Jagdpanther vs SU Eastern Front Duel Author: David R. Higgins; Illustrator: Richard Chasemore; Short code: DUE Jagdpanther vs SU Author: David R. Higgins ISBN: 1 6. Contributor: Andrew Nguyen Review Date: 17 Sep As with all German. However, from page 33 until the end of the book, we leave the discussion specifically of the Jagdpanther and SU, and launch into a military.

Author: Vudogor Taut
Country: Argentina
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Science
Published (Last): 11 July 2012
Pages: 420
PDF File Size: 7.40 Mb
ePub File Size: 15.88 Mb
ISBN: 766-9-88684-971-2
Downloads: 10750
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Gardall

The SU jagdpantther Jagdpanther seem quite similar vehicles: In terms of mobility, both claim similar top speeds, and similar specific powers. The accuracy of the PaK 43 and the DS would jagdpanthdr more-or-less the same. The inter-leaved suspension of the Jagdpanther is more comfortable for the crew, but is harder to maintain. Mud getting stuck in it would be painful. The Jagdpanther is 0. My pick for the better of these two vehicles would have to be the SU The combat performance looks to be the same for either vehicle, effective range is the same, accuracy is the same, armour protection is the same, etc.

SU’s look to be more economical to produce.

Jagdpanther vs SU-100: Eastern Front 1945

I also dislike the German use of interleaved suspension. As minor as it may seem, I feel that the DS’s shorter gun barrel will get the SU into less trouble than the PaK 43’s barrel will get the Jagdpanther. Finally, having an operational range twice that of the Jagdpanther doesn’t seem like it could possibly be bad, though this is certainly less important for a defensive vehicle than for an offensive vehicle.

Check out the first Podcast dedicated to the version of World of Tanks. MegaB0B0, on 03 November – Matthew J35U5, on 04 November – MegaB0B0, on 04 November – There is a lot of things claimed about German tanks that isn’t true. I hate being bi-polar. Crazedtiger77, on 04 November – Certainly it served the longest of any of those, and had an exemplary combat record over the course of the war. Crews of t34 were very hard jobs and often skinny guys were forced to drive them.

D0omedEx1stence, on 20 November – Keep Calm and Derp On! BlazinWeedies, on 20 November – Role Mario, on 21 November – This is about the historical vehicles, not the in-game ones. Glad you enjoyed the SU in-game though, I found it pretty fun as well.

Don’t be afraid of the Jagdpanther though, I thought it was pretty good, and it was one of the only 2 tier 7 TD’s I kept after grinding through it. Before the war, the Soviet Union was sent a Pz. They tested a 30 mm thick section of its armour by firing a 45 mm shell at it.

This was the result:. The Soviet testers were surprised by this as they expected a 30 mm plate to withstand a 45 mm shell at such a low impact velocity, so they had a local factory build them an identical test plate. jagdpantehr

They carried out the same test:. Certainly not twice as strong as Soviet steel of the same thickness. Furthermore, after operation Barbarossa, consideration was given to copying the T Frontline officers suggested that we should build tanks exactly like the T in order to correct the unpleasant position of our armoured forces, but this position did not ajgdpanther support from the engineers.


Not because they were opposed to imitation, but because it was not possible to rapidly set up manufacturing of important components, especially the diesel motor. Additionally, our hardened steel, whose quality was dropping due to a lack of natural resources, was inferior to the Russians’ hardened steel.

Guderian, “Memories of a Soldier”, page Emphasis mine It seems completely contrary to evidence to suggest that German steel was at all to steel produced by the Soviet Union. Secondly, the claim that Soviet optics were bad: Incomparable to any currently known worldwide or currently developed in America.

Most effective fire is from meters” Now, obviously an SU is neither an IS-2 nor an ISU, however the DS has similar ballistic performance to the DT, so there is no reason to think that the SU could not also be effective opening fire between m.

Funny that I just now saw this thread. I just ordered this book a couple days ago, and am waiting for it’s arrival. The assault guns and the tank destroyers though, in general, were much more reliable especially those based off the Pz. jagdpantner

SU-100 vs Jagdpanther

III chassisand typically more economical both in resources and cost. Relative to jagdpajther other nations, they were at least equal to the tank destroyers and assault guns fielded by the other nations, and enjoyed considerable success due to the eventual nature of the war Germany would find themselves in throughout much of WWII; defense.

Reliability was slightly better for the Jagdpanther relative to the Panther, due to the way in which tank destroyers were used, often in a rather immobile or “dug in” fashion, and in general did not suffer as much “wear-and-tear”. Unfortunately though, English books specifically about the SU seem to be essentially nonexistent, and I have been limited in jagdpanfher ability to research this tank.

I can not answer the cost, as I have no idea how much the SU cost per unit. Ease of production, assuming equal resources and similar manufacturing ability, would be the SU due to the smaller dimensions and less complicated design. In my opinion the mm DS and 8,8cm Pak 43 guns are near identical in performance, and there is nothing to suggest one jagdpanthdr better than the other.

The various ammunition used for the Pak 43 guns was around 10kg or 11kg, where as the DS used ammunition in the 16kg range. These values would help in determining penetrative and accuracy determination, but are sadly non-existent as far as I can tell.

Jagdpanther vs SU Eastern Front by David R. Higgins

Still though, there was enough testing information and battlefield analysis of both rounds, to draw a fair conclusion as to the performance of both.

E ither gun is as capable as the other. Both are very similar. The Jagdpanther has 5mm more base armour on both the frontal superstructure and the lower glacis. The glacis of both is essentially angled the same, where as the superstructure front of the SU is a half dozen degrees better angled.

Frontally the Jagdpanther has the edge, but not by a significant amount. The side armor is again better on the Jagdpanther, both in base thickness and angle. Again though, the difference is not drastic. All in all, both are strong frontally for the WWII era, but are very weak everywhere else. This is of course not surprising, as tank destroyers are meant as ambush and defensive vehicles, and aren’t meant to trade shots with other vehicles. Neither of the two vehicles have an armour scheme that will save them from the potency of the others gun, even at the longer operational engagement ranges.


From everything I have read, the mobility of both vehicles appears to be excellent. The Jagdpanther seems to have a slight edge over the SU in speed and terrain performance, with the SU being the slightly more agile vehicle.

Ultimately the Jagdpanther is the better of the two in all-around mobility. Both vehicles can carry a fair amount of fuel internally, though the Jagdpanther can carry the most but not enough to compensate for range performance of the SU The SU has been proven to operate in extreme cold and extreme heat, and in difficult environments such as the Middle Eastern deserts as the SUM. It is not limited to icing, but other debris can cause issues between the overlapping wheels.

Further, the Jagdpanther did not see desert environments, so it’s ability to operate in sandy conditions is unknown as is it’s ability to be modified to operate in said environment. The SU is the better of the two for it’s ability to operate in all environments and weather, and it’s operational range.

I will have to answer this in a variety of ways. I am partially talking out of my here, as I have not read as much about the SU as the Jagdpanther due to limited sources.

The wheel design is problematic, as is the other Panther elements of the Jagdpanther. What I don’t know, is if there has been captured SU’s or M’s and if analysis xu conducted as to the overall reliability. Should be interesting to see what the book has to say, perhaps when you get it you could share its conclusion with us?

I more-or-less agree with all of your points.

SU vs Jagdpanther – Historical Discussions – Official Forum – World of Tanks Console

If both are as combat effective, and one is presumably cheaper and faster to build, it would appear to be the better vehicle. Community Forum Software by IP.

Search Advanced Search section: Please log in to reply. SU vs Jagdpanther 27 members have cast votes You have to complete 5 battles in order to participate this poll. SU 8 votes [ Matthew J35U5 1 Posted 03 November – The SU is an up-gunned and up-armoured SU After the introduction of the T, the utility of the SU was at an end, and the Soviet authorities decided to modify the SU by arming it with a mm gun, expanding the casement to accommodate the larger gun, and increased the frontal armour to 75 mm.

KeystoneCops, on 14 June – MegaB0B0 2 Posted 04 November – Matthew J35U5 3 Posted 04 November – Jagdpwnther Raider 4 Posted 04 November – SU is my favorite tank. Crazedtiger77 5 Posted 04 November – It’s very close but I think the Jjagdpanther was best as it was an all round better performing tank, it’s only weakness compared to the Su is being bigger and more costly to make. This article is interesting to read: Edited by Crazedtiger77, 04 November – MegaB0B0 6 Posted 04 November –

Author: admin