Considering the poor mechanical reliability of Tiger tanks, it would seem that there should be some sort of correctional factor to reflect this.

Tom

I just purchased a copy of "Sledgehammers - Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in WW2" by Chris W. Wilbeck.

In this book, there is an analysis of tigers destroyed by enemy fire and destroyed by own crew - 45% and 41% respectively, averaged across all tiger Bns (14% were destroyed for unknown reasons).

I think we can assume that crews destroy their own tank (to prevent capture) for 2 reasons - lack of fuel or mechanical breakdown.

Therefore, I think it stands to reason that tiger tanks have a "reliability factor" between 59% and 100% (i.e., 100% less 41% as an upper bound).

It strikes me as not unreasonable to simply split the 41% in half (attribute half the self-destructions from fuel, and half from mechanical breakdowns), arriving at a reliability factor for 80%.

My thinking is that the OLI value for any AFV should be multiplied by a reliability factor. Assuming I am not too far off the mark, a tiger tank would have an adjusted OLI value of 80% what is otherwise calculated.

Thoughts ?

thanks,