WHat is the point of the JAgdatigers, and panthers. it is just the same tank without a moveable turret! i know there is an explination for this so please elighten me.
lower profile so its a harder target to hit… the jagdpanther had an upgraded 88 in lieu of the panther’s 75… i believe also the TD versions of these tanks had thicker armor as well…
As you may know, the Panther was mounted with a high velocity 75mm gun. By removing the turret and making a fixed casement, the Jadgpanther could mount the larger 88mm gun. The Tiger II mounted the 88mm gun while the fixed casement Jagdtiger mounted the larger 12.8cm gun.
These tankhunters were to be in defensive positions versus the assault role required of typical turreted tanks.
They were also cheaper and quicker to produce than the traditional tank and as Geoff states, normally had thicker frontal armor and a bigger gun than a tank did. A tank turret’s armor thickness was limited by the weight the turret could efficiently support and still traverse smoothly.
This issue did not factor into a tank destroyer’s frontal armor. The turret mechanism’s weight could be exchanged for thicker frontal armor with the vehicle’s suspension being the only factor in how much armor the vehicle could have.
It was also a way to “recycle” tanks with main guns that have been rendered obsolete by enemy armor. Tanks with smaller main guns that could not accept larger main guns due to weight of the gun or recoil issues could then be remanufactured into tank destroyers or assault guns with a new superstructure.
The Hetzer is a good example of this. Long after the 38t’s 37mm gun was obsolete, the Hetzer was developed using the same chassis and it soldier on for decades after the war.
All I know is after receiving my copy of MMiR’s ‘Modelers Guide to Jagpanzer’ I couldn’t resist…and ordered the old DML Hetzer Command Version. Next is that Dragon Jagdpanzer IV A-O kit. Sigh!
Glenn