Naval History Forums

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2021 9:18 am**

Gentlemen,
Watched a documentary which mentioned the 'Maus' tank and having looked up the specifications on 'Google' it seems to me that it was almost a battleship on tracks weighing in at around 180 tons with massive armour and mounting a 125mm cannon, but dreadfully slow and far too heavy for most bridges.
No doubt it was a A fearsome weapon and the allies had nothing to touch it, but out of interest, I wonder how it would fare against modern tank shells?

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2021 12:28 pm**

There were any number of bridges in Europe that it couldn't cross without crashing the structure, so it couldn't easily pick its battlefield. An M1A2 could run rings around it. The M1's APSD rounds would brutalize it. Shall we go on?

Posted: **Fri Sep 24, 2021 6:15 pm**

paul.mercer wrote: ↑Mon Jul 05, 2021 9:18 am Gentlemen,
Watched a documentary which mentioned the 'Maus' tank and having looked up the specifications on 'Google' it seems to me that it was almost a battleship on tracks weighing in at around 180 tons with massive armour and mounting a 125mm cannon, but dreadfully slow and far too heavy for most bridges.
No doubt it was a A fearsome weapon and the allies had nothing to touch it, but out of interest, I wonder how it would fare against modern tank shells?

As OP said.

Seeing as modern tanks now rely on Chobham or "Reactive" style armour I think a Maus would look like a colander pretty damned quickly.

That's if the damned thing didn't total itself by lunching its drivetrain. Its a great example of "Hitler/Nazi folly".

Except that he didn't stop there and had a paper study produced for the Ratte! The man was one gear short in the turret ring.

Naval History Forums

Maus tank

Maus tank

Re: Maus tank

Re: Maus tank