SUPER-HEAVY TANKS OF WORLD WAR II KENNETH W. ESTES ILLUSTRATED BY IAN PALMER © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com NEW VANGUARD 216 SUPER-HEAVY TANKS OF WORLD WAR II KENNETH W. ESTES ILLUSTRATED BY IAN PALMER © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 4 DEVELOPING THE SUPER-HEAVY TANK, 1918–40 5 (cid:116)(cid:1) Char 2C (cid:116)(cid:1) Initial Progress to 1940: Design and Specifications of Super-heavy Tank FCM F1 WAR AND THE TANK PROGRAMS, 1939–45 9 (cid:116)(cid:1) TOG Super-heavy Tanks (cid:116)(cid:1) KV-4 Super-heavy Tank Project (cid:116)(cid:1) German Super-heavies: Maus, E-100, and Jagdtiger (cid:116)(cid:1) Final Converts to the Super-heavy Category: Japan’s O-I, The American T-28, and Britain’s Tortoise A39 SUMMARY 46 FURTHER READING 46 INDEX 48 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com SUPER-HEAVY TANKS OF WORLD WAR II INTRODUCTION Popular historical surveys treating tank development may reach back to war wagons and mobile forts once drawn by no less a visionary than Leonardo da Vinci, as well as early examples and improvisations dating from Muscovy and the Hussite Rebellion. Although tanks and tank warfare also may claim antecedents in chariots and cavalry arms of the ancients, modern tanks reflect equally the evolution of siege machines. The inescapable fact remains that tanks emerged as early innovations to break the deadlock of ground combat early in the twentieth century. The super-heavy tanks of World War II owe their existence to the siege machine tradition. As a class of fighting vehicle, they began in the World War I concept of the search for a breakthrough tank. Without earlier improvements to the internal combustion engine, metal fabrication and rapid-firing weapons, their introduction would have been much delayed. The World War I Western Front provided the immediate military problem that caused their later development. We will classify the super-heavy tanks as armored fighting vehicles of 70 metric tons or more, borrowing from the briefly expounded US Army 80 short-ton criteria of 1946. There was never an international standard. We should not be surprised that the breakthrough tank projects of the period prior to World War II took place in the armies suffering the greatest casualties of the Great War (Russia, France, Germany). Herein we find the progenitors of the World War II super-heavy tanks, worthy of mention in our introduction and concept development. Although only the French Army had on hand some of these super-heavy breakthrough tanks at the beginning of World War II, the major armies sooner or later began projects aimed at fielding updated versions of them, as well as equally super-heavy tanks intended to dominate the armored battlefield. The latter category became the almost exclusive domain of the German Army as it operated under the twin pressures of its diminishing operational prospects in the war, plus the increasingly convoluted activities of the industrial leadership. Although a very small number of super-heavy tanks were built or saw active World War II service in the armies of the major powers, it remains clear that their impressive appearance and specifications have captured the interest of armored fighting vehicle enthusiasts, pundits, and military personnel. 4 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com Once discovered, the search is on for more information. In many respects, this appeal stems from the engineering feats undertaken by these projects, where improvisations of auto or locomotive manufacture often sufficed for smaller fighting vehicles. The super-heavies exceeded the imagination of most contemporary tank users and designers and, even today, occupy the top shelf in the pantheon of tank and armored fighting vehicle history. DEVELOPING THE SUPER-HEAVY TANK, 1918–40 The first practical modern tanks, conceived and developed by the British Army, went into action on the Somme front on September 15, 1916. They were large rhomboid-shaped armored tractors that contained propulsion machinery, machine guns, cannon, and crews within a single chassis, protected against bullets and artillery shell fragments. Their peculiar shape enabled trenches of up to 2.44m to be crossed. The descriptive term “tank” was applied largely as a security cover for their development by the British and supplanted the awkward alternative term of “landship.” Employed to cross barbed wire and destroy opposing machine-gun positions, they gained increasing success in the war when employed en masse, with accompanying infantry and artillery support. Hundreds of tanks saw action in the following years in the British and French armies, including some lighter, two-man models, some featuring rotating turrets for employing weapons. The Germans managed to field only a few dozen machines for lack of incentive and materials. Although the Allies developed faster machines, the tanks put into action remained, in general, walking-speed, limited-endurance fighting vehicles, tied to an infantry support role and serving as a form of armored battering ram or siege machine. By 1918, both the German and French armies planned a new generation of tanks that would play a decisive role in 1919, each hoping to break the deadlock on the battlefield. The German General Staff took little The K-Wagen remained very nautical in its arrangements, typical of early landships. The commander and his gunnery officer observed from his cupola (bridge) and issued orders to the two drivers/ helmsmen, who had no vision ports of their own. He issued orders to his batteries of guns and machine guns to engage targets. They would have been transported by rail in sections of approximately 30 tons and reassembled a few kilometers behind the front. Its scale model is paired here with the conventional A7V, which would have borne the lion’s share of action had the war continued for the German Army, supported initially by the K-Wagen. (Photo and models by Steven Zaloga) 5 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com interest initially in tanks, which had not proved decisive at the outset, and in any case the plan for 1917 was to defend in the West while the decisive moves took place in  the  East. However, improvements in the British tanks and the need to return to the offensive in the West provoked new policies in 1917. Their slowly evolving A7V was ordered into low- rate production in early 1917, but further efforts were ordered before it was ready. A supporting giant tank was proposed to The two K-Wagen breakthrough augment the A7V, the GrossKampf-Wagen (K-Wagen), with a planned tanks neared completion at the size of 150 tons, sporting four 77mm fortress guns and seven machine Riebe Works in Berlin, 1918. guns, and powered by two marine diesel engines. Finally, ten vehicles were Their characteristics: weight, ordered on June 28, 1917, taking shape as somewhat smaller vehicles 120 metric tons; length, 13m; width, 6.1m; height, 3m; trench of around 120 tons. Two bridge-building firms were contracted for crossing, 4m; armor, 30mm their assembly, estimating a year to build. The track was adopted from maximum (front and side). excavation machinery. Armament: 4x 77mm fortress In October 1917, they were re-evaluated by the General Staff as suitable guns; 7x 7.92mm machine guns. Engine: 2x V-6 Daimler- only for static warfare, not exploitation. By the Armistice, two of the K-Wagen Benz diesels, each 650hp. designs were nearly completed (one without engines) by Reibe Ballbearing Speed: 8kph. Crew: 27. Works at Berlin, and another neared completion at Wegmann Carriage Works (Photo NARA) at Kassel. The Germans dismantled all under close inspection of the Allies. Char 2C The French Army mostly followed the guidance of General Jean Baptiste Eugène Estienne in the development and formation of its tank arm, leading, among many innovations, to the fielding of the FT-17 light tank, which had the first rotating turret and could be produced en masse as an infantry accompanying tank. Yet he also subscribed to a heavy tank concept, much heavier and more tactically focused than the artillerie d’assault vehicles, such as the Saint Chamond and Schneider. He saw the need for a heavy tank for every three to four light tanks as early as February 1917. The La Seyne (Toulon) shipyard of the Forges de Chantier de Méditerranée (FCM) already had heavy tank designs in development, and with the encouragement of Estienne proposed a super-heavy vehicle of some 68 tons, carrying a turret-mounted 75mm gun, armored to at least 35mm, capable of crossing trenches of 4.5m width. The ensuing political and military dialogue eventually produced a plan for 300 Char 2C in Plan 1919. The Armistice produced sharp markdowns in procurement, and only ten of the super-heavies would be funded. Once in hand, with the last Char 2C delivered in 1921, the French Army had the unique position of having such vehicles for experimentation and subsequent development of doctrine for their employment. Because of its age 6 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com in 1939, the Char 2C may be mistaken for an antique artifact of a bygone era. The second FCM 2C to be However, a number of breakthroughs were achieved in its engineering. It ranks completed, later named Picardy, on the grounds of the as the first operational tank to weigh 70 metric tons. Some other “firsts” include: FCM shipyard. The four   machine guns are not fitted, (cid:114)(cid:1) Trench crossing in excess of 4m (4.5m achieved) but the photo shows the (cid:114)(cid:1) Mounting a long-barrel 75mm in an armored turret unique cupola on the 75mm (cid:114)(cid:1) Mounting an auxiliary machine-gun turret (for clearing trenches and gun turret (and the rear machine-gun turret), which rear protection) rotated at 300rpm inside a (cid:114)(cid:1) Mounting a machine gun in the hull front similar static cylinder giving (cid:114)(cid:1) Engine power over 500hp stroboscopic vision to the (cid:114)(cid:1) Division of compartments: driver, fighting, and engine (the modern occupant through the vertical slits, yet remained impervious standard) to small-arms fire. (Photo (cid:114)(cid:1) Unique use of stroboscopic viewing devices for its turrets Marius Bar, Toulon)   Although notions of heavy breakthrough tanks appeared in British, German, and Russian studies and plans between the wars, the French explored these concepts in greater detail. Thus during the period 1918 to 1940 the French Army pursued a program of heavy-tank development, beginning with the Char 2C of 70 metric tons, and analyzed lessons and experiences drawn from World War I. The conception and construction of the Maginot Line also played an important part in the development of a series of French heavy and super-heavy tank studies and designs. These emerging designs variously sought to fight enemy tanks, halt enemy breakthroughs, assault enemy fortifications, and fit into the scheme of French defensive works, such as the Maginot Line. Studies initially worked around a specified maximum weight of 45 tons, but this factor increased because of additional armament and armor. By the late 1920s, the designs of chars de forteresse (fortress tanks) called for 100-ton machines protected by 100–150mm armor plating and mounting high-velocity 75mm cannon. By 1938, the requirement for 90mm cannon capable of firing against the embrasures of fortifications and employing flamethrowers entered into play. Various designs included 7 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com The FCM 2C required no a skeleton tank, an articulated tank, paired cannon, the installation of two disassembly for rail transport, turrets, a tank capable of being disassembled and transported by train, and although the forward cupola a tank mounted on railway bogie wagons. The coming of World War II then was dismounted in this caused some rapid decisions, and many proposals for tanks weighing 140 or instance for overhead clearance. The specialized rail even 220 tons therefore did not get off the drawing-board. On April 13, transport bogies permitted this, 1940, the eighth meeting of the Commission on Fortress Tanks convened, on flat and stable rail lines viewing proposals from industry, and immediately ordered ten vehicles from using four 35-ton hydraulic FCM, designated the F1, to be ready for operations in May–June 1941. The jacks, dunnage, and other support gear. (Photo Marius events of June 1940 made the order superfluous. Bar, Toulon) This action, however, did most likely explain the strange odyssey of the old FCM 2C tanks, of which only eight were capable of further service in 1939, once re-engined with Maybach engines that had been held in storage since they were taken as reparations in 1919. At first kept for possible offensive operations against the Germans in the event the Poles held off the initial German attacks, such deployment was canceled and the 51st Tank Battalion continued training using the FCM 2C, likely to maintain cadre for new super-heavy tanks expected to be produced during the war. When ordered to evacuate to the south by the Third Army, two tanks out of repair had to be destroyed on June 13, 1940. The remaining six were rendered unusable days later on their rail undercarriages, caught in the general withdrawal without their locomotives in a defile with no chance of offloading. They were later hauled off to Germany as trophies and salvage. Initial Progress to 1940: Design and Specifications of Super-heavy Tank FCM F1 The FCM F1 order never progressed beyond the full-scale wooden mockup the manufacturer had demonstrated to the commission in order to win the contract. It does present a benchmark for the continued evolution of this type of vehicle, however, in terms of technology and engineering. A true “land battleship” weighing 139 metric tons combat-loaded, it featured two turrets 8 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com oriented to its various missions. The primary turret, raised to permit 360-degree rotation, carried a variation of the naval DCA Model 1926 90mm/L50 (L=barrel length in calibers) antiaircraft gun with 88 rounds of ammunition. It was considered capable of sniping the weapons embrasures of enemy forts, thereby knocking them out of action. This was a remarkable feat, considering that the characteristics of the German West Wall forts remained unknown to foreign intelligence. The second turret carried the Model 1937 47mm antitank gun, with 100 rounds. This would have been the weapon of choice against tanks in the fortress-tank mission of stopping breakthroughs or operating in the intervals of the Maginot Line. Mounted forward, it had a blind zone of about 100 degrees of its rearward arc. Six 8mm Hotchkiss machine guns rounded out the weaponry: dual mount in the bow (30-degree arc), one each side (30-degree arc), and a gun in each turret. Armor protection averaged 100mm all around (sloped frontally) to a maximum of 120mm. The crew of nine men (three fewer than that of the Char 2C) operated the weapons, radios, and the two 12-cylinder Renault KGM gasoline engines of 550hp each, which powered the Alsthol electrical drive system. Endurance of 200km on roads was planned, providing the 20kph top speed was sparingly used. As in the case of the smaller Char 2C, rail transport required the use of special bogie- heel assemblies to which the tanks were joined at each end via hydraulic jacks. Accordingly, these tanks also had relatively narrow hulls because of required rail transport conditions. Had France managed to stop the German offensives in 1940, and had stalemate ensued as in 1914, the FCM F1 tanks could have entered service the next year, six months in advance of the first appearance of the German Tiger heavy tank. Together with the improved versions of the Char B heavy tanks and the Somua medium tanks, the French Army would have ironically fielded and operated the most modern tank force in the world during 1941–42. WAR AND THE TANK PROGRAMS, 1939–45 The opening moves of World War II in Europe in 1939 brought to an end the period of experimentation conducted in the preceding decade. The German pattern of the all-arms formation of tanks, mechanized infantry, engineers, artillery, and motorized logistic support, supported by tactical air power, became the new standard for the major warring powers. Developments of tanks and their components now settled upon three distinct classes of evolution: the light, medium, and heavy tank, of approximately 10, 25, and 50 tons. Although armies had expected the antitank guns to dominate the battlefield as they had in the Spanish Civil War, tank mobility, armor, and firepower had advanced sufficiently by 1940 such that a new paradigm operated. Instead of the machine guns and light cannon of the previous decade, tanks in World War II carried main guns of up to 152mm bore, numerous machine guns, and even flame weapons or rocket launchers on occasion. Improved running gear and specially designed or modified engines permitted speeds in excess of 30kph. The armor protection by the end of the war exceeded the penetration power of all but the most unwieldy and heavy antitank artillery. Tank cannon now had to penetrate the armor of their opponents, and a number of specialized vehicles 9 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com emerged for direct-fire support (assault guns, close-support tanks), antitank missions (tank hunters or tank destroyers), reconnaissance, engineering, tank recovery, and antiaircraft roles. Most importantly, the operational doctrine for tank employment began to exploit not only the tank, but also accompanying mechanized troops of all arms, supporting aircraft and a fluid command style that permitted the exploitation of breakthroughs or weaknesses in the opposition forces, so that systemic collapses could be inflicted upon whole field armies. This doctrinal concept of rapid warfare, developed during the 1920s by the German Army, took advantage of tank and mechanized equipment developed in the 1930s to effect quick results on the battlefield not feasible in the previous era of foot and horse-mobile armies. Through 1941, the German concept, dubbed Blitzkrieg in foreign quarters, worked well as long as opponents could not manage to respond to German maneuvers or attack their vulnerable logistics. TOG Super-heavy Tanks The British Army staff recognized at the outset of World War II that its tank arm had stagnated despite some theoretical progress achieved via experiments undertaken in the 1930s. Even as wartime production began to take form, the new Ministry of Supply sought novel designs and ideas to counter the obvious German advantages demonstrated in the campaign against Poland. Even before the outbreak of war, the Secretary of State for War, Mr. Leslie Hore-Belisha had invited Sir Albert Stern to discuss mechanized warfare evolutions since 1918. On September 5 he notified Stern, who had headed the original Landship Program that developed the first British tanks in the previous war, that he welcomed his “suggestion to explore the possibility of designing and constructing a special tank.” By then 62 years of age and having returned to his banking profession, Stern reactivated many of his previous associates to join his new committee, including naval constructor Sir Eustace d’Eyncourt, Major General Sir Ernest Swinton, engineer Major Walter G. Wilson and Sir William Tritton, the last CHAR 2C IN BATTLE, 1940   A In September 1939, the eight operational FCM 2C were held ready in the fortified region for defense of the Maginot Line intervals during a German attack or to attack enemy fortifications in the event the Poles held out and an attack on the Siegfried Line in the Saar Region became necessary. However, engine problems and the deterioration of their electrical wiring made almost any movement a complex operation. In the fighting of June 1940, the high command moved the vehicles out of the fighting front. But in this hypothetical situation, Third Army has ordered the 51st Tank Battalion into action on June 14, 1940. Near Gondrecourt-le-Château, seeing elements of French cavalry tanks retreating southward, Lieutenant Colonel Fournet drove ahead of his six tanks in a sedan, and then stood aside as the lead tank 97 “Normandie” broke through the tree line and fired its 75mm gun into a pair of Panzer III medium tanks with devastating effect as the Panzer II light tanks scurried for cover and concealment and the other five giants arrived. The victory was short-lived, however, as German Stuka dive-bombers came upon the scene and three of the Char 2C were left behind, in ruins. Nevertheless, the crews were elated at finally having a chance to rub out several panzers. The 70-ton Char 2C carried a crew of 12 men. With dimensions of 10.27m long, 3m wide, and 3.8m high, it crossed trenches of 4.25m, climbed obstacles 1.7m high, and forded 1.4m streams. Maximum radius of action was 150km and maximum speed 12–15kph. Armor consisted of 45mm front, 22mm side, 13mm top, 10mm bottom, 35mm forward turret, 22mm rear turret. 10 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com