|
OctaviusBeaver posted:I believe this happened to the Americans at the Kasserine Pass in North Africa. At least Wikipedia claims: Doing some googling on the subject, I found this from a random website on a tank unit in the Phillipines during 1942: http://www.proviso.k12.il.us/bataan%20web/Garrett_J.htm posted:tanks also would park with one track over foxhole and spin by applying power to one track It also pulled up a book on google books about an infantry man in a glider unit of the 101st who said German tanks would do it to them and it would grind the occupants to death if the ground was soft enough, and if the ground held racing the engines would fill the foxholes with exhaust. Ensign Expendable posted:Lieutenant [Azobkov] drove his tank over the trench where the surviving soldiers were hiding, and started thinking. How do you get them out of their hole in the ground? Lieutenant Azobkov came up with a creative solution. He opened the emergency hatch, hung out of it, and started shooting the Germans with his Nagant. Those that tried to escape were killed with the tank machinegun. Having killed the ten soldiers from the trench, the Lieutenant grabbed a box of German mines, some documents, closed the hatch, and continued the attack. I like how apparently there was almost nothing that was too crazy that some Russian guy wouldn't try it at least once if he thought it would kill some Germans. Pornographic Memory fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Aug 7, 2014 |
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
Do you guys have any book recommendations for Cold War history stuff. It doesn't neccessarily have to be a giant overview, it can just be about specific incidents/periods. I just like whole secret (but not really) escalation of things between the intelligence agencies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Is there any good books or documentaries about the American Civil War. Bonus points, if about Gettysburg.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Is fiction OK? Killer Angels. Seconding Killer Angels, it hits that sweet spot where you learn stuff and you're also entertained. MrBling posted:Do you guys have any book recommendations for Cold War history stuff. It doesn't neccessarily have to be a giant overview, it can just be about specific incidents/periods. I just like whole secret (but not really) escalation of things between the intelligence agencies. I recently bought Enemies by Tim Weiner, which examines the history of the FBI. Weiner takes the view that the FBI has never been primarily a law enforcement agency, but instead a secret police to battle political threats to the status quo. The Cold War takes up most of the book, but the Red Scare gives context to the Cold War too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 11:19
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Do you guys have any book recommendations for Cold War history stuff. It doesn't neccessarily have to be a giant overview, it can just be about specific incidents/periods. I just like whole secret (but not really) escalation of things between the intelligence agencies. Blind Man's Bluff is about ridiculous Cold War submarine espionage. Ghost Wars is a history of the CIA's involvement with Afghanistan, starting before the Soviet invasion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 11:45
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Is there any good books or documentaries about the American Civil War. Bonus points, if about Gettysburg. Stars in Their Courses which is the chapters about Gettysburg out of Shelby Foote's The Civil War: A Narrative. The whole series is worth buying and reading, of course, but if you just want Gettysburg, Stars in Their Courses will get the job done for you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 12:22
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Do you guys have any book recommendations for Cold War history stuff. It doesn't neccessarily have to be a giant overview, it can just be about specific incidents/periods. I just like whole secret (but not really) escalation of things between the intelligence agencies. I enjoyed John L. Plaster's SOG: The Secret Wars of America's Commandos In Vietnam The situations those guys got themselves into was pretty jaw dropping. I especially enjoyed the Tradecraft chapter, their toe popper use was pretty ingenious. Make sure to check out Youtube for The Cold War. There are several channels that have all 24 episodes available. Great documentary series. DEMAG fucked around with this message at 14:05 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 14:01
|
|
|
OctaviusBeaver posted:I think Antony Beevor mentioned it in one of his books as well. My guess is that it would only work on slit trenches, I think a guy in a foxhole would be harder to crush because it would be narrower and deeper and the tread would just go over the top of the hole. Actually it works surprisingly well. Tanks tear up a lot of dirt when turning with one track locked. Here's a Panther doing a partial turn with the track locked; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsodIneQGzI The thing with the Germans waiting for Russian tanks to run over their foxholes is so they can either plant a mine on the underbelly or pop out and run up behind it and slap a mine on it. The Russian answer was to run over and spin on those foxholes to get rid of the threat and kill a German. SocketWrench fucked around with this message at 14:31 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:Actually it works surprisingly well. Tanks tear up a lot of dirt when turning with one track locked. Here's a Panther doing a partial turn with the track locked; Neither one of those turns seemed to really displace THAT much soil being completely honest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
I think the idea was to collapse the trench sides, not transport enough material volume to cover someone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
Plus I don't think you need to get the tread in that much deeper to grind on a dude with your tread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
You don't need to directly grind on a guy or run him over to kill him with a tank. The idea is to collapse the trench, essentially burying anyone in it. Even just a couple feet of dirt can exert enough pressure to immobilize someone's arms and ribcage, guaranteeing them a slow death by suffocation. This is the reason why burying people in sand at the beach is one of the more dangerous things you can do there, and why it should only be done with loose sand on the surface rather than any kind of hole or depression. As far as trenches specifically go, you can put a (relative) gently caress load of pressure across a trench perpendicular to it without causing a major collapse, but even modest pressure parallel to it can cause really bad things, especially if it isn't reinforced with some kind of retaining structure. Even if they manage to dig themselves out it will be after the tank is safely away, and even if it's still in the immediate area they would probably be more concerned with gasping for air than attaching explosives to an armored vehicle's weak points. Cyrano4747 fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
Seems like a rather reckless move with such obvious downsides that you would only do it if you knew as a fact that they weren't a threat to your tank. I am sure somebody has done it Russian or otherwise and it worked. The idea is pretty self discouraging and you would have to be pretty crazy to do it. That Panther is a surprisingly tank agile over such distances and less ungainly as I imagined it would be. I would love to see it in person.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
The Panther was actually pleasant to drive when it wasn't broken down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:Seems like a rather reckless move with such obvious downsides that you would only do it if you knew as a fact that they weren't a threat to your tank. I am sure somebody has done it Russian or otherwise and it worked. The idea is pretty self discouraging and you would have to be pretty crazy to do it. I suppose it depends on what era tech you're dealing with. A German cowering in a hole waiting with a bomb that he needs to stick on some weak spot isn't much a threat when you figure your tread has him pinned in that hole and has the split second choice to try and attach an explosive to your tread that's going to get knocked off before it explodes or hopes you leave without killing him. Obviously going up against a guy with a few panzerfausts would be stupid. But some demoralized, scared dude with a magnetic mine that wants to live to fight again? Not so much There's a few vids on there of that and a Jagdpanther and a few other tanks. Unfortunately the only Tiger resides at Bovington, and with all the work they constantly put into it to keep it running, they don't really put it through its paces beyond a steady drive around a track two or three times a year...not that I can blame them, really. SocketWrench fucked around with this message at 16:29 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Do you guys have any book recommendations for Cold War history stuff. It doesn't neccessarily have to be a giant overview, it can just be about specific incidents/periods. I just like whole secret (but not really) escalation of things between the intelligence agencies. For classic spy vs spy counter-intelligence, I really enjoyed Cassidy's Run by David Wise. Nerve gas, decades long sting operations, double agents, the works. Shooting at the Moon covers the secret war in Laos, and the good old days when an American with a suitcase full of cash and radio link to God (or an ARC LIGHT strike-next best thing) could change the course of nations. While the field operations get all the press, most CIA agents are analysts trying to piece together enemy capabilities and intentions. War of Numbers by Sam Adams chronicles the career of an analyst trying to get a clear order of battle on the Viet Cong, and his struggles with a military that was keeping three sets of books.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:There's a few vids on there of that and a Jagdpanther and a few other tanks. Unfortunately the only Tiger resides at Bovington, and with all the work they constantly put into it to keep it running, they don't really put it through its paces beyond a steady drive around a track two or three times a year...not that I can blame them, really. And the odd Movie role.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Those are mostly T-34s with Tiger shells built over them as far as I can tell. I'm not actually aware of any movie that used a real Tiger.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
Do we still have the blueprints? Could a movie director simply build a disarmed Tiger tank if he really wanted accuracy?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:Do we still have the blueprints? Could a movie director simply build a disarmed Tiger tank if he really wanted accuracy? Accuracy in what regard? If it's all about the visuals then cgi should suffice. While it's nice that you get to see reproduction airplanes in films, I doubt that movies like A Bridge Too Far would be more accurate had they used real Panthers instead of Leopards with some make up. It would still only be a prop, after all. I don't know if useful blueprints still exist but it'd probably exceed a grog porn film's budget just to build an authentic Maybach HL230 engine from scratch. Production of prototypes consumes lots of time/money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Yeah such a venture would pretty much only be undertaken by a studio that had greenlit at least half a dozen movies that each need a detailed Tiger tank for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
I think that's part of the problem with 131 - the need to custom make replacement parts by looking at the old ones to try keep it running rather than just making them from the plans.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
I'm sure that Hollywood has guys who could build a tank lookalike on an old truck chassis or something that would be absolutely indistguishable to even the nerdiest of tank nerds. If they were so inclined.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
How many movie goers can tell the difference between a T-44 or MT-LB chassis and a Tiger one? Not enough, I'd wager.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
Well we'll find out for sure how good they are at building props for the new Brad Pitt movie "Fury". Looks like he's an Easy-Eight (M4A2E8 Sherman) commander, and the trailer definitely has what looks like a Tiger in it. And it looks pretty decent, maybe the turret is a little far forward.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
MA-Horus posted:Well we'll find out for sure how good they are at building props for the new Brad Pitt movie "Fury". Looks like he's an Easy-Eight (M4A2E8 Sherman) commander, and the trailer definitely has what looks like a Tiger in it. And it looks pretty decent, maybe the turret is a little far forward. Wikipedia posted:Tiger 131 was borrowed from the Bovington Tank Museum for the film. It is the first time a genuine Tiger I tank was used in a contemporary war film.[13]
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:36
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Excellent. Most excellent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Those are mostly T-34s with Tiger shells built over them as far as I can tell. I'm not actually aware of any movie that used a real Tiger. It was a reference to Fury. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Looking forward to that movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
I hope Pitt rocks the Aldo Raines accent he had going in Inglourious Basterds. I think it'd go well for a tank commander. "Gnatzee tank on the left up there roundabout fi-hunnerd yards" "Load up wunna'em tankbuster rounds" "Faaaahr"
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
His character is named 'wardaddy' for some unfathomable reason.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
Suddenly I am excited and angry all at the same time. Why must this movie come out on my busiest weekend of the year?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:Actually it works surprisingly well. Tanks tear up a lot of dirt when turning with one track locked. Here's a Panther doing a partial turn with the track locked; Watching that I can see why the general staff would've been very impressed with the interleaved wheels/suspension layout, when it's being run around the pleasant countryside. As far as these guys rebuilding these tanks and the questionable reliability of panthers/tigers, is it acceptable for them to make replacement parts with modernised materials, machining techniques, metallurgy and so on? It seems like the failures in reliability would be a combination of the brutal conditions on the eastern front, a lack of critical materials due to shortages, and just plain old lovely design because it was the 40's and complicated internal combustion engines and gearboxes and such were still in their infancy. Surely it would be pretty straightforward to build stronger gearbox components, a modern cooling system and so on in the name of practicality? It would be better to have a couple of running examples that can be demonstrated at shows without a constant fear of breaking down, instead of 'authentic' tanks that spend all their time being rebuild after the latest blow-up? Surely?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
I have no idea. And quit calling me Shirley.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
Were 131 not the last Tiger in existence I could see that line of logic working. As it stands, she's kind of a rare treasure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Watching that I can see why the general staff would've been very impressed with the interleaved wheels/suspension layout, when it's being run around the pleasant countryside. As far as these guys rebuilding these tanks and the questionable reliability of panthers/tigers, is it acceptable for them to make replacement parts with modernised materials, machining techniques, metallurgy and so on? It seems like the failures in reliability would be a combination of the brutal conditions on the eastern front, a lack of critical materials due to shortages, and just plain old lovely design because it was the 40's and complicated internal combustion engines and gearboxes and such were still in their infancy. Surely it would be pretty straightforward to build stronger gearbox components, a modern cooling system and so on in the name of practicality? You could make a shell with different insides that use modern components that was still visually similar externally. It won't be any more expensive than remaking the tank from scratch, and it will be cheaper to run and maintain. Also your actors will thank you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:You could make a shell with different insides that use modern components that was still visually similar externally. It won't be any more expensive than remaking the tank from scratch, and it will be cheaper to run and maintain. Also your actors will thank you. Yeah but the real trick would be convincing the studio to bankroll such an enterprise. Not saying it can't or won't be done but I suspect that's the biggest reason it hasn't been done to this day, especially when CG is always an option.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
Some guy made a Tiger on a MT-LB chassis over three years in his spare time. I'm sure if he had a team of more than a couple of guys and a real budget he could have made a suspension too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
I'm not referring to a movie tank. I'm meaning the historically restored examples like the panther in the video. Wouldn't it make sense to fix some of the components that break due to lovely design/metallurgy? Like if you were restoring a P51 and you changed the valve seats to hardened steel so it doesn't need lead fuel anymore, made piston rings out of modern metal and put modern engine oil in it, and so on and so forth. Or is that somehow taboo?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
Slavvy posted:I'm not referring to a movie tank. I'm meaning the historically restored examples like the panther in the video. Wouldn't it make sense to fix some of the components that break due to lovely design/metallurgy? Like if you were restoring a P51 and you changed the valve seats to hardened steel so it doesn't need lead fuel anymore, made piston rings out of modern metal and put modern engine oil in it, and so on and so forth. Or is that somehow taboo? For a museum piece? They should keep it as close to the original as possible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:12
|
|
