Krupp "Kettenschlepper" tracked artillery tractors

Krupp attempted to build a whole line of artillery prime movers according to "Heeres" and their own commercial needs. In April 1938 they built the "Leichter Kettenschlepper", light tracked tractor, meant to tow up to 5 tons. They also endeavoured to construct the "Mittlerer Kettenschlepper", medium tractor, in march of the same year. It was to pull up to 8 tons. The last in the series, "Schwerer Kettenschlepper", heavy tractor, was able to tow 12 to 15 tons. Anyone can shed some light here? At least one of them was built, one initiated. How come this is ignored?

If by ignored you mean not mass produced, fully tracked vehicles need very complex transmissions, which make them expensive to produce. That's why why cheaper half tracks were so popular in world war two with the US and Germans, but then faded away almost completely postwar owing to inferior mobility. If you were going to pay the money for a full tracked vehicle, then why not just mount the gun on top of it and forget about towing? Much of the advantage of a partly or fully tracked tractor is lost if the gun being towed is wheeled in the first place. That led to the 1920 or so US idea, might have been French first, and which was later service adapted by the USSR, to make the towed gun tracked too, but while that worked well in mud, it proved very heavy and thus slow on roads, as well as working very poorly in deep snow. The tracks also made the weapon hard to reposition once emplaced to change its arc of fire. Its surprising the Soviets built so many fully tracked artillery tractors postwar, when they had very lavish programs for self propelled artillery even before the outbreak of WW2.

Sea Skimmer said:

Its surprising the Soviets built so many fully tracked artillery tractors postwar, when they had very lavish programs for self propelled artillery even before the outbreak of WW2.

Click to expand...

Because their concept of operations still heavily relied on emplacing masses of artillery for general support. In such a case after the gun is positioned and dug in the gun tractor then becomes a gun limber and can be used to resupply the guns with ammunition. If they had built self-propelled artillery with the same resources the vehicle mechanism would not be available for further work once the gun was emplaced unlike the separate artillery tractor.

Since the tractors, other then the small armored AT-P which towed anti tank guns and had external racks, couldn't carry the crew and ammunition at the same time, a separate vehicle is already necessary for the transport of ammunition. Those massed Soviet barrages actually generally didn't involve that much ammunition anyway, it was about intensity, not raw volume.


A more likely explanation is that the Soviets just didn't like the reliability of self propelled artillery when compounded by the low priority they decided to place on recovery and repair of armored vehicles. That was a longstanding objection against them in all armies, though not a very sound considering the much lower reliability of tracked vs wheeled prime movers. It made more sense to do what the USSR ended up doing as the AT-S/L/LM ect.. were replaced, just use a truck.

Hi,

Sea Skimmer said:

If by ignored you mean not mass produced

No, I meant why this interesting vehicles ( at least one of them was built ) are ignored by historians and other researchers. The Krupp Archives are out-of-reach for me at the moment, but I will get there, sometime.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Just to prevent me from getting it wrong: The "Schwerer Wehrmacht-Schlepper" (s.WS.) isn't part
of your list ? AFAIK the series of the "Wehrmachtschlepper" was a standard design, to be build by all
factories, which still had capacities for production.

Hi Jens,

good to have you here. No, i`m not including the later half-track s. WS. These Krupp tractors were full-tracked, dating from 1937/38. They were not just commercial complements to their range of towed artillery, they were presented to the Heereswaffenamt too. Stay tuned to other Krupp "goodies", buried ( I believe) deep in Villa Hügel`s basements .

Sea Skimmer said:

Those massed Soviet barrages actually generally didn't involve that much ammunition anyway, it was about intensity, not raw volume.

Click to expand...

I don’t know where you got this impression from? Maybe in WWII where they lacked the logistics. But in the Cold War the planned barrages the Soviets were going to fire were enormous and their norms and subsequent stocks of shells far higher than NATO’s. Even if the barrage is just more intense it still requires more transport for the shells because a much higher rate of shells must be moved in a set period of time requiring more transport. Especially in high tempo warfare without the luxury of weeks or months to build up units of fire.

Hi guys,

I´m afraid your topics ( soviets, NATO, Etc...) don`t match this thread. It is about pre-WW2 german artillery tractors developed by the german Krupp company.