Why are Germans bad at design and overengineer everything?

Why are Germans bad at design and overengineer everything?
Seriously.
Here are IS-3 and Tiger 2,designed and produced roughly the same year.
Tiger 2 weights 68 TONS,and IS-3 only 48 tons,all the while having FAR superior protection(at the time inpenetrable by anything except a lucky shot from Jagdtigers 128 mm gun).
Tiger 2 has 88 mm gun,while IS-3 has 122mm mounted.
It took about 50% less time to produce and set in action one IS-3 than Tiger 2.

Many people don't know this,but this is what essentially lost them the war.Overengineered shit that works great when it works,but takes ages to produce and if it breaks,takes ages to fix.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_von_Bismarck
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Autism

...

>Many people don't know this,but this is what essentially lost them the war.
Yeah, that and the fact that they where fighting the US and Russia at the same time.

>soviet beat nazi germany alone meme

Really? Cause I always thought what lost them the war was trying to fight the entire world without the material or man power to do it.

Yes IS-3 was ahead of its time in terms of armor layout and design etc but problem was that it was so cramped and had bad crew comfort, vision and rate of fire.

Armor is god tier really with an engagement of IS3 vs jew M48 where the M48 even with 90mm HEAT couldn't pen IS3 from the front and ended up flanking IS3 to knock it out.

Tiger 2 focused more on providing a good stable gun platform, with lots of design fuckups because Hitler decreed that certain parts were to be interchangeable with the cancelled lighter Panther 2.

Both tanks are evolutionary dead ends really since Cold War doctrine invalidated heavy tanks.

Now if you want something really revolutionary you should look at the Centurion which was designed around the same time as the two.

>is 3 made in 1945
>tiger 2 made in 1943
>same year

the is3 was such a badly design tank that it was never used in action
the tank was so cramped that crew had trouble loading the tow pice amo fro the 122

meanwhile tiger 2 were an absolute monster during the shot time it was used suffering mostly from fuel shortage like the rest of the german forces

Reich was engineered to fail, to install eternal war between Russians and PRussians and to kill as much non-anglo white people as possible.

USSR was not engineered to fail, it had to be red menace to USA forever. But we managed to undermine it somehow. Thank God for that.

To people like you all objective truths are memes right? The soviets lost the most people and suffered the most, and it wasn't even the soviet leadership which was suffering it was the civilians who were both victims firstly of the bolsheviks and Stalin then the nazi gang.

Is3 was used against israel by many arab states

>roughly the same year
Tiger II saw service 1943 while the IS-3 came 1945.
2 years of tank development is a lot, you turbo faggot

> lend-lease meme > after locomotive scam > after "roosevelts new-deal" aka "stalins industrialization", where they bought technologically obsolete scrap metal for triple of industrial equipment prices > after wall street funding bolshevism and robbing all the wealth of Russians

>meanwhile tiger 2 were an absolute monster during the shot time
Kek, it was piece of shit.

>Yeah, that and the fact that they where fighting the US and Russia at the same time.
So it's their intelligence that opened a two front war?

Same shit happened in WW1, Bismark tried to delay the loss by helping to overthrow the Russian government which gave us the USSR. Everyone and their mom joined after the Communists took over the Russian Empire.

Just face it, Germans like to over-engineer their own demise.

Now go see how that went for them.
They got absolutely BTFO by a couple of jews.

This post makes no sense to me? Was that supposed to be an argument against ?

...

And look how well that turned out

Soviet staff didn't want IS-3. They were fine with IS-2 doing its job and were more interested in the programme that led to T-44 and T-54. It was only Stalin's insistence that caused Soviet heavy tanks to be developed post war.

the is-3 had about 180-190mm frontal armor, tiger 2 had
just over 200mm on the front

>Bismark tried to delay the loss

are you dumb?
He left office in 1890 and died in 1898.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_von_Bismarck

kek'd

>Bismark
>WW1

Germans did help communists a lot in WW1 and it backfired that's true.

Angles user, angles.

those

> soviet nigger blaming its work on PRussians > again

...

Because Hitler was autist tier when it came to war,
check out the other tanks such as the Pz.IV seiresd,Hetzers, and Stugs, and Hummels.

The IS-3 is generally considered something akin to a paper tiger. It shocked the allies in the victory parade when it was first shown, but in reality, it tended to fall apart just by driving along, and the 122mm gun took an age to reload, and was horribly obsolete soon after introduction.
The fact that it was shown at the parade at all is proof of how little the Soviets actually thought of it... the T-44 was being introduced the same time and it was kept hidden from the America et al for decades.

Wrong,idiot Kraut.
Tiger 2s were saw action in late 1944,while IS3 in mid 1945.
In any way,you didn't design or produce anything after Tiger 2 that could match IS-3.

...

>The soviets lost the most people and suffered the most
No, the Chinese lost the most people.

Therefore the Chinese won ww2, because losing lots of people is how you win a war.

Lenin was sent to Russia thanks the executive order of Kaiser Wilhelm, with a wagon full of gold that allowed him to set up fuckhuge newspaper that became known as Pravda. The idea was to destabilise Russia even further and get it out of war.

The IS-3 never saw combat during WWII and never against even remotely comparable and contemporary armour.

He said it's a meme that the soviets beat hitler alone but I replied saying that the soviet citizens were victims of both regimes. I didn't add at the end a sentence saying it was also them who won the war for stalin. Stalin didn't win himself, the war of two political ideologies quickly turned into a war of two cultures. I intended to imply that it was the soviet people who almost single handedly won the war which he thinks is just a joke. The casualties for both the soviet people and the germans was colossal on the eastern front.

Anyways sorry for not making my statement more clear.

They had designed the first mbt in world e50 too bad they never had plans to make one any time soon

>The IS-3 never saw combat during WWII
Allegedly they were used in Vienna

...

>jordan

>i played world of tanks and now im an engineer

Amphetamines.

There is zero confirmed reports.

The panther could have been the first MBT, but the speed had to be governed well below it's potential because of how unreliable it was.

lend-lease was helpful, but pretty much no one with any knowledge of the topic actually credits americans with "winning" the war. regardless of the material supplied to them, the soviets still had to pitch themselves bodily at germany to win the war, which they did at the cost of absurd amounts of their own lives, families, cities, etc.

not to say the western front was useless. the eventual winning of air superiority and resulting targeted bombing did achieve things.

They helped some communists. Contained others. They could not contain.

alright, now that makes sense. I agree

the IS3 wasnt even actively used in the soviet army except for 3/4 times against the japs lmao. the tiger 2 on the other hand was used in many battles at the end of the war and completely buttfucked the t34, even the t34/85

The is3 was so shit that it was retired within 4 years of frontline service. It couldn't even handle its own weight and the chassis buckled, bent and broke on it from cross country maneuvers. At one point it was so bad that new production was put on a train after leaving one factory to go to another just to correct its defects.

T-34 was a Soviet medium tank,and by German standards,LIGHT tank.
Also,Soviets could produce ten T-34's by the time you produced one Tiger 2.

German Tiger 1s,Panthers and Tiger 2s were notorious for breaking down.
Get your shit together nigger.

meth amphetamine, and was created bu japs.

They were kind of shit by the end of the war. At the beginning, they had excellent armour and firepower (but were also extremely prone to breaking down), by the end, they may as well have been made of paper.
They didn't apart just from moving.

as I've said here Soviets liked IS-2's up to some point but as the Soviet medium tank development resulted in T-44 which fixed all major problems T-34 had and later T-54 which was one of those tanks that were effectively MBT's but weren't called like that, they became more and more convinced that the whole heavy tank business simply isn't worth it. Politicians(Stalin or more likely his bootlickers) pushed for them though.

Which is exactly the same process that got M103 or Conqueror into production. Military didn't want them but some piece of shit in the administration said that they absolutely need to conquer the Red menace in form of legions of IS tanks(that were held in rearguard since no Red Army leader actually wanted to use them).
Tiger 2 was used so extensively that they were abandoned before they've seen combat during the Ardennes offensive and it wasn't an exception.
>by German standards,LIGHT tank.
It was still medium for them.

Generally the T2 vs T-34 debate is absolutely bullshit because T2 weights twice as much, comparison makes no sense at all.

I mean, the German tanks didn't just fall apart from moving.

At the same time can you really blame us for not going balls to the wall when your two greatest enemies are massacring eachother? Who wants to break up a fight between Hitler and Stalin?

Plus we were also fighting in the pacific. We had a legit logistical nightmare on our hands.

still doesnt make the t34 better. quality instead of quantity.
the JS 2 on the other hand was a powerful enemy, even against a tiger/tiger2

but saying that the is3 is way superior compared to the tiger 2 is just stupid

btw why the fuck did they remove (You)'s?

Belgians and French complained about Panthers doing exactly this(plus they liked to throw tracks just because). And they've used them longer than Germans did.

Is-3 is blind as a bat.

> further
So he literally just funded anglo-created and poolack-supported scam a little.

>Allegedly they were used in Vienna

nope, not a single report or photo of it.

I didn't say t-34 was better.
I said IS-3 was better,and it was.In terms of armor,firepower,weight(material cost) and production time.
The purpose of tanks is to wage war.Wars are waged to win.
Quality,quantity or whatever the fuck,it doesn't matter.
The only thing that matters is who wins.

I can't believe the Turks are already losing Leopard 2's to ISIS.

You might want to check on the first deployment of Tiger II battalions on Ostfront.
It got mauled very badly, and it underperformed so badly that Soviets didn't even note it as a new tank.
Afterwards, they feared the Tiger I more than Tiger II, because the first one was more reliable, mobile and usually crewed by more careful and experienced crews, fully aware of the by then obsolete boxy 80-100 vertical armour.

What's worse is that these are A4 versions and we have those too. If dune coons can blow them up so can everyone else.

>same year

May as well be decades.

IS-3 wasn't ready to fight

Tiger-II was, and it was fighting

duckling, please go

They're blown up from the inside, though. Probably climbed on top and grenaded the hatches.
Turkroaches don't know how to use a Leopard 2, its one of the fastest tanks for a fucking reason.

I'm sure they also had shit-all spare parts, considering none would have been made immediately after the war ended.
Also they would have had the sever handicap of being Belgian and French.

Btw, IS-3s got BTFO by 90mm Pattons in the desert

Who'd think that slow moving boxes get flanked?

You are aware that even completely modernised Abrams and Leopards with no add-on or urban stand-off protection have armour sections that can be penetrated by 14.5 AT rifles? Rear and side hull areas?
That Leopard 2A4 turret has a maximum Line of sight (not RHA equivalent) side protection of 310 mm, and a minimum of 80, right where the turret hydraulics (right) and ammo (left) are?
Kornet and especially Kornet-E can only be countrered by APS, infantry and CAS. Armour required to reliably stop is too much even on the front. And the MBT was never armored on the side and rear, with the West emphasising frontal 60 degree, and Soviets 70 degree.
Worse still, there are frontal weakspots on all tanks, like sensors, sights, mantle-barrel area etc.

The soviets used the ISU-152s to rape German armour. No WWII era armour was enough to save you from a direct hit from a 152mm shell.

Arab moral. Unless religion is involved they are useless. This is why my chips are still on ISIS.

IS-2 model 1944 was in every way an equal match to Tiger 2.

>I read somewhere IS-2 crews out jump out of the tank having come face to face with a tiger 2 at a distance
Yeah, Sup Forums's /natsoc/ general isnt great source to get your historic informations from.

Do you live under a rock? ISIS posted pictures and videos of ATGM hits and destroyed tanks.

If you see your enemies, they win

yes i am very aware about the rough start of the tiger 2 at the ostfront but at the end of the war but it was still superior against most tanks of the soviets(by that time) ofc the tiger 2 had many disadvantages and the well trained crews highly favoured the tiger 1h over the tiger 2.

but the first JS 3s were produced in may 1945 while the production of the tiger 2 started in 1943 and believe me: 2 years can make a hell of a difference

You mean better? Better protection on all sides, better penetration and after armour effect, better HE power, lower silhouette, better reliability, lower weight, lower cost.

>inb4 tards start crapping about L71 pen vs A-19 and not D-25T

Go read actual history

Except in accuracy, reload speed, penetration, ammo capacity and armour.

>Sovjets have no gun depression.

>German engineering
>bad
how's going you meme loving fuck?

sorosoro no jikan for challenger 2 to make an appearance

Hmm financing all sides of the war ??? I wonder who could be behind this ...

IS-2 (aka mod 1944), opposed to IS-122, is a better tank on almost all acounts.
Btw. rate of fire criteria is different, if anyone tries to point out that L71 could fire 10 aimed shots per minute because it is written so in a document.
Newsflash: it can't.

Also, I see imbeciles mentioned the "slow loading two piece ammunition". Think again, dipshits, the ammunition is two piece in order to increase the speed, because it was shown that loading long and heavy tank rounds in confined internal space is both slow and exhausting. There were versions of 122 mm with single piece ammo mounted on T-44 for example, but it was abandoned.

>works great when it works
lol
>if it breaks
*when

>muh kruppstahl
>muh 262s
lmao

>because of how unreliable it was.

>because of how bombed to shit the bearing factories were
FTFY

Allies fucked up every single building stone to make Germany's tanks. Part of it was design incompetence, sure, but a lot of it was because the Allies bombed everything to shit, causing substandard parts to be used, which causes shit to break.

Germans have the mentality that quality is always better than quantity.

It's never time for chally 2.

>muh world of tanks

except most their stuff was both low in quality and quantity

>Turkroaches don't know how to use a Leopard 2, its one of the fastest tanks for a fucking reason.

Sven even your army would lose them in such situations, all the tanks that where made in the late 70s/80s are cold war era tanks.
In the west they where made for defence in maneuver warfare on large open high intensity battlefields, not the low intensity urban warfare we see where all the shitskins live.

The only tanks that are actually somewhat designed for such situations are the BMPT or the T-15, witch are heavily armored all around, with fast firing mid caliber guns and minimal crew.

Uneven terrain + no gun depression = bad time bears.

Look at the sherman kitchen sink! Kraut fags are all like "pfff, my shit is better than yours" or "I will pwn in at CoD newb faggot!" but then burguers spawn 5 of them for each tiger and the krauts are pwned.

Thats how you win wars faggot.

So our glorious MoD just dropped a cover over the tank instead of painting it, don't know how to feel about this. Looks better I guess. Come to think of it the Army in general looks better than it did 10 years ago despite everything.

>stupid "common knowledge" nonsense: the post

Just for the laugh, would you be so kind and post the testing results of US tests done on L71 and D-25T?
Then you could post the dispersion and ballistic testing results of KwK 43 and D-25T. Finally, give us your appraisal of frontal and side protection for both tanks.

>German instructions and manuals urge side shots and flanking for JgPanthers and Tigers when dealing with IS

I remember reading wikipedia about the Allied bombing campaign and it ultimately concluded the bombing was inconsequential to the outcome of the war. Yet every fucking page about German tanks,planes or whatever mentions how they were crippled by Allies bombing the factories and supplies relentlessly.

Panzerschokolade

>have almost zero oil
>build stuff that requires a shit ton of oil to work
Superior thinking of superior race.

>allies were so afraid of German engineering that they developed and weaponized the first a-bomb
we didn't even need to lift a finger to make your grand parents shat their pants and run for papi Ahmed

SWEDEN YES