Panzer projects & prototypes.

More info on the E-25 tankhunter.

Panzerkampfwagen E25

The German E series of simplified development tanks designed towards the end of the war. The vehicle described here is the E-25, a squat, ugly little tank somewhat reminiscent in shape to the Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer which it was designed to replace, along with the Jagdpanzer IV Lang, the other Panzer III/IV based Sturmgeschutz/Panzerjager types and all other self propelled anti-tank gun chassis in service. Most of these vehicles carried out roughly the same task but were vastly different in design and construction and the E-25 would have rationalised them down to just one simple vehicle. As usual the information available is minimal so I have had to make educated guesses as to a lot of the details. Also my German isn’t too hot either. I managed to master Cromwell Model’s E-25 from what was available, though.

Work on the E series started in 1943 under the direction of Waffenprufamt 6 (WaPruAmt 6) headed by General H.E. Kniepkamp, a capable and prolific engineer and good administrator. A direct translation of this organisation is “Weapon test establishment, section 6”. The firms involved in the E series were Klockner-Humbolt-Deutz of Ulm, makers of the Diesel powered RSO/03, Argus of Karlsruhe, Adler of Frankfurt, and Weserhuette of Bad Oeyenhausen. They were to design respectively tanks in the 10, 25, 50, and 75 ton weight brackets. Adler were also directed to design a super heavy tank in the 100 ton class, which was actually built.


Drawing by H. Doyle

Argus had the task of making the E-25, nominally weighing 25 tonnes. It was to be a low, well armoured and agile tank destroyer taking the place of the Jagdpanzer IV Lang which was too large and fairly complicated to build. Armament was to be the 7.5 cm L/70 gun (as fitted to the Panther, Jagdpanzer IV, etc) which was a well proven weapon effective against all Allied tanks of the time. It may have been replaced in service with a new weapon designed by Krupp and Skoda as the 7.5 cm KwK 44 L/70 for the Schmalturm armed Panther F and featured a concentric recoil mechanism. This dispensed with the large cylinders on top of the gun barrel and would have enabled a much smaller mantlet than that of the Jagdpanzer IV Lang’s PaK 42 L/70 to be fitted. Skoda were working on an auto loader which would fire 40 rounds a minute and it had been test fired by the end of the war. In reality of course that rate of fire would not be practicable as the gunner would not be able to select the targets fast enough to catch up with the gun! An alternative was the StuH 42 10.5 cm howitzer to equip close support artillery units. H.L. Doyle’s drawing shows a small, one man, fully rotating turret armed with a 2 or 3 cm gun as an anti- aircraft/light vehicle weapon.

The suspension was to be externally mounted in a novel fashion. The swing arm contained the spring and damper mechanisms, moving against a fixed crank on the hull side. There were to be five units either side, each one supporting a single large road wheel. These were offset and overlapped in typical German style, so the track guide teeth ran between alternate wheels, with axles of the same length using spacers to give the correct offsets. The road wheels would have been 1000 mm diameter resilient steel type similar to, but larger than the 860 mm wheels for the late Panther G and the projected Panther F (not the 800 mm type from the Panther II or Tiger II). The springs inside the suspension housings were to be made from stacked Belleville washers with a central hydraulic damper. Each suspension unit was bolted to the hull side and bottom plate so it could be easily removed if damaged. The track was to be 66 cm wide the same as the Panther, but with only a single central guide tooth per link.

The hull armour was to be extremely well sloped, for instance the upper hull side plates were at 45 degrees. I believe the roof plate would have been bolted to the hull like previous German tank destroyers. I have concluded that the small roof turret would be offset to the left so that the gunner’s legs and body would not foul the breech area of the main gun. This would leave the driver with no exit from the vehicle as he would be blocked by the main gun to his right and the small turret behind. As a result I think there would be an access hatch located immediately above his position. This is on a sloping part of the roof so I doubt if it would be the lift and swing type from the Tiger II/E50/E75 so I have guessed on a simple side hinged pattern. Gun crew access would probably have to be in the rear right hand corner of the roof, and here I think it would have been a circular hatch design similar to that on the Jagdpanzer IV. It could have been simply cut out from the plate rather than from a new piece of metal. See Doyle’s article in last year’s Mil Mod for the same idea on the Schmalturn rear hatch.

The engine was originally meant to be an Argus air cooled motor mounted transversally at the rear, driving an eight speed gearbox with hydrostatic steering, but this was probably not to be fitted straight away as it was still under test. Also designated was a water cooled maybach engine of 400 HP, the extra 50 HP being lost through fans and pumps for the cooling system. The Spielberger book’s data tables show the liquid cooled Maybach HL 230 P30 as fitted to the Panther, but this was probably to be mounted only as a test engine, being in production for quite a while and well proven. The 700 HP available would have given the E-25 a speed of 65 kph. This amount of horse power coupled with the wide track would have made the E-25 extremely agile. 350 - 400 HP would still have given ample reserves of power. As there are no drawings available of the roof and engine deck these areas are pure conjecture. I based the master I made for Cromwell Models on a bit of guess work on airflow. Most air cooled engines are fitted with sheet metal cowls which fit fairly close to the cooling fins. The idea is to get the air as close to the cylinder as possible. Any fan is kept as close as possible to the cowls as otherwise there has to be ducting etc. For an instance, look at the SdKfz 234 (trop) armoured car series. They sported louvres on the engine deck but absolutely no sign of a fan. Luckily the Tank Museum has a Tatra engine on display and it shows the fan mounted directly on the end of the engine, well away from the decking and other external parts. Even with the low silhouette the E-25 would have had a usefully sized fighting compartment, due to the transmission position at the rear of the vehicle and the external suspension units. It would have had much more internal volume than the Hetzer. While I was building the model I kept placing it next to a Panther and a King Tiger to visualize its size and was constantly amazed at what a neat and effective design it was. Perhaps the only draw back would have been the length of the L/70 gun barrel. Stuck right at the front of the vehicle it would have been prone to damage in built up areas, and from nosing into the earth when on the rough. This was initially seen as a major drawback to the Jagdpanzer IV Lang but careful handling circumvented the problem.

The E-25 was to slot into place between the Panzer 38D, a wholly German, greatly simplified and enlarged development of the Czech Panzer 38(t) and the E- 50 Panther. Panzer IV chassis production was to be phased out completely as all the weapons it carried in its various guises could be taken by the 38(d) which was two thirds the weight and size. If E-25 had ever fought against Shermans and Cromwells it would have made an extremely difficult opponent to destroy.

Make no mistake, this was not a fantasy vehicle. Some hulls were completed by 23rd January 1945 and were at Kattowitz ready to be moved to a proving ground (Entwicklungskommission Panzer, Berlin W8, Pariser Conference Hall)
[LEFT]Thanks to Gordon Brown of Cromwell models for help and encouragement all the way through this project.

[/LEFT]

Bibliography
[ul]
[li]Specialpanzerfahrzeuge des deutschen Heeres Spielberger. Motorbuchverlag.[/li][li]Sonderpanzer Feist. Aero Publications.[/li][/ul]http://fingolfen.tripod.com/eseries/e25.html

Thanks, reason I am after the data is :-

Nice work, the upper is an E-10 I think.

They are both E-25’s. One will have a turret and the other just hatches. The reference material is hard to come by but the specialist model companies have quit a bit.

Hehe, I know, I meaned this profile.

Quite correct, sorry.

Thanks, where did you find the data if you don’t mind?

Sorry, I do not remember, but I do collect info on older AFV´s whereever I find it.

Nice work. And as you write, teh E-25 is depicted both with and without the turret.

7,5 Pak 44 auf 3 ton Zugkraftwagen.

One of the few prototypes using a K.w.K 42 from the panzer V. The vehicle is in fact an simplified “waffenträger” since the gun could be dismounted with the help of a simple crane transported in the vehicle side. The 70 calibers Pak 44 was an field variant of the powerful Panther cannon with the original muzzle brake and electric ignition included, this was made in order to use the same amunition of the german main battle tank thus favouring logistic. One of 2 prototypes were displayed to Hitler in october 1943, there is no a lot of information about, is likely that it had been troop tested sometime in november 1943. The proyect was cancelled by Speer in january 1944.

A totally Brillant Thread, PK. :slight_smile:
My Profound Thanks to you for it.
Exceptionally well done, My friend.

Kind Regards, Uyraell.

Thank you, thank you. I let you another photo of the self propelled Pak 44

Nice pic, haven´t seen it before.

The PAK in the background, it seems to have steel wheels…

Yes, It had stamped steel wheels, is a Pak 43, the “dismounted” variant of the gun used in the Nashorn, Tiger II and Elefant. That cannon appears to be in a 4 wheel carriage, the field gun used electrical ignition ( 4.5,volt battery behind the shield) also in order to be compatible with 88mm AFV ammunition.

Two different, but pretty similar 88mm PAK´s on three different carriages …germans…

Do have any details of a 100mm KwK 45 ?

I think that gun remained only as prototype, sorry no data about it.

PK, I don’t recall more than two PaK in 100mm ever being built, and neither of those ready before about August of 1944, the usual companies, Rhinemetall and Krupp, both were basically unfinished projects.
There is a tenuous link to the Flak weapon in 105mm, But I don’t have much more info on either variant.

Kind Regards PK, Uyraell.

Yea, I suppose that, the onlty thing I know for sure is that gun was actually 10,5 or 105 mm in order to use the same machining tools of the light field howitzer and the heavy field cannon.

There was however a K 18 gun for a couple of self propelled mountings, I am not really sure if that separate charge loading was the same as in the Pak 100mm

For example: The self propelled 128mm antitank gun was not the same as the 128mm gun used in the Jadgtiger and Maus , the earlier was a mechanically primed fixed ammunition and the second was a electrically ignited projectile derivated from the heavy 12,8 flak 40.

Odd thought then, but could we be discussing guns that were 105mm, but designed to fire a 100mm shell in sabot?

Again, I’m guessing a little here, but it would make sense.

Kind Regards PK my friend, Uyraell,

Aditional information on 12,8 cm self propelled Pak vehicles based on VK 30.01 (H).

Originally I thought their usage was quite experimental, however with the new information available is clear that the pair of vehicles were sometimes crucial to defeat soviet local counterattacks supported by heavy armor. The exchange of fire at long range with russian T-34s and KV, seems to be the more confortable field of application for the 128 mm gun carriers. His supply of a very effective sprenggranate ( high explosive) ammunition provided excellent bunker busting and anti-infantry capabilities also.

Light Panzer with 5,5 cm fully automatic gun:

Weird design armed with a aeronautical 55mm RB cannon, that Rheinmetall Borsig machinecannon projected for the late Me-262 variants wasnt really useful againts armor due the modest muzzle velocity ( 600 mps) so is not clear to me what was the objetive with this projekt.

The main gun was fully traversible but only at certain elevation. The 5,5 cm minengranate high explosive ammunition was very good but again poor compared with dedicated close support weapons as the Stuk 37 or Stuk 40 75mm guns.

[QUOTE=Panzerknacker;146419]VK 1301:

Single prototype for a fast recce tank, made by MAN and tested in Austria in mid 1942. It was used later as a base for developing the “luchs” recce panzer.
It was armed with a 20mm Kwk 38 and a MG 34, engine : 6 cilinders maybach 185 hp, weight: 12500 kg.
Armor varied between 30 to 11 mm.

With fake turret

{Greetings Panzerknacker, from a fellow Panzer enthusiast/fanatic.
Please NOTE:
It is possible this is the ‘single Entwicklung VK 1301 (development vehicle) completed by July 1941.’ per page 2-2-16 of Panzer Tracts No.2-2 Panzerkampfwagen II - Ausf. G, H, J, L, and M’.
Nice pic - never seen this one before. Looks like some sort of driver-trng contraption.}

Turret, no armament

{NOTE: This is clearly ‘0-Serie VK 901 (Fgst.Nr. 150021) being tested at St. Johann in the Winter of 1941/42.’ per page 2-2-6 of Panzer Tracts No.2-2 Panzerkampfwagen II - Ausf. G, H, J, L, and M’. Also nice picture, but sorry, definitely not a VK 1301.
Besides the exact same turret as VK 901 w/o armament,
which by the way is different than the VK 1303 Luchs - w\ centre-mounted 1.3m long 2cm Flakrohr w\ coaxial 7.92mm M.G.34 on left - for which the armor components from the Versuchsserie (experimental series) of 15 VK 1301 were used for 15 of 100 VK 1303 and not completed as VK 1301,
it has the same WH-0179596 Licence Plate shown in the picture on page 2-2-6.
The VK 1303 “Luchs” also had 3 left-side-mounted and one long right-side mounted storage boxes over the tracks.}

Armament installed.

{NOTE: This is also clearly a 0-Serie VK 901 per Panzer Tracts No.2-2 Panzerkampfwagen II - Ausf. G, H, J, L, and M’.
Besides the exact same turret w\ armament, which by the way is different than the VK 1303 “Luchs” as VK 901 has left-mounted 2cm Kw.K.38 w\ coaxial 7.92mm M.G.34 on right, the VK 901 has only one long-low storage box over left tracks.}