The Best use of German Resource's

Site Issues 2008 Archive Room
#1

When the Hetzer 38t came off the production line It is often stated that Germany would have been better off building more of these types of cheap defensive Stugs than the more expensive and bulky Tiger and even Panther Tanks. The Hetzer was a sleek simple design with excellent frontal armour and a good gun, but had some serious flaws, including serious lack of side and rear protection, Limited vision for commander and gunner. awkward internal layout for loader, Cramped fatiguing crew station. Limited gun traverse.

What would have been the best use of limited German resources later in the War?

  1. Build more Cheap Hetzer type Stug’s, less Huge Tiger 2’s ?

  2. Build more Tiger 2’s, less Hetzer type Stug’s ?

  3. Neither, build more panzerfausts!

#2

I think the Hetzer would have been the best vehicle - small, powerful and a good construction using parts which are easy and fast to produce.
Same with the StuG - small and good armed.

I like Panthers but together with the other bigger tanks they need too much time to be built.

I think there had been still some million Panzerfausts in the Depots which had never been delivered to the troops - same with weapons like the StG44 (i heard only 1/3 of those reached the troops at the HKL)

#3

Resource/vehicle-wise I have to vote for Stugs :slight_smile:

But since Panzerfausts didn’t consume any fuel it would have been better suited the Nazi wartime economy later in the war :wink:

Oh, and please stop producing V2 (what a waste of resources) :smiley:

_

#4

panzerfausts, at least on the western front, A Tiger vs a Sherman is just overkill, a waste of resources, take the tigers and put them in the east

#5

No matter which direction the Germans headed with weapon procurement they were in a bind because of the loss of air superiority.

While the Allies held command of the air all German weapons systems found their role and effectiveness eroded.

digger

#6

i think more cheaper tanks like hetzers if we take the hetzers as a form of german T-34, obviosuly a proper T-34 equivelant would have been good i.e cheap and basic - but then in a pure numbers game the germans would have still sucumbed to the tide of human resouces from russia?

the v-weapons are an easy target to dimiss as a side show, indeed they proabably were a folly and resources best spent elsewhere?

but, i think people forget how much they contrbuted to destroying and damaging the housing stock of london! the overall figures for distruction of property is higher than most people realise and as for damage something like one in three or one in two of all housing stocks in london where damaged by the air campains - i am going to have to watch that articual epsiode of the “world at war” to be sure!

though, academics have shown that the blitz on british cities and the respective bomber campaigns didnt actually break the will of the people, in some respects it galvanised it!
and the figures for Germany suggest increased ware production untill 1945 - lthough it is hard to tell if is like for like i,e was the percentage of industry and resources in the later war much higher than the early war period when the germns obviosuly thought that it would be a cake walk?

like the siegfried line or western wall surely the germans own experience with bypassing the static defences of france and belgium should have hinted at the folly? sure a big stonking bunker eat up time money and reosurces best spent building regiments or divisions - or aircraft?