Panzerkampfwagen V Panther (Odnance Inventory Designation Sd.Kfz. 171)

edited April 2015 in Off-Topic Forum

Background

The Panther, as is quite obvious, is a German medium tank that started development in 1942. After large numbers of Russian T-34s were captured in relatively good condition by the German Wehrmacht during Operation Barbarossa,
Heinz Guderian ordered the Panzerkommission to examine the captured T-34s. The Panzerkommission noted that the combination of thick(for the time), well-sloped armour, a very effective 76.2 mm gun and good power-to-weight ratio combined with large tracks meant that the T-34 almost achieved the "Impossible Triangle" that characterised the perfect medium tank.

VK 30.01

enter image description here

When the development of the Panther stared, as the VK 30.01, two companies were given contracts to design the VK 30.01: MAN and Daimler-Benz. The Daimler-Benz VK 30.02 is seen above. As you can see, it's more or less a direct copy of the T-34-76, with some changes, such as the turret, those radiators(?) on the rear, as well as the gun, which is a German 7.5cm KwK 42.

Comparison between the Panther and T-34
enter image description here

enter image description here

Differences between the Panther and T-34 are clearly seen, with the Panther having superior armour, slightly less mobility, and having superior firepower, the KwK 42 compared to the 7,6cm L-11 on the T-34 mod 1940, the 7,6cm F-34 on the mod 1941 and the mod 1942, ZIS 4 on some T-34s modified with a 5,7cm gun instead of the 7,6cm, and the D-5T and the ZIS-S-53 on the T-34-85.

Ammunition Performance

When firing the PzGr 39/42(APCBC-HE-T, Armour Piercing, Capped, Ballistic Cap-High Exlosive-Tracer), the Panther could penetrate nearly every Allied tank frontally with the exception of the M26 Pershing, the IS-2 mod 1944, and the Sherman M4A3E2. A Panther firing PzGr 40/42 (APCR, Armour Piercing, Composite Rigid) could theoretically penetrate an IS-4M from the side at 500m.

Average penetration performance established against rolled homogenous steel armor plate laid back at 30° from the vertical
PzGr 39/42

100 m 500 m 1000 m 1500 m 2000 m
138 mm 124 mm 111 mm 99 mm 89 mm

PzGr 40/42

100 m 500 m 1000 m 1500 m 2000 m
194 mm 174 mm 149 mm 127 mm 106 mm

Production and Cost
The Panther cost 117,100 Reichsmarks, compared to 82,500 RM for the StuG III, 96,163 for the Panzer III, 103,462 RM for the Panzer IV, and 250,800 RM for the Panzer VI Tiger I. This made it one of the most cost-effective mid-to-late war tanks the Germans produced.

Sources
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/Panzer-V_Panther.php
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/soviet/soviet_T34-76.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_42

Let me know what you think of this kind of thing. Interested to see if there is any interest.

Comments

  • Panther sucks I always die in WT cos I cant reverse it out of trouble quick enough. Only having one reverse gear is a deal breaker for me.

  • edited April 2015

    Well, sir, the Panther doesn't need to reverse; it's not French. Joking aside, that is one of the drawbacks to the Panther. The others being that the side armour is absolutely terrible, they're bloody expensive, and the fact that the turret traverse is poor, to say the least.

    Historically, though, it was a great medium tank. Some would say a Main Battle Tank, years before the British Centurion.

    Oh, and in my experience, when in the right matchup, any Panther can dominate in any match. Me, I just got my 9th Panther Ace game.

  • I think we can agree on the fact that WT is not really balanced historically.

    Anyways it's a nice article PFC! As far as I know the Panther had engine issues in the beginning of Operation Citadel and most of them were bogged down but after some fixes it became a real monster.

  • edited April 2015

    @PFC Sánta said:
    I think we can agree on the fact that WT is not really balanced historically.

    On that, we can agree.

  • Id say there are lots of contenders for main battle tank, as it is such a loose term.

    Personally I'd say the Panther had too small of an operational range and too high a breakdown rate. Not to mention the underpowered turret traverse which meant it had to be stationary to fire. This combined with it's weak side armour and inability to reverse quickly made it very vulnerable in close range engagments.

    Id say the Panther was a good medium tank, suited to sniping other tanks at long range with it's high velocity 75mm gun and good frontal armour. I woudldn't say it was a true MBT because it was not designed to close in and fight infanry and on the move.

Sign In or Register to comment.