Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and P. 1500 Monster

[Orionblamblam]

As stated previously, if built the Landkruezer P. 1500 would have fired 800 mm shells like the railway guns "Dora" and "Schwerer Gustav". To give you a better idea of how big that is, I have attached an image of an 800 mm shell compared to a Soviet T-34 tank at the Imperial War Museum, London.

Ain't perspective a wonderful thing?

[Triton]

The point of my post was to compare the size of an 800 mm shell to a Soviet T-34 tank to get a sense of its scale. I was not suggesting that the Landkreuzer P. 1500 Monster , or the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte, were tanks or to suggest, or speculate on the outcome of, a duel between Allied armor and a Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte. I think it's pretty obvious that the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and the Landkreuzer P. 1500 Monster are mobile heavy artillery pieces. I don't think anyone disputes that the idea of giving these heavy guns tracked carriages was to allow them to operate outside the confines of existing rail lines.

I believe that the Germans did realize that the large size and limited mobility of the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and the Landkreuzer P. 1500 Monster would make them vulnerable to attack, especially from the air. I doubt that the 8 2 cm FlaK 30 anti-aircraft guns on the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte would be the sole anti-aircraft support these vehicles would receive when they were deployed. Certainly the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and the Landkreuzer P. 1500 Monster would be operated with aircraft and other armored vehicles to provide defense from attack.

Does anyone know if the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte or the Landkreuzer P. 1500 Monster could be dismantled for transport by rail over long distances?

[Colonial-Marine]

Obviously such projects would appeal to some Nazi leadership, but how did these projects make it past people like Albert Speer and others more competent when it came to manufacturing and production?

[Triton]

Obviously such projects would appeal to some Nazi leadership, but how did these projects make it past people like Albert Speer and others more competent when it came to manufacturing and production?

Railway guns were deployed by both France and Germany during World War I. Great Britain and  Germany built and used railway guns, some capable of firing across the English Channel, during World War II. Perhaps the Germans were thinking that the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and P. 1500 Monster were attractive weapon systems because they were not restricted to rail lines like existing railway guns but such heavy artillery pieces were a necessity for the war effort? They probably didn't realize at the time that aircraft and rockets would make such heavy artillery pieces largely obsolete and that they were too vulnerable to attack. Further, remember that the V-1 and V-2 rockets were both deployed in 1944, while the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and P. 1500 Monster were conceived in 1941 and designed in 1942. To his credit, Minister of Armaments Albert Speer canceled both projects in 1944.

When analyzing a decision made 68 years ago, and determining whether is is competent or incompetent, military enthusiasts really need to keep in mind what was known when the decision was made and what historical lessons, practical experience, and events influenced the decision. Remember that our thinking is influenced by the events of World War II and we have the benefit of history to know which weapon systems were effective and which ones weren't. The lessons of the last war influence the thinking for the next one. As a whole, I think we are too critical of commanders and procurement decision makers for their lack of foresight.

[Abraham Gubler]

I was not suggesting that the Landkreuzer P. 1500 Monster , or the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte, were tanks or to suggest, or speculate on the outcome of, a duel between Allied armor and a Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte.

Triton my post wasn’t criticising your post showing the size of the shell and tank. It was actually your picture that persuaded me to offer a comment. I was criticizing the kind of thought displayed by much of the adulation that these Nazi behemoths generate around the place and which wasn’t apparent in what you have contributed. While I can be as impressed as the next guy by the sheer size of these guns and their carriers they are effectively useless.

Obviously such projects would appeal to some Nazi leadership, but how did these projects make it past people like Albert Speer and others more competent when it came to manufacturing and production?

Probably a good explanation of why they were never placed into production. However even with Speer and co. in control the Germans wasted huge resources on weapons that provided little return. The V1 and V2 programs were far less efficient then actually building conventional aircraft. Tiger tanks and a range of artillery systems were also a waste.

Railway guns were deployed by both France and Germany during World War I. Great Britain and  Germany built and used railway guns, some capable of firing across the English Channel, during World War II.

Not quite. The British WW2 very heavy guns were all recycled WW1 and before naval guns. No other combatant in WW2 invested as much as the Germans in very heavy artillery. Despite being the most advanced in thinking for tactical airpower. The problem was that unlike other combatants that had reasonable oversight to armaments production the German system was hugely competitive and encouraged such duplication of effort.

The waste by the German Army in producing very heavy guns like the 80cm, ultra long range 21cm and V2 rocket to provide less capability than the German Air Force could with a couple of bombers meant less numbers of medium tanks, field artillery and strike aircraft. While the 28cm was an effective and practical very heavy gun deploying it in a turret from a fully armoured, mobile station was incredibly foolish. Rail mounting provided more than enough flexibility for most battles which could have been supplanted by the twin tank chassis off road mount.

[Triton]

Attaching the previous artist impressions of the Landkreuzer P. 1500 Monster so they aren't lost when they are deleted from the host from which they are hotlinked.

[Triton]

Additional images of the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte.

[vajt]

Great stuff...fascinating to see what concepts go through people's minds when in a war.

The German high command probably said "here's an open book, let's see what ideas you can come up with". Sometimes even out of the most ridiculous ideas you can have something useful come out of it...they were definitely thinking outside of the box.

It is plainly clear that such a beast would never be practicle (just look at the much smaller Maus and how far that got) but beeing creative you never know if even one small part of the concept could be salvaged and put into use.

Triton, where did you find those other Ratte pics?

Any other good links with interesting/unusual German (or other WW2 armies) weapon concepts?

-----JT-----

[airman]

web reference :
http://www.achtungpanzer.com/p-10001500-pzkpfw-ixx.htm

http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us/Landkreuzer%20P1000%20Ratte.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damn ,it  was an amazing tank ! 

[Madurai]

At least some of the pictures, both paintings and drawings, are from Zack Parsons' My Tank Is Fight!

[Lauge]

http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us/Landkreuzer%20P1000%20Ratte.htm

Yup, another disturbance in the Force, right there........

Scroll down a little, and you find:
"Rumor has it, this massive war-machine [see attached image], dubbed the "Siege Bot" in Western intelligence circles, was built by the Iraqi regime under Saddam Hussein. The huge gun tube launched rocket-assisted howitzer rounds, and was intended to crack Iranian fortifications during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s. The Siege Bot vanished soon after the first Gulf War, having never fired on Allied troops. The United States denies having it….."

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case as far as the credibility of the web reference in question is concerned (but you all knew that already, right?).

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

[Lauge]

... and what does the previous post have to do with the subject under discussion ?

Merely a light-hearted suggestion that being critical of one's sources is not a bad thing.

If the moderator finds the post irrelevant, please delete.

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

[airman]

http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us/Landkreuzer%20P1000%20Ratte.htm

Yup, another disturbance in the Force, right there........

Scroll down a little, and you find:
"Rumor has it, this massive war-machine [see attached image], dubbed the "Siege Bot" in Western intelligence circles, was built by the Iraqi regime under Saddam Hussein. The huge gun tube launched rocket-assisted howitzer rounds, and was intended to crack Iranian fortifications during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s. The Siege Bot vanished soon after the first Gulf War, having never fired on Allied troops. The United States denies having it….."

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case as far as the credibility of the web reference in question is concerned (but you all knew that already, right?).

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

Thomas, we speak about Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and P. 1500 Monster .....
Of last greyfalcon.us i like only theme strange vehicles  where is included Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte and P. 1500 Monster .
Avoiding all about rumors and controversy ...... so i like remain in theme of this amazing Landkreuzer 

[Lauge]

Avoiding all about rumors and controversy ...... so i like remain in theme of this amazing Landkreuzer 

I can certainly second that notion. It's just that any mention of That Site sends my BS meter pinging into the red zone 

Back on topic, I promise.....

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

[Lord Vader]

I wonder how the Jawas felt when they found out their sandcrawler had been stolen.