… some sort of T55?
The Russian massive tank army that emerged in the cold war started out on a pattern that very much resembled the late war German lay-out, with simple angled glacis, non return roller loose hanging tracks and - of course - with the obvious Russian mass industry simpleness… and diesel. perhaps the only major difference would have been the turret construction, since the Germans were not capable of making rigid quality “cast bell” turrets. At least if that statement is true.
What time line are you looking at, you have the E-Series in design for 1945
You also have the so called Indian Panzer designed in the early to mid 1950’s for India by Porsche/Daimler Benz/Tata although the Indians ended up with Centurions and Vickers MBT’s
Article cobbled from several sights which roughly agree with each other - it was mentioned in several books on the Leopard 1 and its development.
In the 1950’s of the post-war world, many German engineers temporarily moved to Switzerland. However, given the lack of work (they had been working on weapons for a long time, after all), they needed to find something to do. Fortunately for the Germans, the Indians came along and opened a bid for an Indian tank.
What resulted from the contest was a joint effort of many German firms: Porsche for overall design, Daimler-Benz MB-837A 8-cyl diesel engine, Zahnradfabrik AG of Friedrichshafen track, Ruhrstahl for turret and gun. Optics and sights, as well as general production, was to be done in India by TATA. The following are the general specifications from that project:
Years of development: 1954-1955.
Weight: Indian demand expected weight about 36-39 tons, the Germans projected about 40 tons.
Crew: 4
Engine: 8-cylinder diesel Daimler-Benz MB-837A, 670 hp
Power to weight ratio: 16.7 hp/ton
Maximum speed: 50 km/h
Caliber gun: 90 mm (Most likely a German adaptation of the 90 mm Gun M3 or the 9 cm PzKan 48)
Armor: Hull 90/90/40, turret 130/70/70, all of it cast
A supposed mock up of the Indian Panzer
Unfortunately, the Indians did not have the ability to cast such large parts (a problem that would plague many rising tank developers), and the winner was the Vickers with the Vijayanta, which was built entirely from welded rolled steel plates. However, this was not the end of the project, for it was the basis of the KW30, which in turn was the ancestor of the whole line of the Swiss Pz series which were developed with the help of German engineers iirc.
http://www.armeemuseum.ch/uploads/media/Entwicklung_Schweizer_Panzer_01.pdf
The E series would be a failure. I’m sure of that. Way to heavy, way to high. What I learned form history books is that in war time much more is allowed because all pieces are needed in the effort. In peace time however, much more detail is important and time is available to search for “the better way”.
I tend to think of nazi germany after an armistice (with france and low countries set free) as a second “evil empire” (seen as such in western political eyes) that would have had a kind of economy and reign as the soviet union, causing a kind of cold war effect. Perhaps the cold war empires would have needed a coalition to survive. Nazi germany could have become a sort of powerful “greater DDR”. If you are no nazi, nor communist I think you understand this view. In this perspective, I see weaponry evolution rather reflected in the Russian design history. I don’t think they would have reached the “Leopard tank phase” very soon.
The very fact even the “Indien panzer” was partially cancelled because of the casting issue boosts my thoughts. I think the Schmalturm design would have lasted long.
The history of the Swiss panzer (with in fact German design behind it) is very interesting. The hull, drive train and suspension is exactly the “Indien Panzer’s” blueprint.
Return rollers are back in the picture. The tank is much lighter again as was common in the post-war period. In fact, the tank looks very “international” with features resembling concept of the M26 - M48 US line of tanks (turret up front, long butt).
But still: is it questionable to relate these designs to a fictional continuation of the “Wehrmacht reality”. They would not have ceased using their Panthers and Tiger II’s.
When looking at the history of the Leopard(started in 1956, not that far away from the Indien panzer), however, I noticed that even this design - that led eventually to arguably the best MBT in the world nowadays - was very much led by the son of Ferdinand Porsche again.
Some prototypes actually looked as if a Panther base was skewed down by pressure and fed with return rollers (and cast turret):
This hull is still regarded as the base of nowadays Leopards…
All by all, the Leopard might just be the modern Panther (albeit with flatter silhouet and return rollers)…
The project that led to the leopard I started in 1956 with a loose set of requirements (joint German/French) hammered out over a few years with the first prototypes commisioned from three different firms in 1959
The image you posted is of a group B (Warneke and steel companies Rhine Rhine-Henschel and Hanomag stall) prototype (actually the B1) which lost out to the Group A (Jungenthal, MaK and Luther & Jordan, with Dr. Ing F. Porsche KG joining as technical director) prototypes
Obvious differences that make it easy to identify are the 6 instead of 7 road wheels.
The E series could hardly be too heavy as there was planned to be a whole range based loosely on the Tiger II/Panther designs for the larger vehicles. Designed to be quicker and cheaper to manufacture and covering a full range of capabilities, types and sized armoured vehicles from 5 to 100 tonne. Only the E100 was built to a running condition (finished by the British to running condition who tested the turretless hull).
They were not to be cut price models but rather streamlined in production with fewer hulls and more commonality of parts, they were to be as capable as present vehicles but make better use of materials.
True!
The thing is the B1 produces a striking example of typical german-adopted WWII features (angled sponsons with overhanging angled butt shape) into a post-war design.
The Group A protoypes are not that far off, wheels yes, but also the extra trimmed angled corners at the front (which the offical Leopard recieved at the end). The B1 is an in-between design. The fact remains, the Leopard has many many features that makes it typical German. And it refers the most to … the Panther. (or better: the paper panzer “leopard” mini-panther, which is quite the coincidence)[/quote]
The E series could hardly be too heavy as there was planned to be a whole range based loosely on the Tiger II/Panther designs for the larger vehicles. Designed to be quicker and cheaper to manufacture and covering a full range of capabilities, types and sized armoured vehicles from 5 to 100 tonne. Only the E100 was built to a running condition (finished by the British to running condition who tested the turretless hull).
They were not to be cut price models but rather streamlined in production with fewer hulls and more commonality of parts, they were to be as capable as present vehicles but make better use of materials.
Possibly… The series that could meet the “MBT” demands in the 50ties, typically making research on the gun primary target, would have to be found in at least the E50 I guess, with 88mm gun as a minimum weapon. It would have the same numbers on paper as the British Centurion.
Let’s settle for this for starters: as I said in the other thread: very much alike the E-25. Oh! Why didn’t I see this earlier. I knew this vehicle before… Complete copy of the nazi-german doctrine in the defense against “quantity” threat of Soviet Russian forces, backed by Western shift towards Cold War priority.
In Belgian Service. It was upgraded with lots of computer and laser tech while W Germany started converted them to Missile launchers. One of the reasons was the 90mm canon was getting obsolete against the T64 and T72 and while Germany phased it out, belgium got them for cheap in the more dense hilly and woody landscapes.
