Let's Take A Look: Jagdpanzer E 100

This article will feature a historical look at a Tier X German tank destroyer, the Jagdpanzer E 100. I will also be looking at its role in World Of Tanks, including its stats, player opinions, and proposing changes where applicable. This blog is dated a of patch 0.9.10

Notice: This article uses third-party sources for its information. While I have no reason to doubt the credibility of these other sources, it's possible their information is not completely accurate. That said, I make sure to use numerous sources so I can cross-reference them and curb misinformation.

Short Summary: The Jagdpanzer E 100 was a historical project to convert the E-100 design into a tank destroyer. A similar conversion was sought for the Maus, but the E-100 proved more favorable. In any case, there are no known documents detailing how the Jagdpanzer would have looked. However, the way it's represented in World Of Tanks is likely the most probable. 

But is this tank a Jagdpanzer, or was it a Sturmgeschütz? What's the difference between the two? Why is the Jagdpanzer E 100 represented the way it is in World Of Tanks? As usual, there's a bit of history to go over first. However little there is for this tank.


In May of 1944, Wa Prüf 6 met with Porsche to discuss a set of drawings put together by Krupp, which proposed the use of a 15 cm L/63 or a 17 cm L/53. Porsche was to develop their Maus chassis into a Sturmgeschütz that could mount either gun, while Adler was to do the same with their E-100 [1].

Krupp however would "do anything" to ensure that the 15 cm gun was chosen over the 17 cm gun, for unspecified reasons. Porsche kept pushing for the installation of a small 3 cm flak gun positioned in their design, but the gun would interfere with the main gun's recoil and was scrapped. In any case, the Porsche design proved to be too tall to fit the required profile for rail transport [1]. Because this was a fault of the Maus chassis, it was unlikely a Sturmgeschütz Maus would move beyond the initial design phase.

In late May of 1944, Krupp was asked to build a 1:5 wooden scale model of the Sturmgeschütz E-100 to clarify questions about space, crew, and ammunition storage [1]. There is no information about this model available, unfortunately. Two months later in June, Hitler ordered to cease production of all armored vehicles with heavy guns. With that order, both the Sturmgeschütz E-100 and Sturmgeschütz Maus died.

Now both these vehicles are designated as being StuGs, so why the Jagdpanzer namesake we see in game? Well, this is actually a common pattern seen throughout German tank destroyer development.

For some clarification, let's quickly define the three main types of tank destroyers.

1. Sturmgeschütz means "assault gun". These types of vehicles are as simply defined as having a gun or howitzer on a motorized armored chassis. They were built to provide direct fire support for infantry on the front lines, attacking enemy infantry and fortifications. By using an armored casemate instead of a turret, these tanks sacrificed the usefulness of a turret for the ability to mount larger guns. Assault guns are characteristic of having large caliber, low velocity guns. However, in the early stages of WWII, it wasn't uncommon for StuGs to have a multipurpose, anti-armor role. This became more uncommon with the introduction of new Panzerjägers and Jagdpanzers. There are only two notable Sturmgeschütz vehicles: StuG III and StuG IV.
2. Panzerjäger means "tank hunter". These types of vehicles were simply motorized anti-tank platforms built specifically to deal with enemy armor. PzJgs were typically conversions of an existing chassis, rather than unique designs based on a preexisting chassis. These included vehicles such as the PzJg I and the Marder series. Typically, these vehicles were lightly armored. Germany set up battalions made entirely of PzJgs to guard tank routes or support infantry that would encounter enemy armor.
3. Jagdpanzer means "hunting tank". Rather than PzJgs which had more of a supportive role, Jagdpanzers were often seen on the front lines. They combined the anti-tank weapons of PzJgs with the protection of StuGs. They were ideally used to ambush enemy infantry and armor, setting up in positions along anticipated enemy routes. Unlike PzJgs, they were specialized conversions of preexisting chassis, often utilizing sloped frontal armor. Notable JgPzs include the Jagdpanther and Jagdtiger.

With this information, we can gain insight to how tank destroyers evolved in Germany during WWII. I numbered those items specifically to help illustrate and gain an understanding of the following: pretty much every Jagdpanzer started as a Sturmgeschütz (the only one I'm unsure of at the moment is the Jagdtiger; I'll have to look into it more).

I'm not sure if every Panzerjäger started as a Sturmgeschütz, however. In any case, most tank destroyers that didn't carry the Sturmgeschütz handle into production at least had it during the earliest stages of development. I don't have a specific source cite, but it's a pattern I've noticed.

• In an effort to mount a 7,5 cm Pak 42 L/70 on the Sturmgeschütz IV, the armored casemate was redesigned and the vehicle adopted a Panzerjäger handle. It would later become known as the Jagdpanzer IV. [2]
• One of the many designations of the Ferdinand was "Panzerjäger Tiger (P)". However, the initial order went out for a Sturmgeschütz on the Tiger (P) chassis, and so one of the vehicle's designations is "Sturmgeschütz mit 8,8 cm Pak 43/2 L/71". [4]
• The Jagdpanther was initially known as "schwere 8,8 cm Sturmgeschütz Panther" up until its first wooden model. When the Panther I chassis was adopted later, it became known as the "8,8 cm Panzeräger 43/3 L/71 Panther". It would later be officially named "Jagdpanther" by Hitler. [3]
• The Jagdpanzer 38(t) ("Hetzer") was an evolution the Marder III (Panzerjäger 38(t)) to improve the vehicle's armor.

So, it's a trend. While the Jagdpanzer E 100 was originally called "Sturmgeschütz E-100", it's safe to assume the vehicle would've gained the Jagdpanzer namesake if it was allowed to reach at least the prototype stage of development, and the same could be said for the Sturmgeschütz Maus, while less likely for the latter since it probably never reached the wooden mock-up stage. Unfortunately, neither vehicle was really developed. But I don't think calling the StuG E 100 the "JgPz E 100" is as egregious as it may sound.

Okay then, but if it doesn't matter so much, why don't we call it "StuG E 100" in-game anyways? Well, that conjecture can be assessed by the vehicle's design.

The following image, taken from the World Of Tanks official wiki, details three designs Wargaming developers could've gone with when they implemented the vehicle. Let's take a look at each one.

Note: I can't read Russian.

1. The top design is probably the most authentic to Entwicklung series. The Entwicklung series, including tanks like the E-25 and the E-100, were designed to share common parts and eventually phase out tanks like the Tiger and Panther with their equivalent "standard panzer". This first design calls for the least amount of modifications to the E-100 chassis. However, because the vehicle was purposed to carry a long gun, the amount of barrel hanging over the front of the tank isn't very desirable. Longer tanks are simply harder to move around and their battlefield effectiveness is limited as a result.
2. While certainly the more aesthetically pleasing design, the middle tank has a serious problem when it comes to mounting the gun. Depression would have been very limited if not nonexistent, not because of the barrel hitting the ground or the front of the tank, but because of the internal breach hitting the roof of the tank. In fact, this design shows the breach clipping through the roof. The armor angle can't be changed much, because if we elevate the angle then we're putting even more armor over the front of the tank the closer we get to the vertical. This design is very front-heavy, even more so considering the weight of the gun overhang. This exaggerates the problems found in the previous design.
3. We should be able to see now why the third design was chosen. The vehicle is both shorter and better balanced than the two before it. And while this would necessitate switching around the engine compartment and the fighting compartment, this was already planned for the E-100. I touched upon this in my brief E-100 article, but there was a plan to mount a more powerful engine which would call for moving the turret to the rear of the tank. Not to mention that, of three designs, this has the most room in the fighting compartment, which would've been favorable for the crew. So not only does the rear casemate design we see in-game make the most sense, but it's actually got historical basis to be in this configuration.

As for the vehicle we see in-game, I think it's actually historically sound and is fairly well balanced. It's a better representation of a JgPz than it is of a StuG. While a more accurate gun option would be the 15 cm L/63 pushed by Krupp, it's fine with its 17 cm L/53. I don't know if the gun is modeled to the correct length, however. I think Wargaming may have just taken the model for the G.W. Tiger's 17 cm gun and put it on the Jagdpanzer E 100 model. I don't know whether or not if these are the same guns at the moment.

Also, I don't know why Wargaming has "Jagdpanzer" shortened to "Jg.Pz." A more historical option would be "JgPz" without the periods, or simply "JPz.". However, it's likely just a stylistic choice, like with deciding whether or not to hyphenate "E-100".

The only other thing I would change on the Jagdpanzer E 100 would be to buff its top speed to 40 km/h. On the alternate E-100 chassis I mentioned, that 1200hp engine should be able to propel it to such a speed. The increased weight over the E-100 would mean it'd take longer to reach that speed, but it would be possible. Perhaps in a straight line that's very long and very flat.

So, yeah. The Jagdpanzer E 100 as we see it in-game is fairly historical given our limited knowledge of the actual design. I can only recommend renaming a few things and buffing its top speed by 10 km/h. Other than that, this is a good machine. I might look further into its stats later.

Until next time,

— ThatTrafficCone [NA]

Sources:

[1] Jentz, Thomas L. & Doyle, Hillary L. Panzer Tracts No.6-3 Schwere Panzerkampfwagen Maus and E 100 2008; pg 48. 

[2] Spielberger, Walter J. Panzer IV & Its Variants 1977; pg 94-95 

[3] Spielberger, Walter J. Panther & Its Variants 1977; pg 190 

[4] Chamberlain, Peter & Doyle, Hillary L. Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two 1993; pg. 140