|
Tell me something about a cool tank that wasn't made by the US, Britain/Commonwealth or the USSR.
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 12:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:36 |
|
|
It was the French who invented the Renault FT, the first tank to have a rotating turret and actually look like what we now think a tank looks like. It was widely used by both the French and American armies in 1918 and if Germany hadn't collapsed, the plan for 1919 was basically for the Americans to point their FTs at Berlin and keep going. 100 Years Ago The title says war crimes. It's not a very happy day, with the Q-ship HMS Baralong murdering German submariners at almost exactly the same time that two German torpedo boats are doing exactly the same thing to British submariners, with a German side order of violation of someone's neutrality. (There is at least some excellently innuendo-laden throbbing purple prose from the author of the Official Naval History.) The Italian front sees the deployment of some more of those magnificent Bosnians, waving their enormous trench-fighting maces everywhere, to recapture the keystone of the Austro-Hungarian defences on Mount Mrzli. Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 13:14 on Aug 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Tell me something about a cool tank that wasn't made by the US, Britain/Commonwealth or the USSR. Czechoslovakian LT-38 was an important element of German Panzer forces in the battle for France and Barbarossa, then served as the chassis for many Marder and Hetzer tank destroyers, the latter which continued its service in Swiss army after the war as G-13.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Eh, saying that the Cold War was primarily created by Churchill is oversimplifying things by quite a bit. Quite a bit. You might say Stalin's legendary paranoia being somewhat contagious was more of a likely suspect, but the hilarity of Churchill running around scaring farmers by yelling about an iron curtain will never fade.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:This is the tank gushing thread, not tankie! I'm pretty sure he's joking.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 13:47
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:but in the First World War, it seems battles go on for a horrifically long time after it is clear that in any sort of military sense the battle is useless. This is the clincher for me in the whole 'Lions led by donkeys' debate. There's been a lot of push-back in recent years about the development of tactics and new methods etc etc. All of which i accept. But the fact remains that time after time these battles were fought on to indefensible lengths when it was clear that whatever new approach they were using wasn't working. Even allowing for the most generous time for reports to flow in, assessments made, reinforcements shifted etc. It should have been clear that the Somme offensive had failed inside 3 weeks. It took 3 months of slaughter before it was called off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:Even allowing for the most generous time for reports to flow in, assessments made, reinforcements shifted etc. It should have been clear that the Somme offensive had failed inside 3 weeks. Why do you say this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 14:35
|
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:That's a question that you will not be able to answer. People didn't get where they ended up because of some uncontrollable maelstrom of history, but of millions of individual decisions that lead there. Such a question is so broad that the answer doesn't make much sense. What you could ask is how structure played a role and how individual stories played out when people ended up in such paradox situations that demanded something of them that they knew being wrong and criminal. Thanks for this post, it makes things much more clearer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 14:44
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:This is the clincher for me in the whole 'Lions led by donkeys' debate. There's been a lot of push-back in recent years about the development of tactics and new methods etc etc. All of which i accept. The intention of The Somme was primarily to relieve pressure from Verdun. Territorial goals were secondary.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
Mirrors posted:The intention of The Somme was primarily to relieve pressure from Verdun. Territorial goals were secondary. Really? Wikipedia says the battle was long planned, and that the French were going to take a large role in it till Verdun started.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
I think with Verdun nobody had a drat clue on either side what the goals for that battle were.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Really? Wikipedia says the battle was long planned, and that the French were going to take a large role in it till Verdun started. Correct - the area of the Somme had been the planned target of an attack by the British for some time before Verdun broke out, but the German attack meant Joffre asked for Haig to move the timetable up, which he did. However in regards to the battle going on too long, the battle of the Somme was a very up and down affair - the first day was apocalyptically terrible but the British army bounced back quickly, making a number of extremely successful attacks before getting counterattacked and everything bogging down. It's important to note that this was the first major British battle involving the now fully trained 'Kitchener's' conscript units, which meant the British had a lot more manpower available than they had previously and so had the option of continuing the attack longer, for better or worse. The other thing that's forgotten is that the Germans took an absolute pounding at the Somme. The British might have lost a lot of guys, but so did the Germans. The combined failure of Verdun and the huge losses to the German army at the Somme were what cost Falkenhayn his job and paved the way for Hindenburg and Ludendorff to take over the high command.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
Klaus88 posted:I think with Verdun nobody had a drat clue on either side what the goals for that battle were. One of the things I find fascinating about WWI is that a lot of major players survived the war to write their account of the war, and generally tried to make themselves sound like the only sane man while the bloodbath was everyone else's fault. The whole 'Bleed France White' and War of Attrition stuff regarding Verdun comes straight from Falkenhayn's mouth, while there is a bunch of evidence to show that he intended it to be a normal breakthrough attack and made a big enough cockup of the whole thing that he tried to cover it up in his memoirs. Am I right in thinking that a whole bunch of German military records from this era were destroying in WWII bombing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Really? Wikipedia says the battle was long planned, and that the French were going to take a large role in it till Verdun started. What I had been lead to believe was the kickoff of Verdun removed a lot of the French reinforcement and aid intended for the Somme and relegated the battle itself to a side theatre intended to help draw the Germans away from Verdun. So planned one way but fought another.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Really? Wikipedia says the battle was long planned, and that the French were going to take a large role in it till Verdun started. They were; an attack along the Somme was the central part of the Allies war plan in the west for 1916. The Germans attacked at Verdun before this happened and that kind of screwed things up, so the Somme turned into a relief/distraction effort from Verdun as much as anything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
The notion of fighting a battle on the Somme was developed by General Joffre, after (spoilers) the failure of Third Artois and Second Champagne made it patently obvious that trying the same thing again wasn't an option; the location was chosen in large part with the intent of shoring up alliance solidarity, due to the obvious propaganda and morale advantages to both sides launching a concerted effort side-by-side (the line of the Somme had by late 1915 become the handover point between the BEF and the French Army), and with approximately equal efforts north and south of the river. Once Verdun started then the French commitment had to be scaled back to allow the noria to work properly, but the Somme was always going to go ahead to distract the Germans both from Verdun and the Brusilov offensive across the way. It was never really planned at inter-Entente level with a specific goal in mind other than attrition and the hope that dual pressure on both Western and Eastern Fronts could crack the Germans' resistance. Things like "Our immediate objective is the rail junction at Bapaume" were developed by staff officers once they'd been told "we have to attack here, what can we usefully achieve by doing so?" Haig would have far preferred the option that they'd all been begging the French for since winter 1914 (an attack out of the Ypres salient towards the rail junction at Roulers and the submarine base at Ostend) but no French Chief was ever going to agree to support it, because it involved minimal direct benefits for France and it would have involved advancing towards the blind alley of Antwerp. MikeCrotch posted:It's important to note that this was the first major British battle involving the now fully trained 'Kitchener's' conscript units, which meant the British had a lot more manpower available than they had previously and so had the option of continuing the attack longer, for better or worse. Important technically-correct point: this is the first battle that relied on Kitchener's Army, but New Army men had started appearing at the front in mid-1915 and plenty of them died at Loos and Gallipoli; IX Corps landed three New Army divisions at Suvla Bay, with the intention of holding the two Territorial divisions for operations south and east of Tekke Tepe (insert hollow laughter here). Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Aug 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Tell me something about a cool tank that wasn't made by the US, Britain/Commonwealth or the USSR. The French FCM 36 tank was the first to have thick shell-proof armour that was also sloped to improve the chance of ricochet, an achievement commonly attributed to the Soviet T-34 for some reason. Also while the Germans were building light and barely-medium tanks, the French were cranking out heavy B1s. The tank's design was closer to WWI than WWII: big tracks that went around the entire hull, a howitzer in the hull aimed and fired by the driver, a one-man turret with an anti-tank gun, but the armour was second to none. These guys could basically drive up and down the battlefield with impunity, bouncing piddly German 37 mm guns off their armour all day long and then coming back to base with dozens of dings in their armour. France built some pretty cool tanks in general and it's a shame they're overlooked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Things like "Our immediate objective is the rail junction at Bapaume" were developed by staff officers once they'd been told "we have to attack here, what can we usefully achieve by doing so?" Oh lord. Words fail.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:France built some pretty cool tanks in general and it's a shame they're overlooked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:The French FCM 36 tank was the first to have thick shell-proof armour that was also sloped to improve the chance of ricochet, an achievement commonly attributed to the Soviet T-34 for some reason. Also while the Germans were building light and barely-medium tanks, the French were cranking out heavy B1s. The tank's design was closer to WWI than WWII: big tracks that went around the entire hull, a howitzer in the hull aimed and fired by the driver, a one-man turret with an anti-tank gun, but the armour was second to none. These guys could basically drive up and down the battlefield with impunity, bouncing piddly German 37 mm guns off their armour all day long and then coming back to base with dozens of dings in their armour. Interwar French military procurement makes the F-35 look good. Take the Panhard 178 - a clever reconnaissance vehicle with good cross-country mobility, 4x4, a low profile, high speed, and a 25mm M34 that could penetrate about two inches of armor. Here is how it was constructed: Armament (main) - Hotchkiss Armament (secondary) - MAC Turret casting - SFCM (Cail) Turret assembly - ARL Armored hull - Batignolles-Chatillon, or Firminy Automotive components - Panhard Final assembly - Panhard Add in industrial actions and it's a miracle they produced any of the drat things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:It was the French who invented the Renault FT, the first tank to have a rotating turret and actually look like what we now think a tank looks like. It was widely used by both the French and American armies in 1918 and if Germany hadn't collapsed, the plan for 1919 was basically for the Americans to point their FTs at Berlin and keep going. Got a fancy video of the FT-17 in use by Gunny here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPkMn158Fwo
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
So I was leafing through a volume of documents and I ran into pages and pages of letters from Wallenstein to Graff von Mansfeld, it was like running into a famous person at Walmart. I copied the most entertaining one for the Internet, but first a little cultural context. The guys I study are pretty plainspoken, but while their officers can write very personally to people they're friends with, usually it sounds like this:  (Mansfeld to Tilly) Monsieur: How your contentment and the happy success of all your designs have always given me a subject to rejoice about, and the affection which you have shown to me at other times has given me the courage to importune you with this little word of a letter, and to tell you with this that by the command of His Imperial Majesty I have raised four thousand foot and one thousand horse for the service of the King of Spain and the protection of the Duchy of Milan, having intended by the same command of the aforesaid Majesty to lead my people into Italy in person...etc, etc. And this is only a rough draft; the final probably has both the sender's and the recipient's titles, too. They just sort of...go on. Here's how Wallenstein writes.  (Wallenstein to Mansfeld) Highly well-born count: According to the lord's will I send him what he should do with both Ob[rists] Knetzen now I ask him with this not to delay but immediately have them seized and roundly reproved he is also to have Ob. Lieutenant Beykensten seized and reproved as well because he is the most annoying person in the Emperor's army if the Knetzens become well-meaning then at once back to their regiments, with good grace if not justice, i however remain the lord's willing servant AHZM Here's the back, glued shut with wax and sealed:  The paper is beautiful--extremely thin, soft, translucent. The ink is quite black: since every writer mixes their inks themselves (or, at this level, probably a secretary or something), it's different for each person, and sometimes they've faded. His hasn't. All his correspondence is in his own hand too, which is extremely rare for this period. Usually secretaries handle that. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 11:18 on Aug 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
That's hilarious. "ARREST HIM! He's annoying and I don't like him."
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
for the record, i have no clue what that poor fucker did, knowing these people it could be anything from pissing Wallenstein off to heavy-duty war crimes Edit: "like" is a strong word, we are shooting for "tolerate"
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:for the record, i have no clue what that poor fucker did, knowing these people it could be anything from pissing Wallenstein off to heavy-duty war crimes I like that Wallenstein signs his letters with a slinky.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
Which von Mansfeld is it exactly that your regiment is named after? Must be Philipp I guess, since Ernst is dead by '26.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 00:30
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:Which von Mansfeld is it exactly that your regiment is named after? Must be Philipp I guess, since Ernst is dead by '26. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfgang_von_Mansfeld FAUXTON posted:I like that Wallenstein signs his letters with a slinky.  Edit: It's really a thing about this period--everything is a work of art. Everything can and should be decorated. Basic bookkeeping documents deserve elaborate calligraphy and your signature should have as many flourishes as you can cram onto it. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Aug 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Joke's on them. My signature today is nothing but flourishes 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Joke's on them. My signature today is nothing but flourishes No lie, my mom has one like that. She says she intentionally does it that way so it's virtually impossible to forge. The end result is that the beginning kinda looks like a C and the rest is a seemingly random flow of lines.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Joke's on them. My signature today is nothing but flourishes Euclid Tsakalotos has you beat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:No lie, my mom has one like that. She says she intentionally does it that way so it's virtually impossible to forge. The end result is that the beginning kinda looks like a C and the rest is a seemingly random flow of lines. My signature is five flourishes, with one inside another. But now I think I'm going to sign my name as "Wallenstein" and hope nobody notices.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Euclid Tsakalotos has you beat. Word 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:03
|
|
|
Chamale posted:My signature is five flourishes, with one inside another. But now I think I'm going to sign my name as "Wallenstein" and hope nobody notices. Just sign that poo poo "YO EL REY" with a squiggle, then jut your chin out proudly. Further. Keep jutting. OK, good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Just sign that poo poo "YO EL REY" with a squiggle, then jut your chin out proudly. Like this?  I... might have overdone it. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
Yeah that looks about right.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:No lie, my mom has one like that. She says she intentionally does it that way so it's virtually impossible to forge. The end result is that the beginning kinda looks like a C and the rest is a seemingly random flow of lines. To be fair after you've practiced it a couple of hundred times it really isn't any harder to write a signature like this than it would be to write one without the embellishments. In the art world the quality of your signature is basically a direct indicator of your value as a person, so it seems like everybody slacks off over a few weeks of classes at some point until they have a super crazy one they can scribble out over and over and over again with ease.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
Way back when I was in my teens a cousin of mine worked in a bank and made the claim that signatures now are for you to verify if you signed and thing or not, and nothing to do with anybody else unless being able to verify that. In that spirit, I made mine essentially random, so if it looks like anyone tried to actually make a letter then it totally wasn't me that signed that confession your honour! True story.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
I can barely cursive my name consistently from signature to signature. How the hell are you guys doing this stuff and not having it turn into an inkblot? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
My signature started in proper cursive in elementary school and slowly got less and less correct, until now I very quickly zip between things that don't even look like letters after the C__ C______
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 08:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:36 |
|
|
Were there any freshwater naval battles in the 30yw. I will also accept freshwater naval battles in general, idgaf.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 09:27
|
|
