Information on the Maybach HL 210- HL 230.

[Yossarian]

So I find my self researching the inherit demise of the premise of the Heavy tank and assault gun, I get inexorability drawn back to the Konigstiger and the Jagdtiger of the German forces during the 2nd WW.

The problems faced by the restoration of Tiger 131 in England during the later stages raises serious questions about the over straining of this engine.

My questions are simple. And listed in a reader friendly list bellow:

1. Could Germany under wartime conditions build more powerful or at least engines with better torque under late time war conditions resource constraints? (tank designs were accelerated to being researched and fielded in a matter of months, a rate never matched before or since in armored vehicles by all sides during the war).

2. Why didn't Germany with it's previous affiliations with diesel technology not opt for a lower torque Diesel engine for it's super heavy machines such as the Konigstiger and Jagdtiger?

3. Did valves and gaskets often leak and fail under the strain and pressure of moving such a heavy vehicle in the Maybach HL 210 or HL 230 for the perspective machines they were meant to power. (however inefficiently).

Also I encourage anyone with Military Diesel or mechanical experience, as your input would obviously help better clarify the failings of both the design and the use of the design in wartime AFVs.

As well as the limits of gasoline power plants in AFVs.

Thanks again.

-Yo.

 

[MontyB]

So I find my self researching the inherit demise of the premise of the Heavy tank and assault gun, I get inexorability drawn back to the Konigstiger and the Jagdtiger of the German forces during the 2nd WW.

The problems faced by the restoration of Tiger 131 in England during the later stages raises serious questions about the over straining of this engine.

My questions are simple. And listed in a reader friendly list bellow:

1. Could Germany under wartime conditions build more powerful or at least engines with better torque under late time war conditions resource constraints? (tank designs were accelerated to being researched and fielded in a matter of months, a rate never matched before or since in armored vehicles by all sides during the war).

2. Why didn't Germany with it's previous affiliations with diesel technology not opt for a lower torque Diesel engine for it's super heavy machines such as the Konigstiger and Jagdtiger?

3. Did valves and gaskets often leak and fail under the strain and pressure of moving such a heavy vehicle in the Maybach HL 210 or HL 230 for the perspective machines they were meant to power. (however inefficiently).

Also I encourage anyone with Military Diesel or mechanical experience, as your input would obviously help better clarify the failings of both the design and the use of the design in wartime AFVs.

As well as the limits of gasoline power plants in AFVs.

Thanks again.

-Yo.

I was under the impression that the HL 210 P45 engine and had an aluminium cylinder block and cylinder heads in order to make it lighter. This is where the problems with reliability began to show. Because of the confines of the engine bay it was to run too hot and over heat.

This would cause the block or heads to crack, hence compression leaks and cross contamination of water and fuel making the engine non-functional.

This also increased the need to replace cylinder blocks or cylinder block heads and or relevant gaskets frequently through heat warping of the engine. Only the first 250 Tigers were fitted with the HL 210 P45 engine before the introduction of the HL 230 P45 engine was introduced which is the version that Tiger 131 used.

This information was detailed in a report by the Military College of Science, School of Tank Technology, November 1943”

 

[Yossarian]

Mr. Monty:

Do you think using lower torque diesel engines such as in the later stages of the IS program on part of the Russians would have been in favor for the Jagdtiger and Konigstiger instead of the further use of the HL 230 in the later Heavy German Machines?

I understand why the Germans used them. They were already build and designed engines, and in a hurry could be thrown into service. However I refuse to believe that they were the best the Germans could do in terms of powering such monstrosities.

The idea of super heavy tanks was being eroded via airpower and artillery each day in the later stages of the war, regardless the idea of powering such machines was not in terms of historical hindsight given as such attention.

Or am I wrong?

 

[JOC]

The German Mayback engines had a lot of history and I don't think they were about to do an about face and change to diesel. However as Monty pointed out they were prone to a degree of issues. Particularly when driving vehicles such as the King Tiger " heavy load". They were driving the some of the heaviest vehicles designed until the M1-Abrams came around. BTW the heavy tank is not dead it is alive and well with the Abrams.

The intelligent thing for the Germans to have done would have been to avoid the King Tiger design and produced more Panzer V Ausf G tanks which were far more producible, dependable, battle proven and used the Maybach HL230P30 engine as well but without the heavy load.

 

[Yossarian]

The German Mayback engines had a lot of history and I don't think they were about to do an about face and change to diesel. However as Monty pointed out they were prone to a degree of issues. Particularly when driving vehicles such as the King Tiger " heavy load". They were driving the some of the heaviest vehicles designed until the M1-Abrams came around. BTW the heavy tank is not dead it is alive and well with the Abrams.

The intelligent thing for the Germans to have done would have been to avoid the King Tiger design and produced more Panzer V Ausf G tanks which were far more producible, dependable, battle proven and used the Maybach HL230P30 engine as well but without the heavy load.

These power plants do seem to have a much better track record with the Panther vehicles. However are you suggesting much of the failures of the engine series were greatly influenced by the fact they were used moreover as a matter of pride? The diesel itself was invented in Germany, that could have been a minor propaganda tool. The only concern then would be the fragile transmission as well cramming it into the engine carapace.

Historical hindsight shows that Hitler Himself greatly influenced the building and forcing of the King Tiger and the Jagdtiger partly into existence and many today attribute them unto ego. And this isn't even scratching the problems of Maus...

Although I don't want to drive too far off topic, would you consider modern MBT's the evolutionary offspring of Heavy tanks? Or just the continued evolution of the premises such as the Panther , T 34 85, and other machines such as the Comet in terms of their roles? I thought the U.S. via definition lost favor with such machines shortly after the war letting the T 29 program go, even reclassified the Pershing as a medium machine, and let the concept of the M 103 fall by the waist side leaving really only the Marines using that machine for a while. Are modern MBT's more akin to them or with their mobility lighter tanks of the time?

 

[MontyB]

The idea of super heavy tanks was being eroded via airpower and artillery each day in the later stages of the war, regardless the idea of powering such machines was not in terms of historical hindsight given as such attention.

Or am I wrong?

On this point I think you are partially wrong, air power was no where near as big a factor as artillery was.

The effectiveness of air power against armour in WW2 is a myth that has hung around far beyond its time.

 

[JOC]

Artillery losses

On this point I think you are partially wrong, air power was no where near as big a factor as artillery was.

The effectiveness of air power against armour in WW2 is a myth that has hung around far beyond its time.

I can't say much on the limitation of ground attack aircraft in combat. I would have thought that planes like the Thunderbolt would have been quite menacing to German armor, trucks, weaponry caught out in the open.
However I have heard it stated (I don't remember the source) that > 20% of battlefield losses in WW2 were due to artillery which includes: cannons, howitzers, mortar's, rockets and Self-Propelled Guns.

 

[Yossarian]

Back to an original thought I had before posting.

Do you think you could shoe horn a diesel engine of sufficient efficiency and torque into the carapaces of late war heavy German designs? And them not be heat sinks or unreliable?

Speed and acceleration not obvious points here.

 

[MontyB]

The Germans did start a project to develop an air cooled, X configuration, 16 cylinder Diesel engine for heavy AFVs. It was to be designed and produced as a joint venture between Porsche and Simmering-Graz-Pauker of Vienna.

The engine designation was either SLA 16 or Porsche Type 212. and was a 36.8 litre engine that developed 750 horsepower. Unfortunately, development didn't start until 1945.

The engine was proposed for the Tiger II, Maus and Panther II.

The engine performed well in a few Tiger II test vehicles but the hull required extensive modification in order to install the engine.

 

[Yossarian]

Did Germany ever have any well performing and reliable Aircraft Engines? I found that both the British with their Merlin Engines as well as the Americans with their Continental engines found solid results with placing them in small AFV's of the period.

As in the Case with the British they even put a de tuned Merlin in their post war assault gun "Tortoise".

Although that machine was quickly phased out.

 

[MontyB]

The Jumo 213 engine was designed for bombers but was eventually used in the FW 190D series of fighters.

 

[Mousedeer]

According to: http://www.oocities.org/desertfox1891/pzpanther/pzpanther-Schmalturm.html the experimental Maybach HL 234 engine (at least 800 hp) could replace the HL 230 motor but was not tested or installed in any tanks. Alternatively, I think aircraft engines could replace the engine of the Tiger I, Tiger II, Sturmtiger and Jagdtiger in the following ways:
(1) Two Argus As 410 engines (459 hp each for total of 918 hp).
(2) Two Hirth HM 512 engines (360 hp each for total of 720 hp) but the internal compartment may have to be rearranged or the tank made longer (and hopefully with sloped armor) because each engine is slightly longer than the Maybach HL 230 P30.
(3) A Junkers Jumo 204 engine (740 hp).
There could be other combinations. Another alternative is to mount better radiators, cooling system, and turbocharger (s) with fuel return line (so the fuel economy does not become worse) or other engine upgrades. The vehicles might need a little bulge built onto their hull to fix in the turbocharger to give perhaps about 13 hp boost. There are wartime armored fighting vehicles with two engines such as the M24 Chaffee and the M18 Hellcat. Anyway these are my suggestions for the "What if Germany upgraded their Tiger tanks' engine?"

 

[MontyB]

I agree, they certainly had options available.

Part of the problem in these ideas is that German production was already a complete mess with a myriad of vehicles and weapons to support it would probably have stretched them to the breaking point to incorporate more engine types and chassis adaptations.

 

[JOC]

The Germans had the widest variety of AFV's of any nation "many of which were the best in the war" in WW2 which created considerable problems from the repair and maintenance end. Why make things any worse?