Tiger (P) question

[Stirling]

Hey guy's can you help me out?

the porsche chassis (VK 4501) proposed for the tiger that was rejected and used for the Elefant/ferdinand tank destroyer used the petrol electric principle right? 2 x 320hp engines which powered electric motors that ran the drive sprockets right?
But it looks like it has drive sprockets front AND rear did each motor power a different pair of sprockets? can you tell me please?

Also Do you think Ferdinand Porsche is over rated as far as tank design is concerned? a creative genius sure, but what did he design that was used????
(except for the Elefant and we know how that turned out I read the vk4501 chassis got stuck many times during tests)

And his design's had horrible ballistics, the kingtiger porsche turret's gun mantlet was a dangerous shot trap! and others were too box like.
what are your thoughts????

Cheers
Stirling

[Sam]

Hi,

Unlike most German tank designs of WWII, the Elefant was driven by the two rear sprockets. The two front sprockets were not powered.
Regards,
Sam

[Stirling]

Thanks Sam
that solves that one, But why use a sprocket as an Idler? did it have any advantages? It seem's abit odd

Oh, and Im still interested in any thoughts you guy's have on ferdinand porsche as a tank designer I think the petrol-electric drive was over complicated and the Maus II was the wrong direction to go as far as tanks are concerned.

Whats your opinion?
Stirling

[cbo]

Thanks Sam
that solves that one, But why use a sprocket as an Idler? did it have any advantages? It seem's abit odd

You can see the same thing in the British Churchill tank.



In the case of the Churchill, it was a throw-back to the British WWI tanks where it proved troublesome. As the track was stretched due to wear, it would not easily align itself with the teeth on both front and rear sprockets.
It would appear, that the argument for the use of a toothed idler wheel was to prevent the track from working itself off the idler in a rear-drive tank. Which kinda makes sense, as the Porsche Tiger/Ferdinand had rear-drive as well. Obviously, those concerns ceased to bother late war tank-designers

Claus B

[Stirling]

Thanks claus

nice picture, I forgot the churchill had two spockets

cheers anyway

Stirling (no hat today)

[pchwastiak]

Stirling
You are correct, the Elephant had two V12 petrol engines each coupled to an
electric generator. The generators powering two electric motors which drove the rear sprockets.
The system was such that if one petrol engine failed the elephant could still be driven albeit with half power.
Why electric drive, it deleted the need for a complicated gear box and steering system like that used in the Tiger.
The reason for the front sprockets is because they housed the brakes.
Unlike other german tanks which had brakes inside the hull the Elepant had brake shoes located within the front sprockets, hence the reason for the teeth.

[Stirling]

Thanks pchwastick

That's just what I'm after. But, one last question
Did it use a gearbox between the electric motors and the drive sprockets? or was there just a rheostat (like a light dimmer) to increase/lower the speed?
Any thoughts my australian friend? or anyone else
That will be my last question on the infernal VK4501 chassis OK

I have a new queery on the use of a paticular Panther in the Ardennes, so start studying up boys and girls...

Bye and have a nice day everyone!
Stirling

[pchwastiak]

Stirling
As far as I can tell from the information I have you are right.
Each petrol engine was fitted with a DC generator. The generators fed power into a control system located in between the driver and radio operator. This control system intern controlled the speed and direction of rotation of each track DC electric motor.
There was no mechanical gearbox or steering box.
DC electrical control systems had been used for years in trams and were fairly well developed in the 1940's.