The Tiger I was a German heavy tank used in World War II, produced from late 1942 as an answer to the unexpectedly formidable Soviet armour encountered in the initial months of Operation Barbarossa, particularly the T-34 and the KV-1. The Tiger I design gave the Wehrmacht its first tank mounting the 88 mm gun, which had previously demonstrated its effectiveness against both aircraft and tanks. During the course of the war, the Tiger I saw combat on all German battlefronts. It was usually deployed in independent tank battalions, which proved to be quite formidable.

While the Tiger I was feared by many of its opponents, it was over-engineered, expensive and time-consuming to produce. Only 1,347 were built between August 1942 and August 1944. The Tiger was prone to mechanical breakdowns and in 1944, production was phased out in favour of the Tiger II.

The tank was given its nickname by Ferdinand Porsche, and the Roman numeral was added after the later Tiger II entered production. The initial official German designation was Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausführung H (‘Panzer VI version H’, abbreviated PzKpfw VI Ausf. H), but the tank was redesignated as PzKpfw VI Ausf. E in March 1943. It also had the ordnance inventory designation SdKfz 181.

Today only a handful of Tiger Is survive in museums and exhibitions worldwide. Perhaps the most notable specimen is the Bovington Tank Museum's Tiger 131, currently the only one restored to running order.

Design

The Tiger differed from earlier German tanks principally in its design philosophy. Its predecessors balanced mobility, protection, and firepower, and were sometimes out gunned by their opponents.

The Tiger I represented a new approach that emphasised firepower and armour at the expense of mobility. Design studies for a new heavy tank had been started in 1937, without any production planning. Renewed impetus for the Tiger was provided by the quality of the Soviet T-34 encountered in 1941. Although the general design and layout were broadly similar to the previous medium tank the Panzer IV, the Tiger weighed more than twice as much. This was due to its substantially thicker armour, the larger main gun, and the consequently greater volume of fuel and ammunition storage, larger engine, and more solidly-built transmission and suspension.

Armour

The Tiger I had frontal hull armour thick and frontal turret armour of , as opposed to the frontal hull and frontal turret armour of contemporary models of the Panzer IV. It also had thick hull side plates and 80 mm armour on the side superstructure and rear, turret sides and rear was 80 mm. The top and bottom armour was thick; from March 1944 the turret roof was thickened to . Armour plates were mostly flat, with interlocking construction. The armour joints were of high quality, being stepped and welded rather than riveted.

Gun

The gun breech and firing mechanism were derived from the famous German "88" dual purpose flak gun. The 88 mm Kwk 36 L/56 gun was the variant chosen for the Tiger and was, along with the Tiger II's 88 mm Kwk 43 L/71, one of the most effective and feared tank guns of World War II. The Tiger's gun had a very flat trajectory and extremely accurate Zeiss Turmzielfernrohr TZF 9b sights (later replaced by the monocular TZF 9c). In British wartime firing trials, five successive hits were scored on a target at a range of . Tigers were reported to have knocked out enemy tanks at ranges greater than , although most World War II engagements were fought at much shorter ranges.

Ammunition used

• PzGr.39 (Armour Piercing Capped Ballistic Cap)
• PzGr.40 (Armour Piercing Composite Rigid)
• Hl. Gr.39 (High Explosive Anti-Tank)
• Sch Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (Incendiary Shrapnel)

Mobility

The Tiger tanks were too heavy for most bridges, so it was designed to ford four-meter deep water. This required unusual mechanisms for ventilation and cooling when underwater. At least 30 minutes of set-up was required, with the turret and gun being locked in the forward position, and a large snorkel tube raised at the rear. Only the first 495 units were fitted with this deep fording system; all later models were capable of fording only two meters.

The rear of the tank held an engine room flanked by two floodable rear compartments each containing a fuel tank, radiator, and fans. The petrol (gasoline) engine was a 21-litre 12-cylinder Maybach HL 210 P45 with 650 PS (641 hp, 478 kW). Although a good engine, it was inadequate for the vehicle. From the 250th Tiger, it was replaced by the uprated HL 230 P45 (23 litres) with 700 PS (690 hp, 515 kW). The engine was in V-form, with two cylinder banks at 60 degrees. An inertial starter was mounted on its right side, driven via chain gears through a port in the rear wall. The engine could be lifted out through a hatch on the hull roof.

The engine drove front sprockets, which were mounted quite low. The eleven-tonne turret had a hydraulic motor powered by mechanical drive from the engine. A full rotation took about a minute. The suspension used sixteen torsion bars, with eight suspension arms per side. To save space, the swing arms were leading on one side and trailing on the other. There were three road wheels on each arm, giving a good cross-country ride. The wheels had a diameter of and were overlapped and interleaved. Removing an inner wheel that had lost its tire (a common occurrence) required the removal of several outer wheels also. The wheels could also become packed with mud or snow that could then freeze. Eventually, a new 'steel' wheel design, closely resembling those on the Tiger II, with an internal tire was substituted, and which like the Tiger II, were only overlapped, and not interleaved.

To support the considerable weight of the Tiger, the tracks were an unprecedented wide. To meet rail-freight size restrictions, the outer row of wheels had to be removed and special wide transport tracks installed. With a good crew, a track change took 20 minutes.



Another new feature was the Maybach-Olvar hydraulically-controlled pre-selector gearbox and semi-automatic transmission. The extreme weight of the tank also required a new steering system. Instead of the clutch-and-brake designs of lighter vehicles, a variation on the British Merritt-Brown single radius system was used. The Tiger's steering system was of twin radius type, meaning that two different, fixed radii of turn could be achieved at each gear; the smallest radius on the first gear was four meters. Since the vehicle had an eight-speed gearbox, it thus had sixteen different radii of turn. If a smaller radius was needed, the tank could be turned by using brakes. The steering system was easy to use and ahead of its time. However, the tank's automotive features left much to be desired. When used to tow an immobilised Tiger, the engine often overheated and sometimes resulted in an engine breakdown or fire, so Tiger tanks were forbidden by regulations to tow crippled comrades. The low-mounted sprocket limited the obstacle-clearing height. The tracks also had a bad tendency to override the sprocket, resulting in immobilisation. If a track overrode and jammed, two Tigers were normally needed to tow the tank. The jammed track was also a big problem itself, since due to high tension, it was often impossible to disassemble the track by removing the track pins. It was sometimes simply blown apart with an explosive charge. The standard German Famo recovery tractor could not tow the tank; up to three tractors were usually needed to tow one Tiger.

Crew compartment

The internal layout was typical of German tanks. Forward was an open crew compartment, with the driver and radio-operator seated at the front on either side of the gearbox. Behind them the turret floor was surrounded by panels forming a continuous level surface. This helped the loader to retrieve the ammunition, which was mostly stowed above the tracks. Two men were seated in the turret; the gunner to the left of the gun, and the commander behind him. There was also a folding seat for the loader. The turret had a full circular floor and 157 cm headroom.

Cost

A major problem with the Tiger was its very high production cost. During the Second World War, over 40,000 American Shermans and 58,000 Soviet T-34s were produced, compared to 1,347 Tiger Is and 492 Tiger IIs. The German designs were expensive in terms of time, raw materials and Reichsmark, the Tiger I costing over twice as much as a contemporary Panzer IV and four times as much as a StuG III assault gun. The closest counterpart to the Tiger from the United States was the M26 Pershing (around 200 deployed during the war) and IS-2 from the USSR (about 3,800 built during the war).

Design history

Henschel & Sohn began development of the vehicle that eventually became the Tiger I in January 1937 when the Waffenamt requested Henschel to develop a Durchbruchwagen (breakthrough vehicle) in the 30 tonne range. Only one prototype hull was ever built and it never was mounted with a turret. The Durchbruchwagen I general shape and suspension greatly resembled the Panzer III while the turret would have greatly resembled the early Panzer IV C turret with the short barrelled 7.5 cm L/24 cannon. Before Durchbruchwagen I was completed a new request was issued for a heavier 30 tonne class vehicle with thicker armour.

This was the Durchbruchwagen II, which would have carried 50 mm of frontal armour and mounted a Panzer IV turret with the 7.5 cm L/24 cannon. Overall weight would have been approximately 36 tonnes. Only one hull was built and a turret was not fitted. Development of this vehicle was dropped in the fall of 1938 in favour of the more advanced VK3001(H) and VK3601(H) designs. Both the Durchbruchwagen I and II prototype hulls were used as test vehicles until 1941.

On 9 September 1938, Henschel & Sohn received permission to continue development of a VK3001(H) medium tank and a VK3601(H) heavy tank, both of which apparently pioneered the overlapping and interleaved main road wheel concept, for tank chassis use, that were already being used on German military half-tracked vehicles such as the SdKfz 7. The VK3001(H) was intended to mount a 7.5 cm L/24 low velocity infantry support gun, a 7.5 cm L/40 dual purpose anti-tank gun, or a 10.5 cm L/28 artillery piece in a Krupp turret. Overall weight was to be 33 tonnes. The armour was designed to be 50 mm on frontal surfaces and 30 mm on the side surfaces. Four prototype hulls were completed for testing. Two of these were used to create the 12.8 cm Selbstfahrlafette L/61, also known as Sturer Emil.

The VK3601(H) was intended to weigh 40 tonnes, carry 100 mm on front surfaces, 80 mm on turret sides and 60 mm on hull sides. The VK3601(H) was intended to carry a 7.5 cm L/24, or a 7.5 cm L/43, or a 7.5 cm L/70, or a 12.8 cm L/28 cannons in a Krupp turret that looked very similar to an enlarged PzIVC turret. One prototype hull was built, followed later by five more prototype hulls. The six turrets intended for the prototype hulls were never fitted and ended up being used as static defences along the Atlantic Wall. Development of the VK3601(H) project was discontinued in early 1942 in favour of the VK4501 project.

German combat experience with the French Somua S35 cavalry tank and Char B1 heavy tank, and the British Matilda I and Matilda II infantry tanks in June 1940 showed that the German Army needed better armed and armoured tanks. Superior tactics had overcome superior enemy armour, but the Germans did take notice.

On 26 May 1941, at an armaments meeting, Henschel and Porsche were asked to submit designs for a 45 tonne heavy tank, to be ready by June 1942. Porsche worked to submit an updated version of their VK3001(P) Leopard tank prototype while Henschel worked to develop an improved VK3601(H)tank. Henschel built two prototypes. A VK4501(H) H1 which used the 88 mm L/56 cannon and a VK4501(H) H2 which used the 75 mm L/70 cannon.

On 22 June 1941, Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the Soviet Union. The Germans were surprised to encounter Soviet T-34 medium tanks and the KV-1 heavy tanks that completely outclassed anything they were currently fielding. The T-34 was almost immune frontally to every gun in German service except the 88 mm FlaK 18/36 gun. Panzer IIIs with the 5 cm KwK 38 L/42 main armament could penetrate the sides of a T-34, but had to be very close. The KV-1 was almost immune to all but the 8.8 cm FlaK 18/36.

The emergence of the Soviet T-34 was a great shock; according to Henschel designer Erwin Aders, "There was great consternation when it was discovered that the Soviet tanks were superior to anything available to the Heer". An immediate weight increase to 45 tonnes and an increase in gun calibre to 88 mm was ordered. The due date for new prototypes was set for 20 April 1942, Adolf Hitler's birthday. Unlike the Panther tank however, the designs did not incorporate any of the innovations of the T-34: the width benefits of sloping armour were absent, with the thickness and weight of the Tiger's armour making up for this.

Porsche and Henschel submitted prototype designs and they were compared at Rastenburg before Hitler. The Henschel design was accepted as the best overall design, especially because of the problem-burdened Porsche gasoline-electric power unit and its use of large quantities of copper, a strategic war material. Production of the Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf. H began in August 1942. Awaiting orders for his Tiger tank, Porsche had built 100 chassis, using some for his Tiger prototypes. After losing the contract, they were used for a new heavy assault gun/tank hunter. In spring 1943, ninety-one hulls were converted into the Panzerjäger Tiger , also known as Ferdinand, and after Hitler's orders of 1 and 27 February 1944, Elefant.

The Tiger was essentially at the prototype stage when it was first hurried into service, and therefore changes both small and large were made throughout the production run. A redesigned turret with a lower, safer cupola was the most significant change. To cut costs, the submersion capability and an external air-filtration system were dropped.

Production history

Production of the Tiger I began in August 1942, and 1,355 were built by August 1944 when production ceased. Production started at a rate of 25 per month and peaked in April 1944 at 104 per month. Strength peaked at 671 on 1 July 1944. Generally speaking, it took about twice as long to build a Tiger I as another German tank of the period. When the improved Tiger II began production in January 1944, the Tiger I was soon phased out.

In 1943, Japan bought several specimens of German tank designs for study. A single Tiger I was apparently purchased along with one Panther and two Panzer IIIs, but only the Panzer IIIs were actually delivered. The undelivered Tiger was loaned to the German Wehrmacht by the Japanese government.

During the production run modifications were introduced often and sought to improve automotive performance, firepower and protection. Simplification of the design was implemented, along with adjustments for shortages. Due to a “first in, last out” policy at the factories, incorporation of the new modifications could take several months. In 1942 alone, at least six revisions were made, starting with the removal of the Vorpanzer (frontal armor shield) from the pre-production models in April. In May, mudguards bolted onto the side of the pre-production run were added, while removable mudguards saw full incorporation in September. Smoke discharge canisters, three on each side of the turret, were added in August 1942. In later years, similar changes and updates were added, such as the addition of Zimmerit in late 1943.

Variants

Among other variants of the Tiger, a compact, armoured self-propelled rocket projector, today commonly known as Sturmtiger, was built. Another variant, given the name "Bergetiger" post-war was a recovery vehicle. It was fitted with a winch capable of lifting only two tonnes. Speculation continues to run on whether or not this was actually a recovery vehicle given its limited capability. Another theory is that it was a damaged Tiger which was converted for explosive placement.

Combat history

Gun and armour performance

Tigers were capable of penetrating the front of an American M4 Sherman between , the British Churchill IV between , the Soviet T-34 between , and the Soviet IS-2 between . The Soviet T-34 equipped with the 76.2 mm gun could not penetrate the Tiger frontally at any range , but could achieve a side penetration at approximately 500 m firing BR-350P APCR ammunition. The T34-85's 85 mm gun could penetrate the front of a Tiger between ,, the IS-2s 122 mm gun could penetrate the front between .

From a 30 degree angle of attack, the M4 Sherman's 75 mm gun could not penetrate the Tiger frontally at any range, and needed to be within 100 m to achieve a side penetration against the 80 mm upper hull superstructure. The British 17-pounder as used on the Sherman Firefly, firing its normal APCBC ammunition, could penetrate the front out to 1000 m. The US 76 mm gun, if firing the APCBC M62 ammunition, could penetrate the Tiger side armor out to just over 500 m, and could penetrate the upper hull superstructure at ranges of 200 m. Using HVAP ammunition, which was in constant short supply and primarily issued to tank destroyers, frontal penetrations were possible out to just over 500 m.

As range decreases in combat, all guns can penetrate more armour (with the exception of HEAT ammunition, which was rare in World War II). The great penetrating power of the Tiger's gun meant that it could destroy many of its opponents at ranges at which they could not respond. In open terrain, this was a major tactical advantage. Opposing tanks were often forced to make a flanking attack in order to knock out a Tiger.

First actions

The Tiger was first used in action on 23 September 1942 near Leningrad. Under pressure from Hitler, the tank was put into action months earlier than planned. Many early models proved to be mechanically fragile; in this first action many broke down. Others were knocked out by dug-in Soviet anti-tank guns. One tank was captured largely intact, which allowed the Soviets to study it and prepare a response.

In the Tiger's first actions in North Africa, it was able to dominate Allied tanks in the wide-open terrain. However, mechanical failures meant that there were rarely more than a few in each action. In a replay of the Leningrad experience, at least one Tiger was knocked out by towed British six-pounder antitank guns.

Mobility vs firepower

The tank's extreme weight limited which bridges it could cross and made drive-throughs of buildings, which might have had basements, risky. Another weakness was the slow traverse of the hydraulically-operated turret. The turret could also be traversed manually, but this option was rarely used, except for very small adjustments.

Early Tigers had a top speed of about over optimal terrain. This was not recommended for normal operation, and was discouraged in training. Crews were told to not exceed 2600 rpm due to reliability problems of the early Maybach engines at their maximum 3000 rpm output. To combat this, the Tiger's top speed was reduced to about through the installation of an engine governor, capping the rpm of the Maybach HL 230 to 2600 rpm (HL 210s were used on early models).



Despite being slower than medium tanks of the time, which averaged a top speed of about , the Tiger still had a very respectable speed for a tank of its size and weight, being nearly twice as heavy as a Sherman or T-34. The Tiger had reliability problems throughout its service life; Tiger units frequently entered combat understrength due to breakdowns. It was rare for any Tiger unit to complete a road march without losing vehicles due to breakdown. The tank also had poor radius of action (distance a combat vehicle can travel and return, in normal battle conditions, without refuelling). Due to its very wide tracks, the Tiger had a lower ground pressure bearing than many smaller tanks, the most notable exception being the Soviet T-34.

Tactical organization

Tigers were usually employed in separate heavy tank battalions (schwere-Panzer-Abteilung) under army command. These battalions would be deployed to critical sectors, either for breakthrough operations or, more typically, counter-attacks. A few favoured divisions, such as the Grossdeutschland or some of the low-numbered Waffen-SS divisions had a handful of Tigers.

The Tiger was originally designed to be offensive breakthrough weapon, but by the time they went into action, the military situation had changed dramatically, and their main use was on the defensive, as mobile gun batteries. Unfortunately, this also meant rushing the Tigers constantly from location to location causing excessive mechanical issues. As a result, there are almost no instances where a Tiger battalion went into combat at anything close to full strength. Furthermore, against the Soviet and Western Allied production numbers, even a 10:1 kill ratio would not have been sufficient. Some Tiger units did exceed the 10:1 kill ratio, including 13. Kompanie/Panzer-Regiment Großdeutschland (16.67:1), schwere SS-Panzer-Abteilung 103 (12.82:1) and schwere Panzer-Abteilung 502 (13.08:1). These numbers must be set against the opportunity cost of the expensive Tiger. Every Tiger cost as much as four Sturmgeschütz III assault guns to build.

Combat examples

On 7 July 1943, a single Tiger tank commanded by SS-Oberscharführer Franz Staudegger from the 2nd Platoon, 13th Panzer Company, 1st SS Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler engaged a group of about 50 T-34s around Psyolknee (the southern sector of the German salient in the Battle of Kursk). Staudegger used all his ammunition and claimed the destruction of 22 Soviet tanks, while the rest retreated. For this, he was awarded the Knight's Cross.

The Tiger is particularly associated with SS-Haupsturmführer Michael Wittmann of schwere SS-Panzerabteilung 101. He worked his way up, commanding various vehicles and finally a Tiger I. In the Battle of Villers-Bocage, his platoon destroyed over two dozen Allied vehicles, including several tanks.

Over 10 Tiger tank commanders claimed over 100 vehicle kills each, including Kurt Knispel with 168, Walter Schroif with 161, Otto Carius with 150+, Johannes Bölter with 139+, and Michael Wittmann with 138.

The Tiger I is claimed to have a ratio of 5.74 kills to each loss, with 9,850 tank kills for a loss of 1,715 Tigers. It is important to note that the number of Tiger Is lost is higher than those produced (1,347), as the Wehrmacht included tanks that had undergone heavy repair in the total.

Allied response

The US Army did little to prepare for combat against the Tiger despite their assessment that the newly-encountered German tank was superior to their own. This conclusion was partly based on the correct estimate that the Tiger would be encountered in relatively small numbers.

In contrast, the more experienced British had observed the gradual increase in German AFV armour and firepower since 1940 and had anticipated the need for more powerful anti-tank guns. Work on the Ordnance QF 17 pounder had begun in late 1940 and in 1942 100 early-production guns were rushed to North Africa to help counter the new Tiger threat. So great was the haste that they were sent before proper carriages had been developed, and the guns had to be mounted in the carriages of 25-pounder howitzers.

Efforts were hastened to get Cruiser tanks armed with 17 pounder guns into operation. The A30 Challenger was already at the prototype stage in 1942, but this tank was poorly protected and unreliable, and was fielded in only limited numbers (around 200 were built), though crews liked it for its high speed. The 17 pounder-armed Sherman, the Sherman Firefly, was a notable success even though it was only intended to be a stopgap design. Fireflies were successfully used against Tigers (in one famous engagement, a single Firefly destroyed three Tigers in 12 minutes with five shots) and over 2,000 were built during the war. Five different 17-pounder-armed British tanks and self-propelled guns saw combat during the war: the A30 Challenger, the A34 Comet, the Sherman Firefly, the 17pdr SP Achilles and the 17pdr SP Archer.

The initial Soviet response was to restart production of the 57 mm ZiS-2 anti-tank gun (production of this was stopped in 1941 in favour of smaller, cheaper alternatives). The ZiS-2 had better armour penetration than the 76 mm F-34 tank gun (used by most Red Army tanks, but inadequate against Tigers) - with APCR rounds, it could ideally penetrate the Tiger's frontal armour. A small number of T-34's were fitted with a tank version of the ZiS-2 but it couldn't fire an adequate high-explosive round, ultimately making it an unsuitable tank gun. Instead, the 85 mm 52-K anti-aircraft gun was modified for tank use. This was initially used on the SU-85 self-propelled gun (based on a T-34 chassis) from August 1943. By the spring of 1944, the T-34-85 appeared; this up-gunned T-34 matched the SU-85's firepower, but with the advantage of mounting the gun in a turret. The redundant SU-85 was replaced by the SU-100, mounting a 100 mm D-10 tank gun, that could penetrate 185 mm of vertical armour plate at 1,000 m, and was thus easily able to defeat the Tiger's frontal armour at normal combat ranges.

In May 1943, the Red Army deployed the SU-152, replaced in 1944 by the ISU-152. These self-propelled guns both mounted the large, 152 mm howitzer-gun. The SU-152 was intended to be a close-support gun for use against German fortifications rather than armour; but, both it and the later ISU-152 were found to be very effective against German heavy tanks, and were nicknamed Zveroboy (commonly translated as "beast killer") because of this. The 152 mm armour-piercing shells weighed over and could penetrate a Tiger's frontal armour from . Even the high-explosive rounds were powerful enough to cause significant damage to a tank. However, the size and weight of the ammunition meant both vehicles had a low rate of fire and each could carry only 20 rounds.

Survivors

Tiger 131

On 21 April 1943, a Tiger of the 504th German heavy tank battalion, with turret number 131, was captured on a hill called Djebel Djaffa in Tunisia. A round from a Churchill tank of the British 48th Royal Tank Regiment hit the Tiger's gun barrel and ricocheted into its turret ring, jamming its traverse and wounding the commander. The crew bailed out and the tank was captured. The tank was repaired and displayed in Tunisia before being sent to England for a thorough inspection.

On 25 September 1951, the captured tank was officially handed over to the Bovington Tank Museum by the British Ministry of Supply. In June 1990, the tank was removed from display at the museum and work began on its restoration. This was carried out both by the museum and the Army Base Repair Organisation and involved an almost complete disassembly of the tank. The Maybach HL230 engine from the museum's Tiger II was installed (it was originally fitted with a slightly smaller Maybach HL210), along with a modern fire-suppressant system in the engine compartment. In December 2003, Tiger 131 returned to the museum, restored and in running condition.

Others

Given the number produced, very few Tiger Is survived the war and the post-war scrap drives. Many large components have been salvaged over the years, but the discovery of a (more or less) complete vehicle has so far eluded enthusiasts and collectors. In addition to Tiger 131, five other Tiger tanks survive, at the following locations:

• Musée des Blindés in Saumur, France. In good condition. An indoor exhibit. It has the narrow transport tracks fitted. This Tiger was part of the 2nd company of the SS Heavy Panzer Battalion 102, fought in the Cauville sector, and was abandoned by her crew after a mechanical breakdown. She was recommissioned as Colmar with the 2nd squadron of the 6th Cuirassier Regiment, fighting her way all back to Germany.
• Vimoutiers, France. In bad condition. Outdoor monument. Heavily damaged by demolition charges set by the crew when abandoned in 1944.
• Kubinka Tank Museum, Moscow, Russia. In good condition. An indoor exhibit.
• Military-historical Museum of Lenino-Snegiri, Russia. In very bad condition. A former badly shot and cut up firing range target. An outdoor exhibit and subject to frequent vandalism.
• United States Army Ordnance Museum, Aberdeen Proving Ground, United States. In good condition. Most of the left side of hull and turret was cut up in the late 1940s for display and educational purposes. This tank is currently in the Kevin Wheatcroft collection for restoration, but it will be returned to the USA soon.

Image:Tiger Tank 1, Bovington.jpg|Tiger 131, Bovington Tank Museum, United KingdomImage:TigerI Saumur.jpg|Tiger Colmar, Musée des Blindés, Saumur, FranceImage:Pz.Kpfw. Vl Ausf.H in Snegiri.JPG|Lenino-Snegiri Military Historical Museum, Russia

Notes

1. Jentz and Doyle 1993, p. 3.
2. Perrett 1999, p. 8.
3. Hart 2007, p. 17.
4. Jentz 1993, pp. 8, 16.
5. Schneider 2000, pp. 78, 104.
6. Schneider 2000, p. 199.
7. Jentz 1996, p. 288.
8. Panzer Statistics achtungpanzer.com
9. Jentz and Doyle 1993, p. 13.
10. Zaloga 2007, p. 17.
11. Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger Ausf. E Sd. Kfz. 181 achtungpanzer.com
12. Crawford 2000, p. 41.
13. Jentz and Doyle 1993, p. 12.
14. Jentz and Doyle 1993, pp. 19–20.
15. Wilbeck 2004
16. Agte 2006, pp. 103-105.
17. Tiger Aces alanhamby.com
18. Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf.E (Tiger I) fprado.com armorsite
19. Zaloga 2003, p. 14.
20. The 17 Pounder Anti-Tank Gun David Boyd, wwiiequipment.com
21. Hart 2007, p. 65.
22. The conservators have kept the damage caused by the ricochet unpainted, it can be observed at the Bovington Tank museum.

References

Citations

1. Jentz and Doyle 1993, p. 3.
2. Perrett 1999, p. 8.
3. Hart 2007, p. 17.
4. Jentz 1993, pp. 8, 16.
5. Schneider 2000, pp. 78, 104.
6. Schneider 2000, p. 199.
7. Jentz 1996, p. 288.
8. Panzer Statistics achtungpanzer.com
9. Jentz and Doyle 1993, p. 13.
10. Zaloga 2007, p. 17.
11. Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger Ausf. E Sd. Kfz. 181 achtungpanzer.com
12. Crawford 2000, p. 41.
13. Jentz and Doyle 1993, p. 12.
14. Jentz and Doyle 1993, pp. 19–20.
15. Wilbeck 2004
16. Agte 2006, pp. 103-105.
17. Tiger Aces alanhamby.com
18. Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf.E (Tiger I) fprado.com armorsite
19. Zaloga 2003, p. 14.
20. The 17 Pounder Anti-Tank Gun David Boyd, wwiiequipment.com
21. Hart 2007, p. 65.
22. The conservators have kept the damage caused by the ricochet unpainted, it can be observed at the Bovington Tank museum.

Bibliography

Further reading

• Jentz, Thomas L. (1997). Germany's Tiger Tanks: Tiger I & II : Combat Tactics. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing. ISBN 9780764302251.

External links

• Tiger I at the Armorsite
• Tiger I Information Center
• Bovington Tank Museum Tiger and Restoration
• Article, "New German Heavy Tank" from U.S. Intelligence Bulletin, June 1943

• Tiger1.info
• Tiger survivors - PDF Surviving Tiger Tanks
• Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger (P) and Ausf. E at Achtung Panzer!
• Tiger and Tiger II sections from Handbook on German Military Forces