Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Relative cost of tanks - 44/5?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Relative cost of tanks - 44/5?

    Trying to put a price on tanks is next to impossible, because resources have a different cost to each nation. Some nations have easier access to some materials and/or cheaper/available manpower.

    However, I do believe it may be possible to come to an agreement about how many tanks can be fielded based on cost, transportability and maintenance/reliability relative to each other.

    For example, I recently stated that I reckon for each working Panther available to a commander, the same resources could be used to field 4 Shermans. I stand by that statement until better info comes along.

    In addition, due to the additional weight of the Churchill, and the apparant need to field the same level of maintenance afv's for 15/18 tank units compared with 20 strong M4 squadrons, I reckon you would only get 3 Churchills in the field for every 4 Shermans. Cromwells would probably be inbetween M4's and A22's in numbers.

    Therefore, I propose completing a table of relative costs of tanks. Of course it will be subjective, but I suggest the following is not completely unreasonable:

    1: King Tiger
    3: Tiger 1
    5: Panther
    10: M26
    15: Churchill
    16: IS-2
    18: Comet, Pz III
    19: Cromwell, Pz IV
    20: M4
    24: T-34

    Therefore, for each working King Tiger that could be fielded, I would suggest 16 IS-2's or 24 T-34's could be fielded for example.

    Just to point out this is not a table of combat power, just the relative costs of tanks compared to each other.

    Any opinions?
    How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
    Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

  • #2

    Good stuff Nick. I wish I had some way to compare but I don't. I will watch with huge interest and have to say I would spend good dollars on a book on the subject.
    John

    Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

    Comment


    • #3
      Very fun thread idea nick! Why not start with the smallest, cheapest tank we can and use it for a yard stick? Say the Tiger II is valued at 24 T-34's and a Panther is valued at 8 T-34's. This way, we can compare stuff bigger than a Tiger II, say...a submarine, or contemplate the infeasibility of the Maus project, etc...
      "In the absence of orders...find something and kill it!" Lt. General Erwin Rommel, 1942

      Comment


      • #4
        I base my assessment on the following main indicators, when sufficient info is available:
        • Man-hours
        • Quantities of the main materials used per tank (steel, copper, rubber etc) in Kg.
        • Energy and transport resources, if data are available. If not, just the first two.
        Last edited by panther3485; 23 Aug 12, 05:03.
        "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
        Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
          I base my assessment on the following main indicators, when sufficient info is available:
          • Man-hours
          • Quantities of the main materials used per tank (steel, copper, rubber etc) in Kg.
          • Energy and transport resources, if data are available. If not, just the first two.
          For the purposes of this thread, I wanted to go one stage further than this .

          When I stated 4 Shermans for each Panther, this was based on being able to produce and transport a tank to a location, and then include maintenance and reliability into the equation to see how many tanks would be actually able to fight for a set amount of resources. Thus I reckon 2 Shermans could be built and transported to a battlefield for each Panther, and then have twice as many available of those that have reached their destination due to the reliability/maintainability of those tanks.

          I'm hoping for a consensus on relative numbers of tanks that could be actually used for each 'unit' cost.
          How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
          Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
            For the purposes of this thread, I wanted to go one stage further than this .

            When I stated 4 Shermans for each Panther, this was based on being able to produce and transport a tank to a location, and then include maintenance and reliability into the equation to see how many tanks would be actually able to fight for a set amount of resources. Thus I reckon 2 Shermans could be built and transported to a battlefield for each Panther, and then have twice as many available of those that have reached their destination due to the reliability/maintainability of those tanks.

            I'm hoping for a consensus on relative numbers of tanks that could be actually used for each 'unit' cost.
            Yeah, gotcha. I was, obviously, looking at production only. Transportation, deployment and maintenance are additional factors. Perhaps we could use our relative poll outcomes for these, I mean, just as a starting point for the purpose of discussion?
            "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
            Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
              Yeah, gotcha. I was, obviously, looking at production only. Transportation, deployment and maintenance are additional factors. Perhaps we could use our relative poll outcomes for these, I mean, just as a starting point for the purpose of discussion?
              Go for it .
              How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
              Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

              Comment

              Latest Topics

              Collapse

              Working...
              X