The History Channel interview with the Pershing crewman who commanded the tank revealed that the Panther burned like a crematorium for three days…:shock:
The Panther did indeed look “well done” afterwards:
Is it the same panther though?
when it received the rounds from the Pershing ,the turret is at 3 o’clock but on the picture(s) with the Cathedral of Koln in the background ,the turret is at 12 o’clock.
It’s definitely the same tank, the americans must have relocated it so it didn’t block any roads. There were some major discussions on that issue on some german WW" forums.
the t-34 was more practical to make and easier to drive.the advantage of it was the sloped armor.but i like the panther. i would either face a group of allied shermans in a panther
The design of the Panther was certainly were much inspired by the russian T-34, that’s why the Panther’s armour actually was “sloped”.
Same with the King Tiger. Wait… If they knew about the awesomeness of sloped armour, why did they make the Tiger with non-sloped front armour?
I guess because they simply depended on the thickness of the Tigers armour.
… It didn’t seem to work too well…
A funny picture. peaceful collaboration between allied and a german tank. The Panther is quoted with better bad terrain mobility than the Churchill, despite being heavier than the british tank.
The actual footage is here somewhere and is quite compelling.
You see, an actual film director happened to witness the beginning of the battle. It started with a rather famous sequence of a Sherman “Easy-Eight” ambushed and hit by the Panther pictured above. One of the crewman flops out of the top hatch, tries to get up but is strangely hobbled. Then you realize if you look closely that his foot have been severed in the attack. Pinned down by sniper fire, medics were unable to get to him and he bled to death in front of his tank. The cameramen then jumped into a jeep, and followed the Pershing filming a sequence that looks more like a Hollywood film than battle footage.
Here it is:
Quite young people the crew in that Pershing, I cant avoid to think the differences in maturity in the people of that time compared with todays, there people 20 year old drive and command an 46 tons steel monster like a bicycle…in the other had today youngster get hurt themselves just handling a scooter.
I completely understand the purpose of relocating the Panther but why move the turret while towing it.Did it matter where the gun was while a prime mover was towing the tank?
Gotta look for some info on that, but the tank should have been towed backwards and the 12 o’clock position of the gun would be most advantageous in the narrow gaps of Cologne.
Dont worry guys, is the same panther, it was moved and the turret too.
Two good examples of Pzkpfw Panther deployed in Italy.
I have been looking over this thread, and I must say that all the information that It has is rather good .
There ar two photos of a Flakpanther in a square with two shops behind it . The one on the left says ‘correctly’APOTHEKE but the one on the right says LEICARAMA ‘a camera shop’ not LEKARNA. So I would say that the picture was either taken in Germany or the German speaking part of Czechoslovakia
Its got to be the panther A for me.
Paul
Thank you, I originally tought it was in Poland because that was the information I found in other forum.
Then again it may well be Poland, as you know the Nazis did try to “Germanise” many parts of Poland by eviction of the normal population and putting “Germanic” people in their place.
Paul
Well… that was the general goal of the NSDAP I suppose :rolleyes:
This seems to be an apples and oranges comparison. The two German tanks are at least 50% heavier than either allied tank. Of course the heavies will have more powerful guns and better armor than the medium tanks will.
Compare the Sherman, T-34, and PzKpfW IV perhaps. Or compare the Panther, Tiger I, Tiger II, Is-2, and Pershing.