Development
The basic design known as the VK7001 / Porsche Type 205 was suggested by Ferdinand Porsche to Adolf Hitler in June 1942, who subsequently approved it. The design up to then had been the culmination of work done by Porsche who had won the contract for the heavy tank that March. Work on the design began in earnest; the first prototype, to be ready in 1943 was initially to receive the name Mammut (Mammoth). This was reportedly changed to Mäuschen (Little Mouse) in December 1942 and finally to Maus (Mouse) in February 1943, which became the most common name for this tank. Its ordnance inventory designation was SdKfz 205.
The development of a tank this heavy was controversial at its time. Heinz Guderian described the Maus as "this gigantic offspring of the fantasy of Hitler and his advisors."
The Maus was designed from the start to use the "electric transmission" design which Ferdinand Porsche had used in his unsuccessful attempt to win the production contract for the Tiger. The initial prototypes used a gasoline engine, the later ones were to use diesel. It drove a massive electrical generator, and together they occupied the entire central rear two-thirds of the Maus' hull, cutting off the forward driver's compartment in the hull from direct access to the turret from within the tank. Each metre-wide track, which used the same basic "contact shoe" and "connector link" design format as the Henschel-built King Tiger had used, had its own electric motor mounted in the rear of the hull; the tracks had no direct mechanical connection to the internal combustion engine that powered the Maus. Each set of tracks had a suspension design containing a total of 24 road wheels each per side, in six bogie sets, staggered to be spread over the wide 1100mm width of the track shoes and links.
Due to the uniquely wide tracks used (1100 mm each) being completely enclosed within the fixed outer side armor panels that defined its overall hull width, and the inner vertical lengthwise walls of the hull used to mount the suspension components, a narrow lengthwise "tunnel" remained between the hull's inner walls, under and to the rear of the turret to house the engine and generator of the tank's powertrain.
The amount of armour was substantial, the hull front was 220 millimetres (8.7 in). The sides and rear of the hull were up to 190 millimetres (7.5 in). The turret armour was even thicker, the turret front was up to 240 millimetres (9.4 in) and the sides and rear 220 millimetres (8.7 in). The mantlet was 250 millimetres (9.8 in), and combined with the turret armour behind, the protection level at that section was even higher.
The initial plan for the Maus was for the prototype to have been completed by the summer of 1943, with monthly production scheduled to run at five vehicles per month after delivery of the prototype. The work on the Maus would be divided between Krupp, responsible for the chassis, armament and turret and Alkett, who would be responsible for final assembly.
The Maus tank was originally designed to weigh approximately 100 tons and be armed with a 128 mm main gun and a 75 mm co-axial secondary gun. Additional armament options were studied including various versions of 150 mm and 128 mm guns. Hitler himself in January 1943 insisted that the armament be a 128 mm main gun with a coaxial 75 mm gun. The 128 mm KwK 44 designed for the Maus was later reused under the designation Pak 44 in the casemate-style Jagdtiger tank destroyer.
By May 1943, a wooden mockup of the final Maus configuration was ready and presented to Hitler, who approved it for mass production, ordering a first series of 150. At this point, the estimated weight of the Maus was 188 tons. However, there is a story that concerns the main armament of the Maus being changed by Hitler who said that the 128 mm gun looked like a ´toy gun´ when compared to the tank, causing the 128 mm to be replaced by a 150 mm gun.
In his book Panzer Leader, Heinz Guderian wrote:
On May 1 a wooden model of the "Maus", a tank project of Porsche and Krupp, was shown to Hitler. It was intended to mount a 150 mm gun. The total weight of the tank was supposed to reach 175 tons. It should be considered that after the design changes on Hitler's instructions the tank will weigh 200 tons. The model didn't have a single machine gun for close combat, and for this reason I had to reject it. It had the same design flaw that made the Elefant unsuitable for close combat. In the end, the tank will inevitably have to wage a close combat since it operates in cooperation with the infantry. An intense debate started, and except for me, all of the present found the "Maus" magnificent. It was promising to be exactly that, a "giant".Note that the lack of close combat armament was rectified later on, the final version of the Maus featured a machine gun and several ports for submachine guns.
Development work on the Maus continued, but in October 1943 Hitler cancelled the order, which was followed in November by the order to stop development of the Maus altogether but to continue the construction of the prototypes.
Read more about this topic: Panzer VIII Maus
Famous quotes containing the word development:
“As a final instance of the force of limitations in the development of concentration, I must mention that beautiful creature, Helen Keller, whom I have known for these many years. I am filled with wonder of her knowledge, acquired because shut out from all distraction. If I could have been deaf, dumb, and blind I also might have arrived at something.”
—Mark Twain [Samuel Langhorne Clemens] (18351910)
“The man, or the boy, in his development is psychologically deterred from incorporating serving characteristics by an easily observable fact: there are already people around who are clearly meant to serve and they are girls and women. To perform the activities these people are doing is to risk being, and being thought of, and thinking of oneself, as a woman. This has been made a terrifying prospect and has been made to constitute a major threat to masculine identity.”
—Jean Baker Miller (20th century)
“Dissonance between family and school, therefore, is not only inevitable in a changing society; it also helps to make children more malleable and responsive to a changing world. By the same token, one could say that absolute homogeneity between family and school would reflect a static, authoritarian society and discourage creative, adaptive development in children.”
—Sara Lawrence Lightfoot (20th century)