Talk:Hetzer

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Military history: Land vehicles / Technology / Weaponry / European / German / World War II C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military land vehicles task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	World War II task force

Name 'Hetzer'

Do we have a reliable source on the origin of the name 'Hetzer' ? The current language in the article is ambiguous. Regards, DMorpheus (talk) 15:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That depends on if you think http://www.achtungpanzer.com/jagdpanzer-38t-hetzer.htm or http://www.panzerworld.net/facts are reliable. The second, although a tertiary source, cites some good secondary sources.

Edit: google book reference Jagdpanzer 38 'Hetzer' 1944-45, Osprey. Hohum (talk) 00:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice book, not a single proof of the name Hetzer" as official or unofficial usage. --Denniss (talk) 18:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remarkable conclusion; I have the Osprey book sitting in front of me right now. The authors include Hilary Doyle and Tom Jentz, two of the most highly-respected authors on WW2 German armor.

On pages 4 and 5, the authors state all of the following:

* That the name Hetzer was given to a competing design

* That this may have been misunderstood by the manufacturers at the time

* That the first unit to get the vehicles referred to them as Hetzers originally, before changing over to calling them jagdpanzer 38s

* That Guderian told Hitler the name came from the troops (he was wrong about that)

None of this can lead to the conclusion that the name 'Hetzer' is a postwar nickname. On the contrary, it demonstrates that the name was in use in 1944. It is very clear that it was in use during WW2, even if it may have been for a limited time, and even if it was 'wrong', i.e. never official. Regards, DMorpheus (talk) 18:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that the current state of the article captures all this quite nicely, so the editor may have based it on the Doyle/Jentz book from Osprey. regards, DMorpheus (talk) 18:37, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inspired by Mareșal tank destroyer

In May 1944, lt.col. Ventz, the delegate of the Waffen Amt, admitted that the Jagdpanzer 38(t) had followed the Romanian design solution. There is an entire paragraph that describes this in Axworthy's book "Third axis, fourth ally". Also, Cornel Scafeș and Ioan Scafeș, two of the best researchers in this field in Romania, say (in several places in their book about the Romanian armored forces) that the germans themselves admitted the Hetzer was heavily influenced by the Mareșal tank destroyer.Mircea87 (talk) 09:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Failings

Most of the failings originally noted were not found to be the case by Spielberger in the book "Light Jagdpanzers". Ken keisel (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By "comparatively thin armor" the article presumably means surprisingly thick frontal armour, designed for this tank destroyer to use from a defensive ambush position.Aforandy (talk) 10:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, it did have thin armour, it just had a very sloped glacis plate which gave it a greater effective thickness. 203.217.150.69 (talk) 01:28, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Surviving Hetzers

The statement about Hetzers being present today in large numbers due to the numbers built seems erroneous to me. Or rather, the part about it being the most abundant today. Sturmgeschutz III was the most built tank/assault gun of the Germans (the G variant being by far the most common), by a factor of more than 4 over the Hetzer, and a lot of StuGs still survive today. Of course I don't know how many Hetzers and StuGs exist exactly, but I'd be very surprised if Hetzers outnumbered StuGs. And StuG is the one generally seen in re-enactments/movies, and is the more known vehicle.

I am also less than convinced by the unreferenced opining. (Hohum ^@) 22:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both vehicles are actually present today in large numbers.(~80+ each, wrecks included, and StuG III with StuH). The statement is indeed erroneous. Nonetheless, the Hetzer has more functional vehicles because of the postwar variants.--Mircea87 (talk) 07:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the translation of "Hetzer"

I have seen claims of people that the name "Hetzer" is a corruption on "Hetzhund", a hunting dog. Other simply translate the name as "Baiter" or "Chaser". Translating "Hetzer" in online translator often ends up with words as "agitator" or similar words with negative connotations. When the German soldiers coined the name, I suppose they meant it in a positive connotation.

Can anyone explain this?