WW2 German tanks

So what if Germany had settled on one design (chassis/hull wise) for their tanks and got a proper assembly line working instead of having 37 smiths making ball bearings in their barns. Would it have had a noticeable impact on their tank production and production costs?

For this example let's say that instead of making the PzII, III, IV, 35 and 38, they went with only the Pz IV instead. It's close enough to the III to justify scrapping that, II could be replaced by armoured cars in function and the 35 and 38 were just there because the Czech factories were already tooled for them. The IV has a larger turret ring, so scrapping IV for III wouldn't be feasible. I know that this is a whole lot of hindsight, but in principle, theoretically, what impact would it have had?

I'm running an alt-history pnp and want to make it at least plausible, but my autism can only go so far.

I don't understand your question....if they settled on one tank instead of trying to build 379433 tanks all with different parts and chassis would it have affected the outcome?

I'm asking to what extent it would have affected the outcome. Would it have been enough to matter on the large scale or not?

you dont understand how it works

the tanks (dont call it tank, call it armor) have a purpose

in 1939 the purpose of armor was to quickly get behind enemy lines, a wreak havoc in the supply line
the PzII, 35 and 38 reflect that

then the war showed it is important to have your armor able to overcome other armor so you developed better protected and better armed vehicles

warfare develops, you cant say if they started procuding panthers in 1939 theyd win the war

the need did not rise, the technology was not there and certainly no experience of large armored battles

the czech series provided a great platform for SPGs and anti tank SPGs, so it was not as much of a wasted production

but even your flawed idea cant overcome one thing
the germans were running low on men, even on crews
it takes a long time to be able perfect driving a tank, to move in formation etc.
they wouldnt have enough to fully fill the ranks

Would have helped a fair bit hard to say exactly, should have just made tons of Panzer IV's and stugs, definitely would have helped the war effort and they could produce more and more efficiently.

If they had started producing m1 Abhams they would have won though. Better gear and more gear helps, that's a fact.

stugs were not well suited for offense having no turret, the panzer IV reached its max potential long before the last variants and its losses were heavy, leading to further losses in manpower

>Well achually...

I just said that this was a whole lot of hindsight.
The Panzer II was a placeholder until they could figure out their shit with III and IV, and the thing it was meant for - recon, could be done more efficiently by armoured cars at the time. The 35 and 38 were just convenient as they didn't have the III and IV lines fully going yet and needed to poop out more armour.
The III and IV were designed with mobile warfare fully in mind, so don't try to make it out to be like they were designed after II proved to be worth fuck all. The development you speak of happened when III switched from anti-tank role to infantry support role and IV switched from infantry support to AT, because it's larger turret ring could support larger guns. With only one chassis, both roles could be assigned to different variation of the same tank by using different turrets.
The experience was very much there with the Spanish civil war and it quickly became apparent that just protecting from small arms fire wasn't enough.
The Czech chassis worked just as well Pz IV chassis worked later in the war.

The manpower problem became a thing once the russians started outnumbering the German tanks by the hundreds and capturing entire armies. How did the russians manage to train tens of thousands of tank crews from peasants that had been shovelling shit all their lives?

>the tanks (dont call it tank, call it armor) have a purpose
>dont call it tank
Don't call tanks tanks? What in the fuck?

Stug on defence and the later models of the panzer IV were fine for dealing with anything short of Pershing's

>How did the russians manage to train tens of thousands of tank crews from peasants that had been shovelling shit all their lives?
Interesting historical note: Many Soviet tank instructors came from the agricultural field where they had experience with tractors for farming.

yes but you cant win a war by having no offensive capability, the enemy is too big and too numerous for you to have a deep defense where everything equally protected, instead you go for firebrigades who take care of any local breakthroughs, and for that, you need proper tanks
no it was not a placeholder, it was the standard vehicle for panzerdivisions

you sound like a retarded wehrabooo without actual knowledge, discussion is over

Germany is, and has been the premier manufacturer of industrial ball bearings

Panzer I was a training tank, Panzer II was an upscaled Pz I, both were meant to fill the gap while III and IV started rolling out of the factories. The III was meant to be the "standard vehicle" for their tank units, with the IV hauling ass behind. You're sperging out and implying I know fuck all, while you're the actual retard here. "I played Company of Heroes once, so I know stuff okay!!!" Turn off the computer and look at some more pretty tank pictures in your Osprey books, kiddo.

>itwasajoke.jpg
The point is, Germany never got to the point where mass produced tanks would just keep rolling off of assembly lines like the russians and americans did. What Germans had was a bunch of skilled craftsmen doing their own thing all over the place, which killed the mass production aspect.

Stug was super cheap though legit costed less than the panzer 3, and Tiger's and panthers were often used on defense as snipers while the Panzer IV's would be able to be firebrigades.

>kiddo
>hauling ass
>tank units

american sperg, leave

Not american, you're just fully autistic. Nice counterpoints though, you really showed me how wrong I am and shined in your infinite wisdom.

with a single big factory you just create an easy target for allied bombers, the war would end in 1940 with an allied victory

True, but for such a high profile target, the Germans would probably either put it somewhere underground, like the V-2 production, or surround it with flak-tower like AA fortifications. Also it doesn't have to be strictly one megafactory, just more centralized than what was happening IRL. Though yes, having such a dispersed production helped with ignoring the strategic bombing losses, no question about that.

Maybe get women to work that MIGHT be a good idea.

Well imagine Speer got around to reforming the industrial system earlier.

Should have commited to total war earlier, ideology held them back

Germans did not even think of putting factories underground until very late in WWII. Flak also became more common when allied bombings had been going on for a wile. Dispersed production was a strategic decision. Germans started this war. Germans prepared for this war for many years.

>Germans did not even think of putting factories underground until very late in WWII.
Yes
>Flak also became more common when allied bombings had been going on for a wile.
Yes
>Dispersed production was a strategic decision.
No, it was an ideological decision. Mass production would require large amounts of relatively low skilled workers working a line. German ideology prided itself on fine craftsmanship, which in turn kept the industry dispersed. Same with not using women in the factories.
>Germans started this war.
Yes
>Germans prepared for this war for many years.
No, Germany was okay with going to war if needed, but they were in no way prepared for a long war. What saved them during the early years was that they embraced manoeuvrer warfare, while most of their adversaries were stuck with position warfare. When they entered war in 1939, most of their Versailles-breaking "Make Germany great again" projects were far from complete, which is why they chose to integrate the Czech tanks into their ranks. Germany didn't go into full war economy before Speer took over in 42, and by then their forces had already bogged down and were suffering from huge casualties because the equipment they needed was 3 years behind schedule.

There is a subtle difference between preparing and being prepared for everything.

Not prepared for everything, just prepared for a conflict on that scale. Because Poland led them into a world war, their best option was to keep the momentum up, and roll over as much of Europe as they could. So far so good, but they did not have the means to keep supporting the war at that point, at least with all the ideological and bureaucratic meddling going on. Every day of increased peacetime production would have helped them in the end, there was just a skewed mentality about what the production to support their ambitions had to be like. Had they actually been preparing, they would have done what Russia or the USA did and squeeze the last out of their production.

He's right though, the PzKpfw. II was never meant to be a MBT, or whatever you wanna call it, but it was the only tank aivable in large numbers. Tanks weren't even seen as the most important component of an army until after the Battle of France, if I remember correctly.

*available

no, Germany's problems went far deeper than having too many tank designs