188 ton Maus Tank From World War II

[Sayeret]

http://www.panzer.punkt.pl/artykuly/maus/maus_01.jpg

http://www.panzer.punkt.pl/artykuly/maus/maus_010.jpg

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/maus_77.jpg

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/maus_1.jpg

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/cmaus.jpg

http://www.panzer.punkt.pl/artykuly/maus/maus_09.jpg

Maus is the name of the largest tank design ever built. Designed in 1942 by Ferdinand Porsche under direct order from Adolf Hitler. The Maus would have had a crew of either 5 or 6. The tank's hull was 10.1 meters long, 3.67 meters wide and 3.66 meters tall. Weighing 188 tons, the Maus was armed with a 128mm cannon and a coaxial 75mm gun, and covered with 180-240mm of armor. Only two were produced. One was destroyed by the Germans at Kummersdorf to prevent its capture by the Soviets, and the sole surviving Maus tank is currently in the Kubinka Tank Museum in Russia. Nine others were in various stages of completion when the war ended. None ever saw combat.

A larger tank, the 1000-tonne Krupp P 1000 "Ratte", started construction but was cancelled before completion. It would have carried two 280mm guns (mounted in the same type of gun turret used in Scharnhorst and Gneisenau warships), a single 128mm gun, eight 20mm Flak 38 anti-aircraft guns and two 15mm Mauser MG 151/15 guns.

For more information and pictures:

http://www.panzer.punkt.pl/strony_www/maus.htm

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/pz7.htm

[Hawkeye]

Reminds me of Pzh2000

[ShapedCharge]

A larger tank, the 1000-tonne Krupp P 1000 "Ratte", started construction but was cancelled before completion. It would have carried two 280mm guns (mounted in the same type of gun turret used in Scharnhorst and Gneisenau warships), a single 128mm gun, eight 20mm Flak 38 anti-aircraft guns and two 15mm Mauser MG 151/15 guns.


WHAT???? Is that like a battleship on tracks????

[Hawkeye]

A larger tank, the 1000-tonne Krupp P 1000 "Ratte", started construction but was cancelled before completion. It would have carried two 280mm guns (mounted in the same type of gun turret used in Scharnhorst and Gneisenau warships), a single 128mm gun, eight 20mm Flak 38 anti-aircraft guns and two 15mm Mauser MG 151/15 guns.

How the f*** would they have done that?! That's like 13 guns and some of those guns are HUGE!

[Heinzi]

*counting second until P1000 and P1500 pictures are posted*
:lol:


Seriously
Building a tank like the Maus is just stupid. Tactical usefulness is VERY doubtfuly.

[Sayeret]

*counting second until P1000 and P1500 pictures are posted*

Here is a picture of what the P1000 or P1500 might have looked like if it was ever made:

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/1000_1.jpg

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/p1000.htm

[DE6]

Kruppe P 1000 "Ratte"

http://www.eksplorator.os.pl/p1a.jpg

http://www.eksplorator.os.pl/p1b.jpg

P1500
http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/bilder/p1000.jpg

[Heinzi]

*counting second until P1000 and P1500 pictures are posted*

Here is a picture of what the P1000 or P1500 might have looked like if it was ever made:

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/1000_1.jpg

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/p1000.htm

It was meant ironic ;)

But hey, its a integral part of the typical "crazy german tanks" thread :lol:

[Operation Ivy]

wasnt this the tank that was used as a road block p-)

[ShapedCharge]

http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/bilder/p1000.jpg

Now that is what is called a HEAVY tank.


http://www.eksplorator.os.pl/p1b.jpg

That hing coould destroy other tanks by riding over them!!!!

[Onyks]

Quite an impressive tank for its size and armament but it was foolish to even produce because of its lack of mobility. I remember hearing a few people say instead of a tank, this was supposed to be more of a somewhat mobile AT unit. Camouflaging this would have had to be quite a pain in the a**, it would be effective versus tanks but who knows what damage Allied aircraft were capable of?

[ShapedCharge]

Ok hold on to your seats people! The exact name for this one:
http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/bilder/p1000.jpg
Landkreuzer P-1000 "Ratte"
Translated as LANDCRUISER, so my assumption this beeng a battleship on tracks was not so very wrong.
Specs:
Weight 1000 tons
Powerplant 8000hp x 2 (ship diesels???)
Max speed 20kmph (Damn fast, considering that the Mouse tank did just a bit more while beeng smaller)

http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/bilder/p1500.jpg

Landkreuzer P-1500 "Monster"

Weight 1500 tons
Two submarine diesels 2000h each
Main gun 800mm
Defence 2 x 150mm

Huge tracked artillery. Now this looks better than the same gun on rails...

[Onyks]

The bottom gun does look alot better tracked instead of on rails but I wonder how fast it could travel. The rail-guns were fairly good because transportation by train was fairly fast, but if a giant like that were on tracks then I wonder.. Still, the Germans came up with alot of impressive weapons and plans for future ones in those times.

[Digital Marine]

Imagine that thing driving over your toes :|

[tenda]

impressive... :P

[Jack Mehoff]

Big bitch

[ShapedCharge]

It says here http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/p1500.html

it could go at an amasing max speed of 20kmph.


But here is a truly remarkable tank:
http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/bilder/neubau2.jpg
Here, you can see something very very similar to what has been brewing in my head for a long time, the concept of the Urban Combat Vehicle.

[CRAZY MERC]

Can you imagine this thing coming at you?

[ShapedCharge]

Wich one of them? :D

[Heinzi]

But here is a truly remarkable tank:
http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/bilder/neubau2.jpg
Here, you can see something very very similar to what has been brewing in my head for a long time, the concept of the Urban Combat Vehicle.


Its a PzKpfw "Nb.Fz."
Earlier called PzKpfw V
coaxial 7,5cm and 3,7 cm KwK. Front right and behind mg turrets. 1933
35 tons
6 crew

saw action in Norway p-)

[ShapedCharge]

Not in urban combat. I mean even with a panzerfaust, this thing has the option to shoot you n the rear and not move one inch. It can intecept infantry from any angle...

[stateofequilibrium]

Wow. One wonders though why the Germans focused so much on bigger heavier tanks at the end of the war when they were having a massive fuel crisis?

[Haiw]

Not in urban combat. I mean even with a panzerfaust, this thing has the option to shoot you n the rear and not move one inch. It can intecept infantry from any angle...
Did you know the Israelis actually have some kind of infantry fighting vehicle like that? Must be part of the zionist conspiracy! :lol:

[Heinzi]

Not in urban combat. I mean even with a panzerfaust, this thing has the option to shoot you n the rear and not move one inch. It can intecept infantry from any angle...

A common misconception. Multiturrets and extra mg turrets were considered useless after war expieriences.

Urban combat is 3 dimensional. You cant have a turret everywhere. Consider the required size of the tank, number of crew, weak armor and shot traps due to all the turrets.

[Sayeret]

A common misconception. Multiturrets and extra mg turrets were considered useless after war expieriences.

Urban combat is 3 dimensional. You cant have a turret everywhere. Consider the required size of the tank, number of crew, weak armor and shot traps due to all the turrets.

I wouldn't say that Multiple turrets are useless. They may not be as effective as having infantry but it can be better than just having one turret, especially if infantry are infront of and behind you.

[ShapedCharge]

My "dream vehicle" auto-aims turrets using IR, registeing muzzle flash, scope reflections, and lazer aiming in progress. The operator simply views suggested target on screen, and accepts or denies to let computer to open fire at it.

[Przezdzieblo]

But here is a truly remarkable tank:
http://www.panzerschreck.de/panzer/pzkpfw/bilder/neubau2.jpg
Here, you can see something very very similar to what has been brewing in my head for a long time, the concept of the Urban Combat Vehicle.


Its a PzKpfw "Nb.Fz."
Earlier called PzKpfw V
coaxial 7,5cm and 3,7 cm KwK. Front right and behind mg turrets. 1933
35 tons
6 crew

saw action in Norway p-)


The Neubaufahrzeug
The Neubaufahrzeug was never known as Pz.Kpfw. V or VI. The error origins from German newspapers being fed with tinformation to fol British intelligence.
Source --> http://www.panzerworld.net/facts.html#5


There were 5 Nb.Fz`s, included 2 experimental build with mild steel. 3 of Nb.Fz`s saw action in Norway, one never came back from there.

[hedgehog]

1000T tank.... that would be the ultimate RV. WOuld be useful right now for driving downtown Falluja without a scratch.

On multi-turret tanks... I remember the original German Marder APC in the 70s had an extra turret in the back as well as 4 firing ports. The turret has been removed andthe ports have given way for more armour. ANy info why this was done? Didn't the Bradley also have 4 firing ports?

[Heinzi]

Thanks for the interesting info Przezdzieblo! woot

[Longbranch]

One wonders though why the Germans focused so much on bigger heavier tanks at the end of the war when they were having a massive fuel crisis?
Probably because they were also suffering from a massive case of denial. Between Hitler spending the last months of the war moving non-existent (decimated) divisions around his maps, believing that Wenck's Army was just around the corner to saving Berlin, or hell years earlier, deactivating 40 divisions in the midst of Operation Barbarossa…

The terms "consequences of reality" and "Nazi leadership" don't seem to be related.

[Hiroshima]

The first Maus enganged Russian armor and did pretty good, but was overwhelmed and the crew self-destructed..the second one was deployed, but the crew surrendured. That one sat in Red Square...

[Ahriman]

Those large tanks would have been useless. As soon as they saw action the airforce would have destroyed or disabled them. They are slow and can't hide so they would have been very easy targets for rocket armed aircraft.

They also can't cross bridges or be repaired once disabled.

[Heinzi]

The first Maus enganged Russian armor and did pretty good, but was overwhelmed and the crew self-destructed..the second one was deployed, but the crew surrendured. That one sat in Red Square...

I never heard that before. Do you have a source for this?

[ShapedCharge]

Those large tanks would have been useless. As soon as they saw action the airforce would have destroyed or disabled them. They are slow and can't hide so they would have been very easy targets for rocket armed aircraft.

They also can't cross bridges or be repaired once disabled.

They would be just as effective as a naval vessle of theyr size, and exacly what they could do on the field is hard to say.

Remember, that all rocket armed aircraft or aircraft with cannons would go in a dive to attack them. And how many 20mm flaks does that thing have?

[Backis]

As far as I've heard they tried to engage with the single functional prototype (the other had a mock-up turret) when the Russians were closing on the factory, but ran out of fuel before contact and destroyed the vehicle themselves...

I do not know wich of the two prototypes is exhibited at Kubinka today.

[panzerwerk]

from what ive read the maus never saw combat , as the russians closed on the factory-test grounds , the twp prototypes were blown up , the russians pieced together one vehicle from the two destroyed prototypes and can be seen today in Kubinka tank museum.
http://www.jagdtiger.de/GermanTanks/Maus-04.jpg

[aartamen]

What was the name of that huge-ass american self-propelled gun? I forgot the designation and thus can't find any images. If it was smaller than Maus then not by much.

[Backis]

What was the name of that huge-ass american self-propelled gun? I forgot the designation and thus can't find any images. If it was smaller than Maus then not by much.

T28 or 105-mm Gun Motor Carriage T95

[Hullebullen]

Encyclopedia of german tanks in WW2 by Chamberlain/Doyle says that both prototype Maus V1 and V2 were destroyed by the personell at Kummelsdorf. AchtungPanzer says this indeed is the most widespread theory but also states that according to other sources prototype V2 actually saw action defending the Kummelsdorf area...

[aartamen]

Since one of them in Kubinka, it means that it was not completely destroyed.


T28 -

http://geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/1418/odbal163.jpg

[Hullebullen]

The one in Kubinka reportedly was pieced together by the russians from a third unfinished hull and the two destroyed prototypes...and the T28 never left the states if I remember correctly...

[panzerwerk]

the official Russian account , says they never faced the maus in combat , they came upon them already destroyed by there crews .

[Sayeret]

http://www.angelfire.com/tx4/bustersbattery/militrivia/MT6pic1.JPG

In the last year of World War II Germany was desperate. The Wehrmacht turned to "superweapons" which could give them a technological advantage that could overcome the numerical inferiority to the Allies in personnel and material. The trend in armor warfare seemed to point towards "bigger is better," so Germany designed the largest tank it could build: the Maus.

The "mouse" was truly a monster. It was 188 tons, armed with a 150mm main gun to easily destroy in enemy tank it might encounter and a 75mm coaxial gun to destroy lesser targets. Its armor was between 50mm and 200mm thick, which made it invulnerable to most tank and anti-tank armament then in use.

The powerful weapons and heavy armor of the Maus were outweighed, so to speak, by its sheer mass. The tank's maximum speed, despite the 1200 horsepower engine it boasted, was only 12 mph. This made blitzkrieg impossible for the lumbering Maus.

[talib_killa34]

Thanks! Loved reading about this! :)

[Roktiken]

Those large tanks would have been useless. As soon as they saw action the airforce would have destroyed or disabled them. They are slow and can't hide so they would have been very easy targets for rocket armed aircraft.

They also can't cross bridges or be repaired once disabled.

I doubt anything the American and Soviet Airforces had could of killed a Maus (Gun wise), bombs of courese if hit with a direct hit....but even then tanks have been known to of survived.

[tomcat1974]

From post war analise of the UK forces got out that very few tanks where actually destroyed by the rocket carring aircrafts(neither with guns , neither with rockets). Most of them where self destroyed by abandoning crew. What the aircraft did was complectly destroying the moral of the tank crew and most important destroyed the supply chain. No Fuel trucks passed, no ammo truck passed.. and you got you self a big number of metaj junks (that is a tank without ammo and fuel) .

[Przezdzieblo]

http://www.angelfire.com/tx4/bustersbattery/militrivia/MT6pic1.JPG

In the last year of World War II Germany was desperate. The Wehrmacht turned to "superweapons" which could give them a technological advantage that could overcome the numerical inferiority to the Allies in personnel and material. The trend in armor warfare seemed to point towards "bigger is better," so Germany designed the largest tank it could build: the Maus.
First prototype of Maus was build 1943/1944 (first test drive 24 XII 1943), project was from mid of 1942 and conception from end of 1941.


The "mouse" was truly a monster. It was 188 tons, armed with a 150mm main gun to easily destroy in enemy tank it might encounter and a 75mm coaxial gun to destroy lesser targets. Its armor was between 50mm and 200mm thick, which made it invulnerable to most tank and anti-tank armament then in use.
Maus (2nd prototype) was armed with a 12,8 cm KwK 44 L/55 128 mm (and coaxial 75 mm). First prototype probably never had turret and guns.

E-100 (very) heavy tank, if build, would have 150 (or even 170) mm main gun.

[Marmot1]

As far as I've heard they tried to engage with the single functional prototype (the other had a mock-up turret) when the Russians were closing on the factory, but ran out of fuel before contact and destroyed the vehicle themselves...

I do not know wich of the two prototypes is exhibited at Kubinka today.

Well both of them are displayed... ;-) Soviets rebuilded it from two destroyed prototypes adding some parts from production line... the one that was in runing condition was blown up by germans and had even turreat upside down... the reason why soviets rebuilded them was propaganda and as well for tests... they shot at them several times from various AT weapons... if you take a look at "Maus" in Kubinka you will notice several holes and scratches from those trials... it's from where there is myth that this tank saw action...