An even larger tank, the 1000-ton Krupp P 1000 "Ratte", started construction but was cancelled before completion. It would have carried two 280 mm guns (mounted in the same type of gun turret used in Scharnhorst and Gneisenau warships) a single 128 mm gun, eight 20mm Flak 38 anti-aircraft guns and two 15 mm Mauser MG 151/15 guns.

The Ratte made the Maus look like its namesake. The Ratte was to be a nightmare machine and its scale still boggles the mind. It would have been 35 meters long, almost four times as wide as the Maus, and 11 meters high. Armor would have been similar or possibly slightly thicker than that seen on the Maus, but of course covering much more surface area. The tank would have been propelled along on a total of six 1.2 meter wide tread assemblies, three on each side of the tank. This means that the treads on one side would have been only slightly narrower than the entirety of a Maus. No less than eight Daimler E-boat engines would have provided the tank's requisite 16,000 horsepower.

 

The number of crew members is unknown but would have likely topped fifty men, with adequate machineguns studding the hull to engage infantry from all directions.

 

The Ratte would have been able to drive over trucks, houses, and even the mighty Maus tank with ease. Its guns would have leveled buildings, blasted craters ten meters across in the earth, or sunk an unfortunate naval cruiser loitering a little too close to shore. The term P.1000 was a reference to the estimated thousand ton weight of the Ratte, but odds are it would have been much closer to 2000 tons.

 

The tank would have been extremely slow - probably less than the paltry 20 kph the Maus could manage - and difficult to command effectively in combat. While its relative invulnerability would have made up for some of these shortcomings but something that big and that slow would have been destroyed one way or another.




 






The Panzerkampfwagen VIII Maus (Sd.Kfz 205) was a German super-heavy tank design, and the heaviest tank to reach complete working prototype in World War II. The basic design known as the VK7001/Porsche Type 205 was suggested by Ferdinand Porsche to Adolf Hitler in June of 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 (Ger. "Mammoth"). This was reportedly changed to Mäuschen (Little Mouse) in December of 1942 and finally Maus (Mouse) in February of 1943.

The Maus was intended to take over the role of the Panther, Tiger I and Tiger II.

 

The tank's hull was 10.1 metres long, 3.67 metres wide and 3.66 metres tall. Weighing about 188 tonnes (or about 207 short tons), the Maus' main armament was a 128 mm cannon with a coaxial 75 mm gun and steel armour ranging from 60-240 mm. A total of nine were in various stages of completion when the war ended with two completed. The Maus would have had a crew of either 5 or 6 and a total production of between 150 and 200 was planned for one version of it.

 

The principal problem in development of the Maus was finding a powerful enough engine for its weight that could be carried in the tank. Though the design called for a maximum speed of 20 km/h, no engine was found that could power the prototype to more than 13 km/h under ideal conditions.
 

The Maus was designed from the start to use the "electric transmission" idea Ferdinand Porsche had used in his attempt to win the production contract for the Tiger I tank that Henschel & Sohn of Kassel won, which ended up with 90 "Porsche Tiger" hulls remaining unused, and were used instead to serve as the hull of the Elefant Tank Destroyer, There does seem to be one important difference between previous petrol-electric designs and the one in the Maus, the Maus design actually seems to have performed well in tests.

The gasoline engine (the later prototypes were to use a diesel engine instead) in the Maus prototypes, that drove the massive electrical generator, together occupied the entire rear two-thirds of the Maus' hull, cutting off the forward driver's compartment in the hull from any sort of direct access to the turret from within the tank. Each metre-wide track 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.


Dr. Porsche was also very demanding of his engineers. He had promised that the vehicle would "turn in place" just like any other tracked vehicle. Given the size and weight of Maus, the army was understandably skeptical. Just prior to a demonstration, some of the engineers became a bit overzealous and took the vehicle out to test it. They excitedly called Dr. Porsche indicating that Maus had indeed almost turned in place. Dr. Porsche was furious, and rousted the engineer in charge of the system out of his sick-bed and demanded an answer to this "problem." After a bit of looking, one spur gear was corrected and, true to Dr. Porsche's word, Maus could turn in place.

The amount of armour was substantial, the front lower hull (glacis plate) was about 200 mm (8 in) thick, sloped at 35 degrees to the vertical. The sides of the hull were 180 mm (7 in) and the rear 160 mm (6.3 in). The turret was 240 mm (9.5 in) to the front and 200 mm to the sides with a roof of 60 mm (2.3 in)

As a result of its low power and huge bulk the Maus was relatively slow moving and logistically demanding, but could potentially have been a formidable weapon in certain defensive positions where extensive movement was not required, and where its massive weight would serve to its advantage by making it a stable gun platform. In an assault, it would have been less useful but it had the benefit of a turret where a vehicle like the 128 mm armed Jagdtiger did not. It could be considered similar to British infantry tanks which sacrificed speed (but not necessarily cross-country ability) for armor protection. This was not a major hinderance because by the time it was built, the German army had almost entirely abandoned Blitzkrieg tactics.

Development history


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 solutions were studied including various versions of 150 mm and 128 mm guns. Hitler himself in January of 1943 insisted that the armament be a 128 mm main gun with a coaxial 75 mm gun.

 

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.

 

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.

 

The first, turretless prototype (V1) was assembled by Alkett in December 1943. Tests started the same month, with a mock turret fitted of the same weight as the real turret.

 

The principal problem with the Maus that emerged from this test was its power-to-weight ratio. There was no engine powerful enough to give it anything like the 20 km/h demanded by the design specifications. The modified gasoline-fuelled Daimler-Benz MB 509 engine used in the prototype was only able to move at 13 km/h and only under ideal conditions. The suspension system used by the Maus also had to be adjusted to enable it to take the tank's weight.

 

Another issue found was that the Maus was simply too heavy to cross bridges. As a result an alternative system was developed, where the Maus would instead ford the rivers it needed to cross. Due to its size it could ford relatively deep streams, but for deeper ones it was to submerge and drive across the river bottom. The solution required tanks to be paired up. One Maus would supply electrical power to the crossing vehicle via a cable until it reached the other side. The crew would receive air through a large snorkel, which was sufficiently long for the tank to go 45 feet (13 m) underwater.


In March 1944 the second prototype, the V2, was delivered. It differed in many details from the V1 prototype. In mid-1944, the V2 prototype was fitted with a powerplant and the first produced Maus turret. This turret was fitted with a 128 mm KwK 44 L/55 gun, with coaxial 75 mm KwK 44 L/36.5 gun and a 7.92 mm MG34 for anti-aircraft armament. The V1 prototype was supposed to be fitted with the second produced turret, but this never happened.

 

By July 1944, Krupp was in the process of producing four more Maus hulls, but they were ordered to halt production and scrap these. Krupp stopped all work on it in August 1944. Meanwhile, the V2 prototype started tests in September 1944, fitted with a Daimler-Benz MB 517 diesel engine, new electric steering system and a Skoda Works designed running gear and tracks.

Operational use
The story of the super heavy tank 'Maus' is only now beginning to become clear. With the fall of the Soviet Union, more and more information about the "Soviet side" of World War II has come to light. With that information, the history books must be re-written to reflect new information.

 

The official line in the West regarding the fate of both Maus prototypes was that "they were blown up at Kummersdorf" to prevent their capture by the Soviets. Though from one source or another there are a myriad of stories, including that one was destroyed by a rampaging British Typhoon. Though, in a war where every Panzer IV became a Tiger in the minds of the Western Allies, perhaps every Tiger II became a "Maus" upon further reflection.


According to a new reference about the Kummersdorf proving ground, in the latter half of 1944 both Maus prototypes arrived at Kummersdorf for testing after final assembly of the turret and chassis at F. Krupp. As the front approached nearer and nearer to the testing facility, both Maus tanks were sent out to engage the approaching Soviets. The vehicles were approaching Wünsdorf (crossing what is now highway 96) when the first Maus was disabled because of damage to the drive mechanism. This vehicle was later captured by the Red Army. The second Maus was dispatched to Berlin for its defence but broke down at Stamplager, near Zossen. It was blown up by its crew to prevent it from falling into enemy hands. It did not see any combat.


The Russian Commander of Armored and Mechanized troops ordered hull V1 to be mated with the turret of V2. The Russians used six 18t half-tracks to pull the 55 ton turret off the burnt out hull. The combined V1 hull/V2 turret vehicle was completed in Germany and sent back to the USSR for further testing. It arrived there on May 4, 1946. When further testing was completed the vehicle was taken over by the Kubinka Tank Museum for storage where it is now on display.

It appears that the capture of this prototype had little impact on post-war Soviet tank development. Soviet tank design continued to concentrate on strictly limiting size and weight. The next-generation Soviet tanks had similar levels of protection and armament. The IS-3 heavy tank was armed with a 122mm gun, but weighed under 50 tonnes. The T-54 main battle tank, which started production in 1947, provided 200 mm of frontal turret armor, 120 mm of frontal hull armor and a 100mm main gun, while weighing in at less than 40 tons.

 
 
 


A report on the German Maus super-heavy tank, from the Intelligence Bulletin, March 1946

 

The German Mouse Super-Heavy Tank Became Hitler's White Elephant

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

One of the subjects of liveliest controversy during the Allied invasion of France was the heavy tank—the 50-ton Pershing, the 62-ton Tiger, the 75-ton Royal Tiger. Were these worth their weight? Did they gain—in protection and fire power—as much as they sacrificed in mobility? Adolf Hitler's mind was presumably made up on this point. A pet project of his, which few were aware of, appears to have been a superheavy tank that would have dwarfed even the Royal Tiger. Dubbed the Mouse, this behemoth of doubtful military value was to weigh 207 tons, combat loaded. Two were actually built, although they were never equipped with their armament.


The Mouse is an amazing vehicle, with spectacular characteristics. The glacis plate up front is approximately 8 inches (200 mm) thick. Since it is sloped at 35 degrees to the vertical, the armor basis is therefore 14 inches. Side armor is 7 inches (180 mm) thick, with the rear protected by plates 6 1/4 inches (160 mm) thick. The front of the turret is protected by 9 1/2 inches (240 mm) of cast armor, while the 8-inch (200 mm) thick turret sides and rear were sloped so as to give the effect of 9 inches (230 mm) of armor.

 

ARMAMENT

 

For the main armament, a pea-shooter like an 88-mm gun was ignored. Selected instead was the powerful 128-mm tank and antitank gun, which was later to be replaced by a 150-mm piece 38 calibers in length. (The standard German medium field howitzer 15 cm s.F.H. 18 is only 29.5 calibers in length.) Instead of mounting a 7.9-mm machine gun coaxially, the Mouse was to have a 75-mm antitank gun 76 calibers in length next to the 128- or 150-mm gun. A machine cannon for antiaircraft was to be mounted in the turret roof, along with a smoke grenade projector.

 

In size, the Mouse was considerably larger than any German tank. Its length of 33 feet made it nearly 50 percent longer than the Royal Tiger. Because of rail transport considerations. its width was kept to 12 feet (that of the Royal Tiger and Tiger). A 12-foot height made it a considerable target.

 

In order to reduce the ground pressure so that the tank could have some mobility, the tracks had to be made very wide—all of 43.3 inches. With the tracks taking up over 7 of its 12 feet of width, the Mouse presents a very strange appearance indeed from either a front or rear view. With such a track width, and a ground contact of 19 feet 3 inches, the Mouse keeps its ground pressure down to about 20 pounds per square inch—about twice that of the original Tiger.

 

POWER PLANTS

 

Designing an engine sufficiently powerful to provide motive power for the mammoth fighting vehicle was a serious problem. Though the Germans tried two engines, both around 1,200 horsepower (as compared to the Royal Tiger's 590), neither could be expected to provide a speed of more than 10 to 12 miles an hour. The Mouse can, however, cross a 14-foot trench and climb a 2-foot 4-inch step.

 

Whatever the military possibilities of the Mouse might be, it certainly gave designers space in which to run hog wild on various features which they had always been anxious to install in tanks. One of these gadgets was an auxiliary power plant. This plant permitted pressurizing of the crew compartment, which in turn meant better submersion qualities when fording, and good anti-gas protection. Auxiliary power also permitted heating and battery recharging.

 

One of the fancy installations was equipment designed for fording in water 45 feet deep—a characteristic made necessary by weight limits of bridges. Besides sealing of hatches and vents, aided by pressurizing, submersion was to be made possible by the installation of a giant cylindrical chimney or trunk, so large that it could serve as a crew escape passage if need be. The tanks were intended to ford in pairs, one powering the electric transmission of the other by cable.

 

The electric transmission was in itself an engineering experiment of some magnitude. This type of transmission had first been used on the big Elefant assault gun-tank destroyer in 1943, and was considered by some eminent German designers as the best type of transmission—if perfected—for heavy tanks.

 

Another interesting feature of the Mouse from the engineering point of view was the return from torsion bar suspension—such as was used in the Pz. Kpfw. III, the Panther, the Tiger, and the Royal Tiger—to a spring suspension. An improved torsion bar design had been considered for the Mouse, but was abandoned in favor of a volute spring type suspension.

WHY THE MOUSE?

 

Just why the Germans wanted to try out such a monstrosity as the Mouse is a question to be answered by political and propaganda experts. Whereas such a heavy tank might conceivably have had some limited military usefulness in breakthrough operations, it was no project for Nazi Germany experimentation in 1943, 1944, and 1945. For not only did German authorities waste time of engineers and production facilities on the two test models, but they even went so far as to construct a special flat car for rail transport.

The drawbacks inherent in such a heavy tank are patent. Weigh not only denies practically every bridge in existence to the Mouse, but it impedes rail movement unless railways are properly reinforced at bridges, culverts, and other weak points.

Fording to 45-foot depths would have solved many of the stream-crossing problems in Europe, but it seems that the Mouse could actually cross in water no deeper than 26 feet.

Though sitting in a rolling fortress, the six men of the Mouse crew are practically as blind as in any tank. Because of low speed and high silhouette their vehicle would be most vulnerable to hits. Since it is reasonable to suppose that heavily fortified, static positions suitable for attack by a Mouse would also be fitted with very heavy, high-velocity guns capable of antitank fire, the even occasional combat value of the Mouse comes into question.

The German 128-mm Pak 44 (also known in modified forms as the 12.8 cm Pak 80) is reputed to be able to penetrate 7 inches of armor at 2,000 yards. Since the Germans actually had their Pak 44 in service in 1945, when the Mouse was not yet in the production stage, it would appear that the Germans had the antidote before the giant tanks were ready. Moreover, in the later days of the war, a rolling colossus like a Mouse would have been almost impossible to conceal, and would have fallen an easy prey to air power.

The psychological factor thus appears to have played a large part in the demand for construction of the Mouse. The German Army would never have desired such a tank, especially in 1942 when its design was apparently initiated. On the other hand, it would have made lurid headlines and Sunday supplement copy in both Allied and German press circles. But whatever the public reaction might have been, it seems questionable that the Mouse could have exerted any psychological effect on Russian, British, or American front-line troops unless the Germans possessed almost overwhelming strength, as they did when they crushed the Maginot Line in 1940. In 1944-45 it would have been too easy a mark for Allied gun and planes the first instant it appeared.

 

MICE OF THE FUTURE


The appearance of such a vehicle in the opening phases of a future war is not to be entirely discounted. When Red Army armored units counterattacked German forces advancing northward toward Leningrad in 1941, the Soviets effected a substantial surprise and just missed obtaining a considerable victory by throwing in for the first time heavy 46-ton KV tanks backed by 57-ton modified KV's mounting 152-mm tank guns in their turrets.

 


KV1 as Pz 756(r)


 



KV 2  as Pz 754(r)


The first days of a war are a time of uncertainty. This is a period when peacetime armies are proving themselves, when their personnel are still anxious to determine the validity of their matériel and tactical doctrines, when they are anxious to discover what the enemy is like. Rumors grow fast, and untried men are likely to be impressed with the mere report of the size and gun power of a superheavy tank. Officers and noncoms should therefore be aware of the possibility of encountering such colossal tanks. They should see that their men know the deficiencies and real purpose of outlandish vehicles of the class of the German Mouse, and that they do not attribute to these vehicles capabilities out of all proportion to their actual battle value.