Talk:Panzer VIII Maus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force

However, despite its drawbacks, the Maus could potentially have been a formidable weapon in certain defensive positions where extensive movement was not required, such as along the Atlantic Wall.

I would love to throw in at the end of that sentence "... if it could ever be transported into position." if it didn't sound so flippant... Krupo 00:34, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

Whatever is wrong with being flippant!?! ;o) We shouldn't exaggerate its transportproblems though...

But what about the statement that Maus was the largest tank design ever? There are no known volume measurements of both the Char 2C and the K-Wagen. Arguably the French giant was somewhat smaller, as it was so narrow and its turret wasn't so gigantic. But surely the K-Wagen must have been larger?

MWAK--84.27.81.59 08:58, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Weight tends to be the factor in determining which tank is the "largest". GreatGatsby 00:19, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

The K-Wagen was approx 12mx6mx3m, while the Maus was 10mx3mx3m, so the K-Wagen probably had a larger volum, but is it appropriate to measure ACV's by their volume? The Maus sure was heavier. (PS. If we're talking sheer dimensions, the prize probably goes to the Tsar tank.)

Yes, but then the Tsar tank wasn't a tank :o).--MWAK 13:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Railway guns could be moved around in pieces. The Mörser Karl could be suspended between two bogies. Who's there to say the Maus's turret couldn't be lifted off and transported separately, not to mention other disassemble-and-assemble -transporting? 62.183.205.191 16:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

This page needs more pictures. - Anonymous

 It's worth noting that a Maus survived the war and is presently at the Kubinka Museum near Moscow.  Basesurge 15:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

Who thought is was a good idea to put that picture in the article? --Adamrush 13:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

corrected typo 128 mm /L5 (changed to L55)

[edit] Typo?

In the article it stated: "Weighing about 500 tonnes (or about 575 short tons), the Maus's main armament..." In the specifications it is given as : Weight 188 tonnes.

Typo?--BorisFromStockdale|Discussion|Contributions 07:47, 16 December 2007 (UTC)