German AFV in Normandy

German Tanks Employed in Normandy

Several types of tanks were used in Normandy by the Germans. For various reasons their characteristics varied considerably. The extremely rapid development of new types during the war quickly made designs obsolete. For example the difference between the Panzer IV, which entered production in 1938, and the Panther, which entered production in 1943, was considerable.

Another factor was the thicker armour carried on the newer tanks. This necessitated bigger anti-tank guns, which were heavier than their predecessors. Consequently it became desirable to mount these guns on AFV chassis. Thereby a new type of AFV was created. Finally obsolete models were often developed into specialized types.

There were three main categories of German "tanks":

Main Battle Tanks. These were designed to be as versatile as possible. Their armament was mainly designed to be effective against other tanks, but did also have good effect on unarmoured targets. The main gun was mounted in a revolving turret.
Assault guns. Originally this type was created to provide the infantry with mobile HE fire support. It was mainly supposed to be used as an offensive weapon. As the German infantry was gradually forced to take a defensive posture this type was rather used in an AT role, since it was more mobile than towed AT guns and had greater survivability.
Tank destroyers. These were called Panzerjäger by the Germans and were initially constructed by mounting an AT gun on the chassis of an obsolete tank and providing the gun crew compartment with thin armour. Usually there was no roof armour and often no rear armour either. This type was a direct response to the increasing weight of AT guns. Later during the war the emphasis was shifted to more heavily armoured vehicles with low silhouette and armour on all surfaces. This tended to make the distinction between tank destroyers and assault guns quite vague and this is also reflected in the inconsistency in the documents.

Often the quality of German tanks has been regarded as an advantage over their adversaries. And to some extent this is true. The Panther and Tiger tanks were superior to most allied tanks in several vital areas. However, the most common German tank was the Panzer IV, whose superiority over allied tanks was marginal at best. The third most common German "tank" was the StuG III, which was not superior to allied tanks. These two vehicles had no better armour than the Sherman tanks, were inferior in terms of mobility and mechanical reliability. The only significant advantage these two German types had was the main armament, which was more powerful than the 75 mm gun of the Sherman, though not better than the 76 mm gun mounted in some of the Shermans.

There were however some advantages enjoyed by the Germans that do not show up in data sheets. On important advantage was the powder used by German guns. It produced much less flash and smoke than allied powder when firing. This made it easier for German tankers to spot their adversaries. This was a factor that allied tankers realized too.

This chapter does not contain as many references to sources as other chapters. The main reason for this is that some of the technical data is ambiguous, even if primary sources are used. An example of this is the armour piercing capabilities. Test firing is not a completely reliable method. Variations can occur due to differences in firing distance and angle of target plate. Even in primary documents these factors can be confused. Finally there are always variations in armour plate. Not only can different types of plates, produced with different hardening techniques, be used. This will make it difficult to compare the results from testfiring. But also there are inevitably variations within armour plates of a specific type, which will make it even more difficult to compare the results from testfiring.

Fortunately there are ways to cope with this problem. Most tank and antitank guns of WWII vintage had muzzle velocities of 600 - 1 000 m/s. In this velocity range the capabilities are usually possible to calculate with sufficient precision and reliability. Many of the figures presented here are the results of such calculations. See Appendix 1 for more information on these calculations.

Metric units have been used for the data presented here:

Weight is measured in metric tons
Horsepower is, as far as has been possible to ascertain, measured according to DIN
Road speed is given in km/h
Range is given in km
Ground Pressure is given in kg/cm
Ammo Carried is the number of complete main gun rounds carried
Armour is given as thickness/angle, where thickness is given in mm and angle in degrees from vertical
Calibre is given in mm
Length of bore is given in m
Shell weight is given in kg
Muzzle Velocity is given in m/s
Armour penetration is given in mm against homogenous armour set at an angle of 30° from vertical

German tanks mainly employed two types of ammunition. High explosive, HE, was used against non-armoured targets. The other main type was APCBC (Armoured Piercing, Capped, Ballistically Capped), i e. an AP round with a cap to improve penetration (especially against face-hardened armour and at oblique angles) and also a soft pointed cap outside the first cap to reduce air resistance. There also existed other types, like smoke rounds.

Also there existed another type of AP round, the AP40. This had a tungsten carbide core enclosed in a light alloy body. When the target was hit only the very hard core penetrated, while the surrounding body disintegrated. Since the total weight of the projectile was lower, it achieved higher muzzle velocity. This, together with the fact that the ratio between weight and cross-section area of the core was usually rather similar to conventional AP shot, resulted in considerable increases in penetration. However, since the ratio between weight and cross-section area for the entire projectile was much less than for conventional shot, it lost more velocity with range. Consequently the improvement in penetration was confined to short and medium ranges.

The AP 40 round seems to have been relatively scarce. Given the power of the German guns and the relatively weak armour of most allied tanks, this was not a major problem. Older weapons, like the 5 cm Pak 39, may have been in greater need for the AP 40 ammunition.

Tiger II

This vehicle, which was also called Königstiger (King Tiger) or Tiger B, was the newest of the German tanks. The first Tiger II produced left the assembly lines at the Henschel factory in January 1944. Only the 503. s.Pz.Abt. was equipped with Tiger II. The 1. Kompanie had twelve Tiger II. Powerful as the Tiger II may have been, the numbers employed nevertheless precluded it from playing a major role in the Normandy Campaign.

Why the Germans actually developed the Tiger II may seem peculiar. They already had tanks like the Panther which was superior to the adversaries in terms of fire power and armour protection. It is possible that the Germans, due to the shock of meeting superior Soviet tanks in 1941, were determined never again to fall behind in the race for more powerful guns and better armour protection.

The data for the main gun was:

Calibre

Length
in
Calibres

Length
of
Bore

Shell
Weight
HE

Muzzle
Velocity
HE

Shell
Weight
APCBC

Muzzle
Velocity
APCBC

Shell
Weight
APCR

Muzzle
Velocity
APCR

8,8 cm KwK 43

88

71

6,25

9,4

750

10,2

1000

7,3

1180

Armour penetration of the main gun was:

APCBC at 500 m

APCBC at
1000 m

APCBC at
1500 m

APCBC at
2000 m

APCR at
100 m

APCR at
500 m

APCR at
1000 m

APCR at
1500 m

APCR at
2000 m

8,8 cm KwK 43

185

165

148

132

237

217

193

171

151

Tiger I

This model had entered production in 1942 and was at that time the most powerful tank in the world. But development of new tanks rapidly continued. In 1944 the Panther and the Tiger II surpassed it in most respects, and also some enemy tanks, like the Soviet IS-2. Compared to the Panther it had only one advantage, the thicker side and rear armour. The frontal armour of the Tiger I was much inferior to the Panthers front armour. Also the 8,8 cm KwK 36 gun of the Tiger had much less penetration than the 7,5 cm KwK 42 of the Panther. If to this is added the superior mobility of the Panther it is quite clear which of the tanks that were the better.

However, there were certain circumstances that favoured the Tiger. Except for the most thickly armoured Churchill tanks, the gun of the Tiger was sufficient to penetrate the frontal armour of all allied tanks, save for very long distances. Similarly most allied guns were not powerful enough to penetrate the frontal armour of the Tiger. Given the deficiencies of the opposition it can be said that the penetration capabilities of the Panther and the excellent frontal armour protection were usually "overkill".

The Tiger tanks were employed in independent tank battalions, each of which were supposed to have 45 Tigers. The s. SS-Pz.Abt. 101 and 102 had 45 Tigers each, while the s.Pz.Abt. 503 had 33 Tiger I. Also it seems that the 316. Pz.Kp. (Fkl), which was subordinated to the Pz.Lehr division, had three Tiger I when it went to Normandy. Thus it seems that 126 Tiger I participated in the battle in Normandy.

The data for the main gun was:

Calibre

Length
in
Calibres

Length
of
Bore

Shell
Weight
HE

Muzzle
Velocity
HE

Shell
Weight
APCBC

Muzzle
Velocity
APCBC

Shell
Weight
APCR

Muzzle
Velocity
APCR

8,8 cm KwK 36

88

56

4,93

9,0

600

10,2

780

7,3

930

Armour penetration of the main gun was:

APCBC at 500 m

APCBC at
1000 m

APCBC at
1500 m

APCBC at
2000 m

APCR at
100 m

APCR at
500 m

APCR at
1000 m

APCR at
1500 m

APCR at
2000 m

8,8 cm KwK 36

110

100

90

82

171

156

138

123

110

Panther

The Panther was a very successful combination of fire power, protection and mobility. The frontal armour protection surpassed most heavy tanks during the war. The 7,5 cm gun had, due to the very high muzzle velocity, good accuracy at longer distances and excellent armour penetration capabilities.

Most of the teething troubles plaguing the Panther at the battle at Kursk had been corrected on the G-model which entered production during March 1944, even though the Panther did not match the mechanical dependabilty of the US Sherman tank. But in combat few tankers would have traded the protection and firepower of the Panther for the mechanical reliability of the Sherman.

Altogether the panzer divisions brought 623 Panther tanks to Normandy. Additionally thirteen were sent to the 12. SS-Pz.Div. and eight to the Pz.Lehr division during June. Finally another 24 were sent to OB West as replacements. Of these eight reached OB West on 8 August. These probably reached the combat area, but the rest most likely did not. Finally the s.Pz.Jäg.Abt. 654 brought command versions of the Panther to Normandy, most likely two or three. The total number of Panthers in Normandy would then amount to 654 or 655.

It is sometimes said that the Sherman had an advantage over the Panther due to its powered turret traverse. It is questionable if this really was much of an advantage. First of all the Panther had powered traverse, not electric but hydraulic. This meant that the speed with which the turret could be traversed was dependent on the engine speed. If the driver, gunner and commander of the tank were trained together this was not much of a problem. The driver could select a suitable gear to ensure quick traverse of the turret. If this was done the turret could be rotated 360° in 15 to 18 seconds. This corresponds to an angular velocity of 20 - 24 °/sec, which was only marginally slower than the Sherman.

To put this into perspective it can be compared to the mobility of a tank. Assume that a vehicle is at a distance of 200 m and moves with a speed of 30 km/h perpendicular to the line of sight from the tank. This corresponds to an angular velocity of 2,4 °/sec, or only a tenth of the speed that the Panther turret could traverse. Except at extremely short distances it seems not very likely that the "slow" turret traverse of the Panther enabled allied tanks to "outmanoeuvre" the opponent.

The main advantage with a rapidly traversing turret is the ability to quickly bring fire to bear upon a target suddenly discovered. This can make it possible to hit the enemy before being hit and it is possible that Sherman tanks occasionally hit the enemy before as a result of the slightly faster turret traverse. However such situations could also be caused by the poor visibility plaguing all tanks. It is certainly conceivable that at least occasionally the slowly traversing turret of a German tank may have been the result of the crew scanning the terrain for a target they are not certain were it is located.

The data for the main gun was:

Calibre

Length
in
Calibres

Length
of
Bore

Shell
Weight
HE

Muzzle
Velocity
HE

Shell
Weight
APCBC

Muzzle
Velocity
APCBC

Shell
Weight
APCR

Muzzle
Velocity
APCR

7,5 cm KwK 42

75

70

5,25

5,74

700

6,8

935

4,75

1120

Armour penetration of the main gun was:

APCBC at 500 m

APCBC at
1000 m

APCBC at
1500 m

APCBC at
2000 m

APCR at
100 m

APCR at
500 m

APCR at
1000 m

APCR at
1500 m

APCR at
2000 m

7,5 cm KwK 42

141

126

112

101

194

174

149

128

106

Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV

Introduced in mid thirties, the Panzer IV was the oldest of the German tanks still in production. In Normandy it was the most numerous German tank. The panzer divisions that fought in Normandy brought 841 Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV to the battlefield. Also, between 6 July and 2 August, the following number of Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV (BefWg) were sent: three each to 21. Pz.Div. and 17. SS-Pz.Gren.Div. and five to 2. SS-Pz.Div. Finally, on 8 July, eleven Pz IV were sent to Pz.Lehr, seventeen to 12. SS-Pz.Div. and seventeen to 21. Pz.Div. This brought the total number of Pz.Kpf.Wg IV that participated in the campaign in Normandy to 897.

At the time of its introduction the Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV was among the very best in the world, but development of new models proceeded rapidly during the war. In most respects the Pz.Kpf.Wg IV was much inferior to the Panther. There was however a few advantages that the older tank enjoyed. One was the electrical power traverse of the turret. In the section on the Panther it has been argued that that it was not such a great advantage from a tactical point of view. But hydraulic systems present a fire hazard if the armour is penetrated. The Panther, with its heavy frontal armour, could be expected to keep the majority of hits out. For the Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV a hit was much more likely to penetrate and then the value of not having a hydraulic system in the fighting compartment was certainly welcome to the crews.

On the J-model of the Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV the electrical traverse was deleted to make room for additional fuel. This model must have been very rare in Normandy since it entered production in June 1944.

But even though the Panzer IV was ageing it was still a useful vehicle. With the L48-gun it had much better penetration capabilities than the Sherman with 75 mm gun. Protection and mobility though was slightly inferior to the Sherman tank.

Weight

Horse-
power

Road
Speed

Range

Ground
Pressure

Ammo
Carried

Chassis
Front
Armour

Chassis
Side
Armour

Chassis
Rear
Armour

Turret
Front
Armour

Turret
Side
Armour

Turret
Rear
Armour

Main
Armament

Pz IV E

21

300

42

200

0,79

80

60/10

40/0

20/10

30/11

20/24

20/14

7,5 cm KwK 37

Pz IV F1

22,3

300

40

200

0,84

80

50/10

30/0

20/10

50/11

30/26

30/16

7,5 cm KwK 37

Pz IV F2

23

300

40

200

0,87

80

50/10

30/0

20/10

50/11

30/26

30/16

7,5 cm KwK 40 L43

Pz IV G

24

300

38

210

0,90

80

80/10

30/0

20/10

50/11

30/26

30/16

7,5 cm KwK 40 L43

Pz IV H

25

300

38

210

0,94

80

80/10

30/0

20/10

50/11

30/26

30/16

7,5 cm KwK 40 L48

Pz IV J

25

300

38

320

0,94

80

80/10

30/0

20/10

50/11

30/26

30/16

7,5 cm KwK 40 L48

The data for the main gun was:

Calibre

Length
in
Calibres

Length
of
Bore

Shell
Weight
HE

Muzzle
Velocity
HE

Shell
Weight
APCBC

Muzzle
Velocity
APCBC

Shell
Weight
APCR

Muzzle
Velocity
APCR

7,5 cm KwK 37

75

24

1,8

5,74

420

6,8

385

-

-

7,5 cm KwK 40 L43

75

43

3,22

5,74

550

6,8

740

4,10

920

7,5 cm KwK 40 L48

75

48

3,60

5,74

550

6,8

770

4,10

990

Armour penetration of the main gun was:

APCBC at 500 m

APCBC at
1000 m

APCBC at
1500 m

APCBC at
2000 m

APCR at
100 m

APCR at
500 m

APCR at
1000 m

APCR at
1500 m

APCR at
2000 m

7,5 cm KwK 37

39

35

32

29

-

-

-

-

-

7,5 cm KwK 40 L43

89

78

68

60

126

108

87

69

?

7,5 cm KwK 40 L48

96

84

74

65

143

120

97

77

?

More will be added later

Pz.Kpf.Wg. III

Production of the Pz.Kpf.Wg. III had ceased in June 1943, but a few nevertheless remained with the forces in OB West. Including command tanks the 21. Pz.Div. had five Pz.Kpf.Wg.III on 1 June 1944, while the 116. Pz.Div. reported eleven Pz.Kpf.Wg.III of various models on 8 June. The Pz.Ers.u.Ausb.Abt. 100 had one Pz.Kpf.Wg.III. The Hohenstaufen division had six BefPz III, while Frundsberg had three and Hitlerjugend two. Also the 4./Pz.Abt. 301 (Fkl) had two Pz.Kpf.Wg. III. This gives a total of 30 Pz.Kpf.Wg. III.

It is possible that further Pz.Kpf.Wg. III may have participated in the battle. At this stage of the war the model was regarded to have little combat value and it was perhaps not always reported if the type was present with ha unit. Also command vehicles were not necessarily reported. Since the Pz.Kpf.Wg. III had been out of production for a year when the allied forces landed in Normandy it is not very likely that further vehicles of the type was sent to the units.

Horse- Road Ground Ammo Chassis armour Turret armour

Weight Power Speed Range Pressure carried Front Side Rear Front Side Rear Main Armament

Pz III H 21,8 300 40 165 0,94 99 60/9 30/0 60/10 35/R 30/25 30/12 5 cm KwK L42

Pz III L-M 22,7 300 40 155 0,95 92 70/9 30/0 50/10 77/R 30/25 30/12 5 cm KwK 39

Pz III N 23 300 40 155 0,96 64 70/9 30/0 50/10 77/R 30/25 30/12 7,5 cm KwK 37

The data for the main gun was:

Length Length Shell Muzzle Shell Muzzle APC Shell Muzzle APCR

in of weight velocity weight velocity Armour pen at distance weight velocity Armour pen at distance

Calibre calibres bore HE HE APC APC 500 1000 1500 2000 APCR APCR 100 500 1000 1500 2000

5 cm KwK L42 50 42 2,1 1,82 ? 2,06 685 45 35 27 21 0,925 1060 96 58 - - -

5 cm KwK 39 50 60 3,0 1,82 550 2,06 835 67 52 40 31 0,925 1180 130 72 38 - -

7,5 cm KwK 37 75 24 1,8 5,74 420 6,8 385 39 35 32 29 - - - - - - -

StuG. III & StuH III

The main disadvantage with the Pz.Kpf.Wg. III was that it could not mount a longer 7,5 cm gun than the short 7,5 cm KwK 37. But by discarding the revolving turret the longer 7,5 cm StuK 40 L48 could be fitted. This made it possible to use the StuG III as an effective anti tank weapon. This was a departure from the original role of the assault guns, to provide fire support for attacking infantry units. The first StuG III models had been armed with the short 7,5 cm StuK 37, which could perform that task. The superiority of Soviet tanks forced the Germans to adopt the longer gun to provide the infantry with effective and mobile AT capabilities. From March 1942 the StuG III was produced with the longer gun.

There was still a need for fire support for the infantry. To provide this a new version of the StuG III was designed. It was armed with a 10,5 cm howitzer and called StuH 42 or StuH III. Production was initiated in October 1942. Still the 7,5 cm variant was much more common. Production of the latter type was about 7 times greater than production of the StuH III.

There were three main categories of units that used the assault guns. These were independent assault gun battalion (or brigades), infantry divisions and panzer divisions. Three army assault gun battalions, 341, 394 and 902 and one from the air force, the 12. Fallsch.StuG.Brig., participated in Normandy. All these had an authorized strength of 31 assault guns, except the 341. which had 45. The three army units were all at full strength when they were sent to Normandy. The actual strength of the 12. Fallsch.StuG.Brig. is more uncertain, but probably it was at full strength when it moved to Normandy.

Some of the infantry divisions had one of the companies in the panzer jäger battalion equipped with ten StuG III. Six of the infantry divisions had such a company. Also eight StuG III were sent to the 16. LW.Div. on 9 July.

Panzer divisions were not supposed to be equipped with StuG III, but some of the divisions in Normandy nevertheless were. In both 1. and 2. SS-Pz.Div. the panzer jäger battalion was equipped with StuG III rather than tank destroyers. Each division had 45 StuG. The 9. and 10. SS-Pz.Div. had no panzer jäger battalion, but two of the tank companies were equipped with StuG III rather than Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV. The 9. SS-Pz.Div. had 40 StuG and the 10. SS-Pz.Div. had 38. Also the 9. Pz.Div. had six StuG III while the 116. Pz.Div. had five. As could be expected the 17. SS-Pz.Gren.Div. had a battalion equipped with StuG III. It had 42 assault guns.

Assault guns were also found among the Funklenk units (units operating remote controlled vehicles). The 4./Pz.Abt. 301 (Fkl) had six StuG III while the 316. Pz.Kp. (Fkl) had ten.

Also, on 30 July the ten StuG III of 348. Inf.Div. were sent to Normandy.

Altogether this means that 453 StuG III and StuH III went to Normandy with the combat sent there (assuming that the 12. Fallsch.StuG.Brig. received its authorized number of StuG). It is much more difficult to establish how many StuG that were sent to Normandy to replace losses. Among the files of the Inspector-General of Panzer Troops there are lists of the deliveries of tanks and assault guns. However these lists do not cover deliveries to GHQ assault gun units before july 1944, since those units were considered part of the artillery. Similarly these lists do not include deliveries to Luftwaffe units.

The available lists show that 17 StuG III and 10 StuH III were sent to the west on 31 July. But further deliveries may have occurred, at least to 12. Fallsch.StuG.Brig. and 902. StuG.Abt. since these units saw action during June. The 341. and 394. Were not comitted to combat before August and replacements to those units would have been included in the lists.

Also there is another possible source for replacements. There were schools, like the assault gun training area at Tours, which may have sent some of their guns to the front in Normandy. However such deliveries could not have been considerable. Weighing in all factors it seems safe to assume that less than 100 StuG were sent to Normandy to replace losses.

There also existed a third assault gun model, the StuG IV. Firepower, armour and mobility were almost identical to the StuG III but as the name implies it was built on the Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV chassis rather than the Pz.Kpf.Wg. III chassis. Usually no distinction is made between StuG III and StuG IV in the reports. The StuG IV was produced in much smaller numbers than the StuG III.

The ratio between StuG III and StuH III among the assault guns sent to Normandy is unclear. Probably only the GHQ assault gun units were given StuH III.

Horse- Road Ground Ammo Chassis armour Superstructure armour

Weight Power Speed Range Pressure carried Front Side Rear Front Side Rear Main Armament

StuG III 23,9 300 40 155 1,00 54 80/21 30/0 50/10 80/10 30/11 30/0 7,5 cm StuK 40

StuH III 24,0 300 40 155 1,00 36 80/21 30/0 50/10 80/10 30/11 30/0 10,5 cm StuH 42

The data for the main armament was:

Length Length Shell Muzzle Shell Muzzle APCBC Shell Muzzle APCR

in of weight velocity weight velocity Armour pen at distance weight velocity Armour pen at distance

Calibre calibres bore HE HE APC APC 500 1000 1500 2000 APCR APCR 100 500 1000 1500 2000

7,5 cm StuK 40 L48 75 48 3,60 5,74 550 6,8 770 96 84 74 65 4,10 990 143 120 97 77 -

10,5 cm StuH 42 105 28 2,94 14,8 470 14,0 470 59 54 50 46 - - - - - - -

StuPz. IV

This was one of the more specialized German AFV and only 306 vehicles of this type were manufactured during the war.

From the beginning of the war German infantry regiments had a infantry gun company to provide fire support. There were two types of infantry guns, the 7,5 cm le.IG and the 15 cm s.IG. The larger of these was difficult to handle in the terrain and this problem was of course even more serious for the infantry units among the panzer divisions. To remedy this problem the Germans introduced a succession of lightly armoured vehicles carrying the 15 cm s.IG. These were built on the chassis of the Pz.Kpf.Wg. I, Pz.Kpf.Wg. II and the Pz.Kpf.Wg. 38 (t). The thin armour and open top made it impossible to use these vehicles in close quarters or expose them to enemy AT guns.

The Stu.Pz. IV was a departure from this line of vehicles. It was built on the Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV chassis and the armour was thick.

During the battle at Kursk in July 1943 the vehicle mad its combat debut, when the216. Stu.Pz.Abt. fouht with 9. Armee. The only unit equipped with the StuPz IV in Normandy was the 217. Stu.Pz.Abt. It employed between 16 and 28 Stu.Pz. IV.

The main advantage the model enjoyed was of course the large high explosive shell that was very effective against infantry targets. On the other hand, the very low muzzle velocity made it almost useless against enemy tanks.

Horse- Road Ground Ammo Chassis armour Superstructure armour

Weight Power Speed Range Pressure carried Front Side Rear Front Side Rear Main Armament

StuPz IV 28,2 300 40 210 1,06 38 80/12 30/0 20/10 100/40 50/15 30/25 15 cm StuH 43

The data for the main gun was:

Length Length Shell Muzzle Shell Muzzle APC Shell Muzzle APCR

in of weight velocity weight velocity Armour pen at distance weight velocity Armour pen at distance

Calibre calibres bore HE HE APC APC 500 1000 1500 2000 APCR APCR 100 500 1000 1500 2000

15 cm StuH 43 150 12 1,80 38 240 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Marder

As the war progressed it became increasingly clear that the heavy anti-tank guns required to deal wth tanks that became better and better protected had to be mounted on tracked chassis to provide sufficient mobility. The Germans used obsolete tank chassis like the Pz.Kpf.Wg. II and Pz.Kpf.Wg. 38 (t) for this purpose. The light chassis did not make it possible to use heavy armour. The tactical employment of these vehicles focused largely on finding good concealed fire positions to alternate between.

In Normandy this kind of vehicles was mainly used by infantry divisions. Often one of the companies in the panzer jäger battalion had fourteen vehicles of this type. Few of the infantry division had one such company.

At this stage of the war the panzer divisions were not supposed to be equipped with Marders, but it seems that the 9. Pz.Div. had nine Marders. These were supposed to be replaced by JagdPz IV, but these did not arrive before the division went to Normandy and probably it had to retain the Marders.

Horse- Road Ground Ammo Chassis armour Superstructure armour

Weight Power Speed Range Pressure carried Front Side Rear Front Side Rear Main Armament

StuG III 23,9 300 40 155 1,00 54 80/21 30/0 50/10 80/10 30/11 30/0 7,5 cm StuK 40

StuH III 23,9 300 40 155 1,00 54 80/21 30/0 50/10 80/10 30/11 30/0 10,5 cm StuH 42

The data for the main gun was:

Length Length Shell Muzzle Shell Muzzle APCBC Shell Muzzle APCR

in of weight velocity weight velocity Armour pen at distance weight velocity Armour pen at distance

Calibre calibres bore HE HE APC APC 500 1000 1500 2000 APCR APCR 100 500 1000 1500 2000

7,5 cm StuK 40 L48 75 48 3,60 5,74 550 6,8 770 96 84 74 65 4,10 990 143 120 97 77 -

JagdPz IV

Since the Marders had poor armour protection they lacked the ability to counterattack against enemy tanks. Rather they had to rely of firing from concealed positions. The JagdPz IV had much more effective protection. The sloped frontal armour was as efficient as the the thicker, but vertical, armour of the Tiger I. In May 1944 the armour was improved by increasing the thickness of the frontal plates to 80 mm. This made its armour almost as good as the frontal armour of the Panther. It also meant that the weight went up by a ton and this extra weight was concentrated at the front of the vehicle, making it nose heavy. This problem was later compounded by mounting the more powerful gun of the Panther in the JagdPz IV. No such vehicles were however produced in time for the battle in Normandy.

The JagdPz IV equipped the panzer jäger battlions of the panzer divisions. Since 1. and 2. SS-Pz.Div. had StuG III for their panzer jäger battalions they had no JagdPz IV. Neither the 9. and 10. SS-Pz.Div. had any panzer jäger battalion in Normandy. These battalions were forming but they did not receive any JagdPz IV before August 1944. Neither had the 21. Pz.Div. any JagdPz IV.

Two division that had JagdPz IV when they went to Normandy were the Pz.Lehr and 2. Pz.Div. They had 31 and 21 respectively. The SS-Pz.Jäg.Abt. 12 of the Hitlerjugend division was forming when the allies landed in Normandy. It seems that one its companies arrived in Normandy equipped with ten JagdPz IV. All these vehicles had been manufactured befor May and probably had the thinner armour.

On 10 July 21 JagdPz IV were sent to 116. Pz.Div. These participated in Normandy and may very well have had the thicker frontal armour. Also the 21 sent to 9. Pz.Div. on 20 July may have had the thicker armour, but they did not see action in Normandy. Finally 31 JagdPz IV were sent to 17. SS-Pz.Gen.Div. on 30 June. These saw action in the Laval area during August. No JagdPz IV were sent to Normandy to replace losses.

Altogether 114 JagdPz IV were sent to Normandy.

Horse- Road Ground Ammo Chassis armour Superstructure armour

Weight Power Speed Range Pressure carried Front Side Rear Front Side Rear Main Armament

JagdPz IV 24 300 40 210 0,90 79 60/45 30/0 20/11 60/50 30/30 20/35 7,5 cm Pak 39

The data for the main gun was:

Length Length Shell Muzzle Shell Muzzle APCBC Shell Muzzle APCR

in of weight velocity weight velocity Armour pen at distance weight velocity Armour pen at distance

Calibre calibres bore HE HE APC APC 500 1000 1500 2000 APCR APCR 100 500 1000 1500 2000

7,5 cm Pak 39 L48 75 48 3,60 5,74 550 6,8 770 96 84 74 65 4,10 990 143 120 97 77 -

Jagdpanther

Only one unit in Normandy was equipped with Jagdpantehrs, the 654. s.Pz.Jäg.Abt. It seems that this unit employed 25 Jagdpanthers in Normandy. Thus, this vehicle was quite rare in Normandy and since the battalion also arrived quite late, the Jagdpanther had little impact on the overall operations.

This should not distract from the fact that the Jagdpanther was an excellent vehicle, with a superb gun, very well armoured and with good automotive characteristics. However, given the fact that very few allied tanks presented any problem for the 7,5 cm gun of the Panther, the Jagdpanther was probably an inferior vehicle compared to the Panther. The value of a revolving turret was usually a greater advantage than the more powerful 8,8 cm gun.

Horse- Road Ground Ammo Chassis armour Superstructuer armour

Weight Power Speed Range Pressure carried Front Side Rear Front Side Rear Main Armament

Jagdpanther 46 700 46 200 0,88 57 80/55 50/30 40/30 80/55 50/30 40/35 8,8 cm Pak 43

The data for the main gun was:

Length Length Shell Muzzle Shell Muzzle APC Shell Muzzle APCR

in of weight velocity weight velocity Armour pen at distance weight velocity Armour pen at distance

Calibre calibres bore HE HE APC APC 500 1000 1500 2000 APCR APCR 100 500 1000 1500 2000

8,8 cm Pak 43 88 71 6,25 9,4 700 10,2 1000 185 165 148 132 7,3 1180 237 217 193 171 151

According to the British official history of the campaign in Normandy most British tanks knocked out fell victim to the German "long-range anti-tank guns, particularly 88's". This seems to be a statement made without any deeper research behind it. Rather, the available evidence suggest that German tanks, assault guns and tank destroyers were the main killers of allied tanks.

The vast majority of German tanks mounted a 7,5 cm gun and also most German AT guns had that calibre. The shells that were fired by these guns were almost identical (even though the propellant charges could be quite different). Hence it was impossible to tell by examination of a wreck if it had been hit by fire from a 7,5 cm Pak 40 anti-tank gun or a 7,5 cm KwK 40 gun of a Pz.Kpf.Wg. IV. Similarly it seems that tank crews being hit by enemy fire are not perfectly objective observers.

Probably the best source for establishing the proportion between various causes for allied tank losses is to look at German claims. A report dated 29 June showed the following causes of tank kills:

17. SS-Pz.Gren.Div.: StuG 7

Towed AT guns 5

Close Combat 5

352. Inf.Div.: Panzerjäger 21

Flak 21

Artillery 25

Close Combat 30

2. Pz.Div.: Towed AT Guns 15

Artillery 4

Close Combat 5

Pz.Lehr: Tanks 85

JagdPz IV 18

Towed AT guns 7

Artillery 4

Close Combat 40

12. SS-Pz.Div.: Tanks 105

Towed AT guns 16

Close Combat 23

21. Pz.Div.: Tanks 37

8,8 cm AT guns (towed) 41

7,5 cm AT guns (SP) 15

Artillery 3

Close Combat 5

This warrants some comments. First, even though the document is dated 29 June it can not include data for all days preceeding that day. During the last four days of June the Panther battalion of 2. Pz.Div. was credited with the destruction of 89 enemy tanks. Second, close combat includes vehicles destroyed by Panzerschreck and Panzerfaust. Third, the claims for artillery are probably more likely to be exaggerated than the other causes. Fourth, the category Panzerjäger in 352. Inf.Div. must include StuG III too.

According to this data tanks, assault guns and tank destroyers accounted for slightly more than half the tanks knocked out. The second most common cause was close combat which accounted for 20 %. But among the three divisions that fought exclusively against British units tanks and JagdPz IV accounted for nearly two thirds of all tanks destroyed. Again close combat weapons accounted for more tanks than towed AT guns.

ZZ här kanske man bör föra in något om vad som slog ut allierade stridsvagnar. Nämn då också något om tyska claims och deras precision.

Tiger I

Tiger II

Panther

Panzer IV

Panzer III

StuG III

StuH III

JagdPz IV

JagdPz V

StuPz IV

Goliat

SPW

Armoured Cars

Beute-Pz

Pz II

Marder

Command Tanks

	Calibre	Length in Calibres	Length of Bore	Shell Weight HE	Muzzle Velocity HE	Shell Weight APCBC	Muzzle Velocity APCBC	Shell Weight APCR	Muzzle Velocity APCR
8,8 cm KwK 43	88	71	6,25	9,4	750	10,2	1000	7,3	1180

	APCBC at 500 m	APCBC at 1000 m	APCBC at 1500 m	APCBC at 2000 m	APCR at 100 m	APCR at 500 m	APCR at 1000 m	APCR at 1500 m	APCR at 2000 m
8,8 cm KwK 43	185	165	148	132	237	217	193	171	151