Elephant Hunt: Semi-Interactive AAR

[Mobius]

Are you going to make the map and scenario available so we can try our hand at it?

[Yoozername]

Perhaps mobius can comment on the side armor modeling.  I believe the lower side armor was 60mm? 
It seems MR mostly used Rush as a movement command.  I am not sure what other commands he may have used. 
I would have liked more tac maps to see the overall situation especially at the end game.
I think video adds greatly to these type of AAR of DAR or SIAARs.  It's great that the hobby can be shared without buying magazines or Journals, etc.  Media should be used to its fullest.
 
 I had hoped that everyone would agree to let the Soviets come closer but it was what it was.  Its clear they were going for the flags, At least to me.  If I were the Germans, I would have used the halftracks as flank protection along the board edge on my right.  I wonder what else the Germans may have had.
 
 
The list of German Panzer Aces lists two 'Elephant' aces, 653rd had one ace with 22 credits and 654th had one with 16 credits.  If this game was representative of what a Ferdidinand platoon could do to a T34 battalion, God help the Soviets.  There would have been many more aces. 
 
Hopefully MR develops the scenario and expands the infantry to a full company and includes some mortar or artillery support.  And emplacements.  Since this battle seems to model the Germans after breaking through the first line of defense in the Northern part of Kursk, I would not expect dense minefields.  I am not convinced that scenario generation was needed to test out a simple claim in regards to what a T34 could do to the side of a Ferdinand.  Don't get me wrong.  It was fun.  But one guy stalking and whacking 6 Ferdinands?  I don't think so.  He nailed StuGs.
 
The Northern assault at Kursk was peculiar in its use of non-turreted AFV in the first battles.  StuGs, Ferdinand, Brumbar were supposed to break through the front (meaning the first line of minefields and trenches), along with the infantry, while the Panzers were held back.  The Germans just did not have the technical means to break through the minefields.  Turretless afv were severely restricted once they lost even one track.  The Germans only got as far as the second line of defense up North.  I suppose this scenario takes place 'between the belts'. 
 
Perhaps the Porsche chassis could have been developed as a heavy engineering vehicle.  A sort of super-mine-roller or plow attached to its front.  It's electric drive gave good low end performance and a roller or plow would protect its vulnerable tracks and brakes, etc.  A superstructure could have housed other weapons like flame-throwers or MG or even a mortar and allowed engineers to get some protection so they could handle bunkers.  They could have controlled the tele-operated vehciles also.  The chassis production run were basically 'captured' resources.  As far as I know, there were no plans to make more of these vehicles and the continued use of them just generated a need for more specialized parts in the German supply chain.  I guess it's true that Germans just don't like to throw anything away. 
 
Was the 88mm long weapon really needed at Kursk?  The Soviets did not field any heavy armor beside KV-1.  As far as a bunker buster, I think any German 75mm L43/48/70 could do as good a job.  I have always thought that the regular Tiger I chassis should have been used as a Panzerjaeger.  The Tiger I production was aways painfully slow.  That strange turret with its bent metal curvature did not lend itself to mass production.  A simple superstructure that could house the 88mm long could have been produced quicker. 

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
Perhaps mobius can comment on the side armor modeling.  I believe the lower side armor was 60mm? 

Unlike the Tiger I, the Ferdinand lower side hull is a full 8cm. of armor. Because of added German armor quality it is a little better than this (8.3-8.47). But since we round to the nearest cm above 2 cm it gets rounded back down to 8. The upper side hull is 8cm and is sloped at something like 28-degrees. This makes it round to 9cm with German armor quality.

The lower 8 cm side hull behind the road wheels might even be said to be under modelled as the possible roadwheel protection isn't included. Location "2" might be "8+1" or "8+2". I think we give +2 to the Tiger I lower side hull. More of a judgement call on how much of the side the roadwheels covers.

[Yoozername]

[left]http://onwar.com/tanks/germany/data/elefant.htm[/left][left] [/left][left]There are some other sites I have seen the armor listed as 60mm@90 for the lower side hull.[/left]

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

[left]http://onwar.com/tanks/germany/data/elefant.htm[/left][left] [/left][left]There are some other sites I have seen the armor listed as 60mm@90 for the lower side hull.[/left]

They get that from The Encyclopedia of German tanks. It has 60mm, while Spielbergers books have 80mm. So somebody is going to have to go to Aberdeen and measure it.

[Edit]Here is the German armor diagram from Spielberger's Panther book. The Germans show the 60mm lower hull armor on the Tiger I but do not show it on the Ferdinand so they aren't missing it.

Often in German books I found that they recite the armor values based on plans rather than actual measurements. On rare occasions the build plans don't match the actual build outs.

[Yoozername]

I suppose that the Tiger I competitors were both going from the same design requirements.  That is, I would expect both turreted Tiger I tanks, including the porsche, to try and meet the same requirements.  If one had 100mm frontal armor, so would the other.  Etc.  Just a theory.  Since the Ferdinand was built on the Porsche Tiger I chassis, I would expect that lower side armor to be the same. 
 
The game might try and model the front grilles being vulnerable.  It also appears the back exhaust guard might actually be a weak point also.

[Mobius]

In Jentz's Tiger book the specs for in March, August, October 1942 and November 1943  show only 80mm armor on the side. The 60mm lower side of the Tiger I appears in the Nov 1944.  But Tigers captured in early 1943 by the British show that they have 60mm lower side.  So the actual data appears later in the specs than appears in the tank itself.

In the text it says Porsche redesigned the hulls of Typ 101 from the Typ 100 by upgrading the side and rear to 80mm.  If Krupp took it on themselves to change the lower hull to 60mm of these 100 hulls it isn't mentioned.

[Yoozername]

A pic from afv interior website:

Picture 3:
This photo was taken in the final assembly plant in Nibelungenwerk in St. Valentin, Austria, and shows the modified interior of the hull (looking toward the hull front) once the initial torch cutting and welding was completed on the old hulls. The engines would then be mounted side by side, just forward of the partial firewall seen here- small access holes in the floor allowed for minor engine maintenance. The area on this side of the partition became the fighting compartment, with the 8.8cm weapon centrally mounted directly behind the engines, just this side of the firewall. The transmission was the Siemens-Schuckert electric power unit mentioned earlier (with three gear ranges in both directions) and steering was hydropneumatic with electric assisted brakes (Porsche/Siemens), again showing the electrically oriented designs of Dr. Porsche. The very rear of the VK 4501 vehicle was altered the greatest. Where the original design had a slanting/pinched appearance when viewed from above, the Elephant's side plates were continued straight back to the rear armor plate. The existing diagonal plates of the older rear were left in place, although large holes were cut out to lighten them. The additional side plate extensions that were added to continue the hull to the new rear plate are seen at the bottom of this photo.

[Yoozername]

This shows the rear electric motors installed. The lower side armor can be seen at the top right.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

A pic from afv interior website:

Picture 3:
This photo was taken in the final assembly plant in Nibelungenwerk in St. Valentin, Austria, and shows the modified interior of the hull (looking toward the hull front) once the initial torch cutting and welding was completed on the old hulls. The engines would then be mounted side by side, just forward of the partial firewall seen here- small access holes in the floor allowed for minor engine maintenance. The area on this side of the partition became the fighting compartment, with the 8.8cm weapon centrally mounted directly behind the engines, just this side of the firewall.

Is that picture showing both the uppder and lower armor sections? I can't get a scale of what in total is being shown. The armor on the outer walls and lower inner welded walls look the same thickness.

[Yoozername]

Note the weld line along the top of the lower hull armor meeting the horizontal armor that is above the tracks. The picture is from the rear of the vehicle looking forward. The triangular pieces are from the orig. Porsche tiger and have been cut out to lighten them. They are not needed, except as bulkhead, since the orig. side armor has been extended back.

[Mobius]

The lower wall doesn't look thicker but it still is doesn't seem that much thinner.
Trying to measure walls at different spots and compensate for perspective.
I get 37 pixels for lower and 39 for upper. Or 33 for lower and 35 for upper. Though I am measuring to center of weld. Maybe I should measure to edge of weld.

[Mobius]

Maybe it is 60mm (or 63mm) as per measured in captured Tiger Is. I found this in my folder of images. I guess that should surprise as Jentz is an author of Encyclopedia of German tanks and it has the lower side as 60mm. So it is Jentz vs. Spielberger.

[Mobius]

I have the picture of the Ferdinand hull in one of my books and I scanned it at an even higher resolution. If I found locations that are equal distance from the camera then the thicknesses can be compared. It does seem like center of the weld is where you would measure thickness. That being the case then it looks like the lower hull is 91 pixels at a distance where the upper side is 119. That would put the lower side 76.4% ot the upper. If the upper is 82mm then the lower should be 62.7mm. Give or take some for perspective distortion.

[Yoozername]

A possible weak point. That rear lower-piece is actually the 'baffle' for the heat outlet on the rear of the vehicle. There are fan units that blow over the electric motors and possibly exhaust the engine (gas) fumes. In any case, it appears to be vulnerable to AP and even HE hits since fragmentation could get in the vehicle. The fighting compartment and e-motors would be at risk as well as stored ammo.

The red section is actually holes that can be seen in the picture I posted a few posts back.

[Yoozername]

Those rear lower sides seem to have 'cobbled' pieces. Perhaps Mobius has a better detailed picture of this area. But the sides look very thin compared to that 80mm area in the back that the air exhausts through.

[Mobius]

Boy, that vent looks sort of jury-rigged doesn't it? I thought that thing on the back was a stowage box.
So it looks like it draws air from the back then ducts it under the fighting compartment floor to the gasoline engines. Then out the deck through some fans. It doesn't go directly to the fighting compartment.

There is suppose to be a screen of somekind protecting the vent. I don't know what it is. It was decribed in some model kit.
The vulnerable area works out to be 3% of the overall area of the rear facing. We can model areas down to 5% with normal notation. At 3% it would required something unconventional

[Yoozername]

I believe this piece could be measured on the vehcile itself.

[Yoozername]

Here is a wallkaround site

http://blog.net-maquettes.com/en/photos ... nand-walk/

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

Here is a wallkaround site

http://blog.net-maquettes.com/en/photos ... nand-walk/

That helps a little more. While no one is holding a tape measure next to the welds I can compare the track width to the side armor thickness. And it does seem to confirm that the lower side hull is indeed close to 60mm.