Who was most successful in tank design?

Iamandi,
Why is LT-38 your favorite WW2 tank, why do think the Czechoslovokians were the most successful tank designers?

Thank You

Czechoslovachia dont have entire war to make tanks, and to prove my affirmation. Ok. Is not a real "most successful in tank design", but at beginning of war they have superior tanks then Germany. LT-38 is the tank who represented image of tanks of ww2 in my early years of (one of) my passion - military technology, because at that time i dont have acces to info's like today. At that time i had only some magazines "Modelism"... And i liked, because is a nice loocking tank. My opinion. And Cz.s have years of research and d. of armoured vechicles, another good tank (LT35) at export and superior to Panzer I and II. Maybe, the bad thing for Czechoslovakia was his vecinity with Germany. And, years after LT-38 in Modelism, i concluded: "if Romania had a license production of this tank, our history may look different".

Iama

What was the OOB in thanks and armour in general for Czechoslovachia and Poland at the beginning of war for them?

Iama

I voted for Germany, but this is how I would rate the top 5 nations in tank design.

1. Germany

2. Russia

3. UK

4. Romania

5. Czechoslovakia

This post has been edited by Stephen Dabapuscu on January 06, 2005 08:34 am

You think TACAM T-60 and R2 was better designs then Somua S 35, for example?
Because you do not put France in your top. And Romania dont have any large scale/mass produced original or serie tank. Just welded some steel sheets (ok, i know, was more than that) and fit a gun between them... And Maresal.. lets not include this. Maresal is better for "what if's".. And Romania in front of Czechoslovakia? Man, we had czech tanks...

Iama

Iamandi,
I listed Romania 4th in tank design, because Romania was able to make maximum use of its limited resources. Compared to nations such as Germany, France and Italy; Romania had a very limited Industrail base, limited experience with tank design and lacked the capability to mass produce high-grade armor plate. And yet inspite of these tremendous handicaps, Romania somehow manaeged to make the most of what little it had!!!....The TACAM T-60, TACAM R-2, TACAM R-1, TACAM T-38, Vanarorul De Care R-35 and the excellent Maresal.

Thank You

TACAM R-1 and TACAM T-38 did not exist.

Dragos,


The TACAM R-1 & TACAM T-38 were proposed designs, which were not put into production. The TACAM R-1 would have been a R-1 light tank, that mounted a captured Russian 45-mm anti-tank gun. And the TACAM T-38 would have been a T-38 light tank coverted in a similar manner to the TACAM R-2. Source Third Axis, Forth Ally by Mark Axworthy

Thank You

And an AH-IV with 45 m.m. ... Was not too much to obtain a good antitank tool? Russians had a 45 or 57 m.m. gun o Komsomoletz - i think was a 45, OSU 45 maybe? Or SU 45? Was a instable platform of fire, but off course was a cheap and mobile antitank device.
French or english, germans for sure, had daveloped on UE (not that with Euro ) chenilette ... And i think was not a success.


"Romania somehow manaeged to make the most of what little it had"

Good point!

Iama

This post has been edited by Iamandi on January 07, 2005 09:50 am

About Germany and Soviet Union...

Both countries had one main tank that was produced in different versions all through out the war on the Eastern Front until the end of the war. They are Panzer IV and T-34. The T-34 was superior to Panzer IV all along the course of modernization. A similar debate we can consider about heavy tanks (Panther, Tiger vs IS-2). My impression is that Germany tried to keep the edge in tank design, while Soviet Union built robust machines, that were performant in the field at any moment they were launched.

Surely you mean T-34, not T-38.

Of course

Yeah ... about soviet tanks .. the quantity was a quality too .

As far as I know the Panther was a medium and not a havy tank. And it was the german response to the T-34 manence.
The Pz. IV beginig with the F model had better cannon (power/range) then a T-34. It's not the same when we talk about armor. The T-34 had a better one. The germans tryed to improve this, but this resulted in a icreased weight - loosing mobility. Then the SU developed the T-34/85 and so not even the H or J models of Pz. IV could match this new threat. So even if the SU had produced the same numbers of medium tanks(Pz IV) as the Reich, wouldn't made much of a diference. The Pz IV was in '44 an obsolete model in comparison with the T-34.

P-IV in '44 ... an execelent tool, just as antitank platform for assault guns.

Iama