Anyone a wwII tank guru?

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
Ive read on wiki that it was a substitute for the panzer III, does that mean it was the same as a panzer III performance wise? Was it better/worse than a panzer III?

Why didn't they force the czech factories to make panzer III's for a more standardized army?
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
The 38(t) was a light tank like the Panzer II but slower while better armed and armoured. The Panzer III was a medium tank.

I see, so i guess it was a poor substitute for the panzer III, but if they needed one it was the closest they had.
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
20,553
3,714
126
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
The 38(t) was a light tank like the Panzer II but slower while better armed and armoured. The Panzer III was a medium tank.

Correct - although different models had different variations. (Oh how those germans loved to add letters after the model) Also, the Germans did not really come up with the 38(t) as it was, at first, a stolen Czech design and then a modifed one. It was generally thought of as better than the Pz II. The Pz III was germay's bread and butter model model till 1942 ish when the Pz IV took over.

IIRC the 38(t) didn't see much action on the eastern front and was mainly used to garrison France and the balkands after those conquests

Originally posted by: Soviet
Why didn't they force the czech factories to make panzer III's for a more standardized army?

They were tooled up for 38(t) designs and they were better than the PzIIs being produced in 1938 (PZ IIIs really didn't come into play till later 1939) that were being created at the time and the chasis proved to be very very versatile. Eventually though, the factories were converted to standard German tank production
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Hindsight is always 20/20. Maybe that would have turned the tide?

You have absoltuely no clue, eh?

theres a :cookie:, enjoy.