An Interview with Oblt. Otto Carius 2/sPzAbt.502
on 1. August 1992 by Uwe Feist.

Text from "Panzerkampfwagen TIGER" Uwe Feist& Bruce Culver Ryton Publications 1992
Foto from intrnet

   Q. Did you train at Henschel and pick up your new Tiger from the factory?
   A. Yes!
   
   Q. How did you and the crew regard the Tiger? What did you like or dislike?
   A. The transmission, armor, and armament were excellent. The vertical side armor on the turret was a disadvantage, but regrettably could not be avoided due to the design and manufacture of the turret.
   
   Q. What were the good and bad points of the Tiger, based on your experiences?
   A. I have no major complaints about the Tiger I !
   
   Q. How did you and the crew feel about the Tiger's firepower and armor protection?
   A. The armor was certainly satisfactory, and the firepower and fighting effectiveness were superior to all existing enemy armor.
   
   Q. How did you rate the Tiger on speed, maneuverability, and crosscountry performance?
   A. At the time, these were adequate, especially since the enemy almost always advanced (or tried to) against us — we didn't have to move as much as they did.
   
   Q. Was maintenance a problem, and was the Tiger reasonably reliable.
   A. Maintenance of the Tiger presented no problem for us. The maintenance and repair units were able to repair our Tigers and make them combat ready.
   
   Q. Was the interior of the Tiger well laid out, and was it large enough for efficient operation?
   A. The fighting compartment of the Tiger I was more spacious than the interior of the new Leopard II. All the controls were practical and well laid out.
   

   Q. Did your crew modify your Tiger to improve its effectiveness in action?
   A. We attached spare track links to the front and to the turret.
   
   Q. Were there any interior features that caused problems, such as ammunition stowage, or clearance through hatches, etc.?
   A. Ammunition stowage in a tank is always inadequate! Entering and exiting a tank is a matter of coordination and practice. The Leopard II is worse than the Tiger in this respect, as the interior is more cramped.
   
   Q. Did you do anything differently from your training to improve the combat effectiveness of your Tiger? How did combat experience match up to your training?
   A. Theory and practice — as with any other occupation — never matched perfectly. Always the crews had to have initiative to meet any situation.
   
   Q. How was the Tiger to use in combat? Could the crew work well together in the noise and extremes of climate?
   A. The Tiger was certainly no motor home, but I survived several winters and summers in our Tiger!
   
   Q. Did you dislike the original cupola compared to the later one? Was the vision adequate?
   A. The newly designed low cupola could not be shot off. I found the vision coverage through the periscopes to be as good as through the old cupola's glass vision blocks.
   

   Q. Were most Tigers hit during combat? What damage resulted?
   A. If your vehicle wasn't receiving any hits, obviously you weren't in combat! Most of our breakdowns were due to damaged running gear.
   
   Q. Were Tiger crews able to adopt to the different conditions on the battlefield, and solve problems in keeping their tanks going?
   A. If a crew was not able to cope immediately and efficiently with all unforeseen emergencies, then it was not a good crew and would not last.
   
   Q. Did your crews remove the front outside roadwheels to keep debris from jamming the drive sprocket?
   A. We did not do this all the time, but when conditions were bad, many crews did.
   

   Q. Did your crew apply any special markings or paint schemes to your Tiger?
   A. The only thing we did was to apply a whitewash during winter.
   
   Q. Did you keep the same Tiger, or did you receive newer vehicles as the war went on?
   A. I kept the Tiger, Nr. "217," from 1943 on. The Tiger was blown up at the end of the war in Pillau, East Prussia.
   
   Q. Did you feel that later models were better?
   A. If you are referring to the Konigstiger (Tiger II), no real improvements — heavier, less reliable, less maneuverable.
   

   Q. How did German Army high level commanders treat the Tiger units?
   A. The Tiger Abteilung (battalion) acted independently and was responsible to its assigned Armeekorps. It served often as a Feuerwehr ("fire brigade") to reinforce or protect critical and strategic points of the battle.
   
   Q. How were your unit repair facilities, and the recovery efforts to retrieve damaged Tigers?
   A. My unit (sPzAbt 502) always had excellent service from the recovery and repair units. Everything was accomplished by the first platoon of the companies, or by the repair company.
   
   Q. How did your unit recover damaged or disabled Tigers? Did you have recovery vehicles?
   A. All our disabled Tigers were recovered by the recovery and repair companies, using their heavy 18-ton FAMO halftrack tractors.
   
   Q. How did you move damaged or disabled Tigers?
   A. Either we towed them with other Tigers, or better, with the 18-ton tractors of the recovery company.
   

   Q. Did you ever have to abandon your Tiger?
   A. Sooner or later, everyone had to bail out of his tank. Disabled vehicles were often recovered at night, and this work was sometimes more dangerous and difficult than combat itself. The crews assisted in the recovery of their Tigers.
   
   Q. How were the Russians as opponents? How did their tactics differ from yours?
   A. With the Russians, their tactics were ordered - no room for change; with us, tactics were requested, and we were free to act according to the combat situation, and to be flexible. The Russians always had plenty of infantry, mounted on tanks or on foot, and used them in almost every situation. However, the lower ranks had plenty of mass, but no brains — they had to follow their orders.
   
   Q. Which Russian tanks were the toughest opponents, and the most dangerous to Tigers?
   A. First, the JS-I and JS-II heavy tanks, then the SU-122 and 122mm antitank guns — all of these came later after the T-34.
   
   Q. How did you rate the T-34 tank, your major opponent?
   A. It was a solid tank, robust, uncomplicated, simple and fast. Its big disadvantages were its sights and communications, both unsatisfactory compared to ours.
   

   Q. How many enemy tanks did you and your crew destroy in your Tiger?
   A. We did not keep an accurate account — I estimate between 150 and 200.
   
   Q. What defense did you use against Russian air attacks?
   A. I think everyone was attacked by Russian aircraft without using the anti-aircraft MG. We felt closing all the hatches was more advisable.
   
   Q. How was the general treatment of enemy tank crews? Did you fire on them or ignore them?
   A. Enemy tank crews abandoning their vehicles and fleeing were seldom attacked or fired on — there were usually more important things. Partisans did not tangle with us.
   
   Danke Herr Carius.