mobile heavy artillery to support attacks against the largely unchallenged German forces of the time. These Heavy Assault Guns would use their large High Explosive shells to obliterate enemy tanks through sheer force. However due to the size of the shells reloading was slow (maximum rate of fire 2 rounds a minute for the SU-152). The SU-152 went from design concept to field trials in a record twenty-five days, and an understrength regiment of guns was sent to the battlefield at Kursk in May, where 12 SU-152 howitzers destroyed 12 Tigers and 7 Ferdinands during battle [this wartime Soviet claim is doubtful, the German loss records only note one Ferdinand lost to an SU-152 (source: The Combat History of schwere Panzer Abteilung 654, by Karlheinz Munch, pages 67-69) while the Tiger unit deployed with the Elefants, sPzAbt 505, only suffered five total losses to all causes in the entire battle (source: Tigers in Combat I by Wolfgang Schneider, page 263)].
By late 1943 the SU-85, one of the Red Army's first dedicated tank destroyers, was put into production in an effort to quickly get the 85 mm gun out into the field. The SU-100, mounting one of the best guns of the war for armour penetration, followed in 1944. In late 1943, the Soviet heavy tank program was renewed, after being nearly cancelled due to the poor performance of the KV-1 tank. This resulted in the Iosef Stalin (IS-2) with a 122 mm gun in early 1944. Lastly, the T-34 was given a new three-man turret with the 85 mm gun in early 1944.
Ammunition used
- 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)
Survivors
A single Tiger I has been restored to running condition, it is on display at the Bovington Tank Museum, UK. Five other Tiger tanks survive, as follows:
- Musée des Blindés in Saumur, France. In good condition. An indoor exhibit. It has the narrow transport tracks fitted.
- Vimoutiers, France. In bad condition. Outdoor monument. Heavily damaged by demolition charges set by the crew when abandoned in 1944.
- Kubinka Tank Museum, Moscow, Russia. In good condition. An indoor exhibit.
- Military-historical Museum of Lenino-Snegiri, Russia. In very bad condition. A former badly shot and cut up firing range target. An outdoor exhibit and subject to frequent vandalization.
- United States Army Ordnance Museum, Aberdeen Proving Ground, United States. In good condition, most of the left side of hull and turret was cut up in the late 40's for display and educational purposes. (this particular tank is currently in the Kevin Wheatcroft collection for restoration, but it will be returned to the USA soon).
Given the number produced very few Tiger I survived the war and the post-war scrap drives. Many large components have been salvaged over the years but a discovery of a (more or less) complete vehicle has so far eluded enthusiasts and collectors.
Citations and notes
- Among other variants of the Tiger, a compact, armoured self-propelled rocket projector, today commonly known as Sturmtiger, was built. Another variant, given the name "Bergetiger" post-war was a recovery vehicle. It was fitted with a winch capable of lifting only two tonnes. Speculation continues to run on whether or not this was actually a recovery vehicle given its limited capability. Another theory is that it was a damaged Tiger which was converted for explosive placement.
- Japan reportedly bought several specimens of German tank designs for study in 1943. A single Tiger I was apparently purchased along with one Panther and two Panzer IIIs, but only the Panzer IIIs were actually delivered. The undelivered Tiger was loaned to the German Wehrmacht by the Japanese government.
Further reading
- Wilbeck, Christopher W., Carius, Otto (Preface), Iskrov, Viktor, (Epilogue), Holt, Ray, Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II, The Aberjona Press, 2004 ISBN 0971765023
- Jentz, Thomas L., Germany's Tiger Tanks: Tiger I & II : Combat Tactics, Schiffer Publishing, 1997 ISBN 0764302248
- Zaloga, Steven J., Bryan, Tony, Japanese Tanks 1939-45 (New Vanguard), Osprey Publishing, 2007 ISBN 9781846030918
External links
-
-
-
-
-
- - PDF Surviving Tiger Tanks
- and at Achtung Panzer!
|
| |
|
|
