|
LatwPIAT posted:the Challenger (which I'll leave to Frangible to describe) She's not happy with that so I'll try again. Challenger was a Chieftain development/replacement that was supposed to fix all of Chieftain's problems, which it kinda did. Chieftain was widely derided for its horrible engine that lead to chronic maintenance problems, anemic performance and a cloud of somewhat tactically inhibiting blue smoke billowing from the vehicle whenever it moved around. It also broke entirely when it was cold. And when it was hot. Challenger fitted a new engine, giving it superior manoeuvrability relative to the Chieftain and inferior manoeuvrability relative to tanks without a crippled national engine manufacturing industry. It also worked when it was cold and even when it was moderately warm. It didn't work in desert conditions very well but we sold some to ex-British Arab states anyway because that's how we roll. The maintenance situation was much improved, with the tanks going from totally unmaintainable to merely having five to ten years of kinks to work out of the system to get them to run properly. It had the same gun, fire control and even roadwheels as Chieftain but it was notably better than it. This was a success. Until you go ahead and compare it to the Leopard 2, which entered service four years earlier with a better gun, better mobility, anecdotally better fire control, no maintenance bugs I've ever heard of and perfectly good performance in any weather conditions. Granted, the Challenger had superior armour by quite some distance but that's rather undermined by the twin facts that a third of the Challenger's frontal projection was a massive weakspot with inferior armour to the Centurion and that within a few years of introduction modern Soviet sabot could drill through both Leopard and Challenger at European combat ranges just fine. If you look at Gulf War photos of Challenger you can see where they've hurriedly bodged on some reactive armour to cover the LFP. In conclusion, the Challenger was a tank that filled the UK's requirements without actually managing to fully fill the UK's needs. But it was better than Chieftain. And it's the best looking MBT ever built, but you don't get points for that. FrangibleCover fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Dec 9, 2018 |
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 01:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
Would a WWII era tank cannon, a 76 or 88mm, be able to pierce the armor and damage a modern day MBT at any range?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 02:34
|
|
|
Amazon alert! Kindle sale on Wicked War, about the US invasion of Mexico in 1846 is on sale for $2.99. https://www.amazon.com/Wicked-War-L...trKUMQkzkUq-Z_o
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 02:44
|
|
Aww, US exclusive  .
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Would a WWII era tank cannon, a 76 or 88mm, be able to pierce the armor and damage a modern day MBT at any range? A quick glance at Wikipedia tells me the 88 mm KwK 36 could penetrate 132 mm of steel at at 30 degrees at 100 m. That should be enough to shoot a lot of 70s-80s tanks (which is what most modern tanks are) through the hull rear and some of them through the turret rear and possibly even lower hull side.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 02:56
|
|
|
Three high ranking Axis soldiers are about to be interrogated One is a member of the Gestapo. One is an Imperial Japanese officer. And one is a Fascist Italian Commander. They are all sitting in their holding cell discussing what they are going to do when they get interrogated. The German says, “My superior German spirit and intelligence will make it impossible for them to break me.” The Japanese says, “It is only through my undying devotion to the Emperor that I will be able to withstand their torture.” The Italian says, “I’m hosed.” The German is the first to be interrogated, and as he leaves they wish him luck. Nearly a whole day passes before the German returns to the cell, covered in bruises and blood. The other two ask him what happened. “Even my perfect genes could not protect me from their methods. I have failed my country,” Next, the Japanese is up to be interrogated. 3 days pass and he returns to the cell. His eyes are both black, fingers broken, and body bruised and bloodied. “I have dishonored myself and my Emperor. When they release me, I must commit honorable seppuku.” Lastly, the Italian is up, and he leaves already begging for his life. A whole week passes before he returns. Beaten nearly to death, he is carried in by 2 soldiers. One of the soldiers jeers, “I can’t believe you guys broke instead of this dago.” The other 2 are shocked. Amazed that this Italian could take their punishments and not break. They ask him how he did it. “I wanted to give in immediately, but I couldn’t speak.” “What do you mean you couldn’t speak?” The others ask. “They tied my hands behind my back.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
*gesticulates italianly* e: That's not a knock against them to be honest. I use a ton of hand motions when I speak. It's a lot of fun Milo and POTUS fucked around with this message at 03:26 on Dec 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 03:24
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes posted:poo poo. I warned you. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1052885781675687936
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 03:36
|
|
|
you seem upset
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 03:38
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I warned you. please do not punish all of us for his sins
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 03:50
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Would a WWII era tank cannon, a 76 or 88mm, be able to pierce the armor and damage a modern day MBT at any range? Probably, or even knock out a lot of fancy electronics by just firing HE. The issue is that a modern MBT will be able to hit that tank in return from outside its range of accurate fire, at night, and on the move.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 04:03
|
|
|
If you want a good post on the WW2 Luftwaffe flying shitfaced, here you go e: and a little medicinal meth - possibly just boring ol' amphetamines Nebakenezzer fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Dec 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 04:10
|
|
|
the only reason this is presented as different from our own military, any of our college experiences, chitoryu12's daily life, or me last wednesday, is that they're nazis and therefore everything they do takes on a sinister cast good social history tho, an especially good touch was the observation that fighter pilots and bomber crews party/drink differently HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 14:44 on Dec 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 12:41
|
|
|
that's an interesting article, thanks. it mentions that US and British air forces also handed out amphetamines, which is cool to know one difference between these guys and their Allied/civilian equivalents may be the existential crisis that they were undergoing as soldiers on the losing side of a total war. i don't know what effects that would have, though, aside from 'more'. one place to look for analogous effects might be the confederacy. does anybody have good links or thoughts or w/e about similarities/differences between Union and Confederate drinkers in the us civil war?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Would a WWII era tank cannon, a 76 or 88mm, be able to pierce the armor and damage a modern day MBT at any range? Preface: I can only really speak about contemporary American Abrams variants. That said, not really, minus some sort of miracle shot that goes down the gun barrel or through an open crew hatch or something. No tank is invulnerable obviously but for all intents and purposes, there isn't anything those rounds could do versus any part of the tank they could target. HE wouldn't do a whole lot either, those rounds only had about 2 lbs of boom so that's like....throwing a light mortar round at a tank and hoping for the best.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
As you might expect, both sides in the Civil War drank a lot. Officers tried to stop it and generally failed, because soldiers proved really adept at sneaking in alcohol.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:As you might expect, both sides in the Civil War drank a lot. Officers tried to stop it and generally failed, because soldiers proved really adept at sneaking in alcohol. I can’t remember who it was, but one Confederate general at Murfreesboro was so plastered that he fell off his horse during the battle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:
this is totally gut feeling, but my impression is that drinking was bigger problem for the union, and got worse the further west you went. union armies in Missouri were basically drunken hordes the last half of the war. this is also pure speculation but if this impression is correct I would blame the difference on the lack of proper drinking resources for Southern armies more than anything else. all that said I'm also interested if there is any proper answer to this question
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
bewbies posted:this is totally gut feeling, but my impression is that drinking was bigger problem for the union, and got worse the further west you went. union armies in Missouri were basically drunken hordes the last half of the war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 20:52
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:the only reason this is presented as different from our own military, any of our college experiences, chitoryu12's daily life, or me last wednesday, is that they're nazis and therefore everything they do takes on a sinister cast Why you gotta call me out like that
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
bewbies posted:this is also pure speculation but if this impression is correct I would blame the difference on the lack of proper drinking resources for Southern armies more than anything else. i might as well at least google the subject so here's my after action report: i got excited when i found this thesis by MAJ Craig J. Surrey, USA about the Federal army fighting moonshining in the south, but it's about Reconstruction and at least the early part doesn't mention anything that happened during the war. i'l still probably skim through it https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a284658.pdf also here's a blog post about drinking on both sides https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/civil-war/forty-rrod-blue-ruin-oh-be-joyful-civil-war-alcohol-abuse/ there's a lot about how hard it was to get alcohol in the confederacy there, so i guess that's a factor i now remember a mark twain history piece based on interviews with people who lived through the siege of Vicksburg. turns out its chapter 35 of his Life on the Mississippi: http://www.online-literature.com/twain/life_mississippi/36/ here's the part that i think is relevant to our conversation quote:Coming out of church, one morning, we had an accident--the only one that happened around me on a Sunday. I was just having a hearty handshake with a friend I hadn't seen for a while, and saying, 'Drop into our cave to-night, after bombardment; we've got hold of a pint of prime wh--.' Whiskey, I was going to say, you know, but a shell interrupted. A chunk of it cut the man's arm off, and left it dangling in my hand. And do you know the thing that is going to stick the longest in my memory, and outlast everything else, little and big, I reckon, is the mean thought I had then? It was 'the whiskey IS SAVED.' anyway that's all i got
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:one difference between these guys and their Allied/civilian equivalents may be the existential crisis that they were undergoing as soldiers on the losing side of a total war. i don't know what effects that would have, though, aside from 'more'. You could perhaps compare with British soldiers immediately after Dunkirk, or (less so) Americans after Kasserine Pass. Original PhD thesis idea do not steal!
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Alcohol is makeable as long as you have food and yeast - distilled spirits probably were rare because of lack of distilleries, but beer and food get to soldiers the same way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:I can’t remember who it was, but one Confederate general at Stones River was so plastered that he fell off his horse during the battle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:Alcohol is makeable as long as you have food and yeast - distilled spirits probably were rare because of lack of distilleries, but beer and food get to soldiers the same way. Makeable, but not necessarily palatable. You can make pruno in prison but it's not going to be as good for morale as something that's drinkable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
Speaking of Amazon. Prime Video has Gun Jesus compilations https://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=a9_asi_1?rh=i%3Aprime-instant-video%2Ck%3Aian+mccollum&keywords=ian+mccollum&ie=UTF8&qid=1544387984
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Why you gotta call me out like that i mentioned myself
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Preface: I can only really speak about contemporary American Abrams variants. That said, not really, minus some sort of miracle shot that goes down the gun barrel or through an open crew hatch or something. No tank is invulnerable obviously but for all intents and purposes, there isn't anything those rounds could do versus any part of the tank they could target. HE wouldn't do a whole lot either, those rounds only had about 2 lbs of boom so that's like....throwing a light mortar round at a tank and hoping for the best. Okay, so I have this:  For the M1A2. No SEP, granted, but we'll try to validate what it has. The side hull is down for 30mm thick.  Looks like about 30mm to me at the rear and around the suspension components. That front bit won't matter, it's probably the side of the hull front. The skirts are supposed to be 65mm.  Yeah, looks about right as well, instinctively. How about the hull rear, quoted at 40mm. You can see the bottom corner of the opening is probably somewhere in the 40mm ballpark. Obviously the big louvers over the exhausts are going to add a bit of protection but probably not all that much. Also, granted, this is a Marine M1A1 but I can't find anything about upgrades to the rear armour, only replacement of the armour packages inside the vehicle i.e. the composite armour areas. Rear turret armour is going to be tough to find anything on because, for good reason, there are no openings there so you can't look at the armour thickness. I'm happy to take their 40mm at 45 degrees figure, that ends up being around 57mm flat (although flat and angled penetration doesn't quite convert that easily so it could be perhaps 60mm equivalent). Let's assume everything is rolled homogeneous armour because that's what you build tanks from and have a go. At 100m the Kwk 36 from a Tiger I with APCBC can penetrate 132mm at 30 degrees from German testing, which gets to around 197mm flat, or 219mm flat from Allied testing using slightly different methodology. At 500m the penetration figures are 110mm (127mm) and 151mm. At 100m the Kwk 36 from a Tiger I with APCR can penetrate 171mm at 30 degrees, 152mm flat, or 162mm flat from Allied testing. At 500m the penetration figures are 156mm (180mm) and 200mm. At 100m the Kwk 43 from a Tiger II with APCBC-HE can penetrate 202mm (233mm), or 232mm. At 500m the penetration figures are 185mm (213mm) and 219mm. This thing holds its penetration much better so I'll do 1000m shots as well: 165mm (190mm) and 204mm. At 100m the Kwk 43 from a Tiger II with APCR can penetrate 238mm (274mm), or 304mm. At 500m the penetration figures are 217mm (250mm) and 282mm. This thing holds its penetration much better so I'll do 1000m shots as well: 193mm (223mm) and 257mm. You can see the Composite Rigid struggling with angles more than the APCBC does from the increasing differences between the German and Allied numbers, which is kinda neat. Since it was asked about, at 500m the 76mm M1 from a Sherman with HVAP can penetrate 157mm at 30 degrees, which gets to around 181mm flat. The infamously inaccurate APDS for the QF 17 Pounder would penetrate 256mm at 500m, which was about your maximum effective range. It can be seen fairly easily that any of these shot types will penetrate an Abrams' rear hull from 500m and probably cause damage to the engine, especially the Tiger II's APCBC-HE. I'm very confident in the ability of any of them to penetrate the rear turret, which in an Abrams is likely to cause an ammunition fire of some description and quite probably to destroy the vehicle. Depending on the exact post-penetration behaviours of these shots it's somewhat difficult to tell what they'd do upon a side hull hit but I think most would be able to get through the side rear into the engine or the back of the crew compartment. The APCBC-HE is likely to be a disadvantage here, it'll penetrate the 65mm plate and then fuse so it's probably going to explode outside the armour.  If we're looking at an Abrams with TUSK or TUSK 2 then the ERA is quite likely going to be able to stop shots to the side, but there's still no further protection to the turret rear besides the stowage and there's nothing on the hull rear apart from some slat armour that won't trouble anti-tank shells. The Abrams is penetrable by WW2 guns, and that's fine. Very few places still have functioning WW2 tanks and it's not like they're ever going to get the drop on an Abrams to the necessary extent thanks to the massive sensor advantage the Abrams has.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:i might as well at least google the subject so here's my after action report: Weirdly Vox published a short article related to this subject recently: https://www.vox.com/2015/8/7/9111123/whiskey-civil-war-chart quote:The chart below, courtesy of the David Rumsey Collection, appeared in Henry Gannett's 1883 Statistical Atlas of the United States, using the American Almanac and Treasury of Facts as its source. You can see prices jumping from roughly 19 cents a gallon to $1.92 a gallon in just 3 years (and soaring even higher after that): :format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3944414/whiskeyprices.jpg)
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
Does anyone have good sources detailing what actually happened during pike blocks making contact (Landknecht through pike and shot era)? I'm not really satisfied with any videos or cursory information on the topic, and my university's research page isn't coming up with anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Let's assume everything is rolled homogeneous armour because that's what you build tanks from and have a go. It's not. The chassis is steel, sure, but even on the original M1 a lot of what you're talking about up there is composite. I don't think there's hardly anything on the M1A1 that's just plain steel armor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 23:43
|
|
|
bewbies posted:this is totally gut feeling, but my impression is that drinking was bigger problem for the union, and got worse the further west you went. union armies in Missouri were basically drunken hordes the last half of the war. Lack of resources doesn't explain the east-west difference within the union, though. My pet theory would be a combination of greater evangelicalism in the CSA, and looser command and control overall in the west. It's hard for a 21st century audience to really grasp, but the 1863 revivals were a really big deal culturally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 23:50
|
|
|
i love the common thread between the union guys in the article i linked who kept whiskey in their musket barrels to the vietnam guys in that video smoking weed out of a shotgun. truly war never changes, or whatever the video game said
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Soviet armour design was consistently superior to Western armour design in the period 1950-1991. As with the comparison between Tiger tanks and their Allied contemporaries above, maybe this is the case "on paper," where you're comparing raw statistics like armor thickness and gun caliber. However, in the "soft" factors like ergonomics and ease of operations I'd give an advantage to the Western AFVs. I don't think they were "better enough" to offset their disadvantage in numbers in a hypothetical WWIII/Fulda Gap scenario, but I wouldn't write them off entirely either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:It's not. The chassis is steel, sure, but even on the original M1 a lot of what you're talking about up there is composite. I don't think there's hardly anything on the M1A1 that's just plain steel armor. Also there's the small matter of the M1A1 being able to put a tungsten/DU lawn dart moving a mile a second through the enemy tank before they can even see the Abrams.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 00:52
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
oystertoadfish posted:i love the common thread between the union guys in the article i linked who kept whiskey in their musket barrels to the vietnam guys in that video smoking weed out of a shotgun. truly war never changes, or whatever the video game said And the Soviet soldiers who stored alcohol in whatever they could. There was one story where an inspector looking for illicit booze found that they were going so far as to fill vehicle fuel tanks and radiators that weren't actively in use with alcohol (often just the mostly pure ethanol used as antifreeze). The Civil War saw all sorts of whiskey making its way into the ranks, from camp moonshine to sutlers selling it. I don't know of any time in the history of warfare where soldiers didn't try to gather as much alcohol as humanly possible and drink all of it at once.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
Modern MBTs don’t waste heavy composite/DU to protect stuff outside fighting and driver compartment. No tank with engine on rear has DU or composite for engine bay armor. Armor is optimized to make sure crew can keep killing stuff rather than making sure every roadwheel is impervious to light AT. The m1 lower hull side drawing there is forgetting the skirt- if you aim below skirtline you’re hardly hitting anything except the torsion bars themselves and the skirt is another 30-40mm of standoff armor. M1 turret ammo is sealed behind a blast door so unless the crew is not following SOP, or the door is broken, or loader is just then putting a round in a hit on the turret ammo stowage causes an explosion in the storage that blows off the blow-out panel at the top, directing the explosion away from the tank and crew. And yes, it would deadline the tank in question but it would be repairable. Now a hit on the engine bay from any side would very likely mobility kill the tank then and there, and it would require a totally new engine block- which if there are replacements in store can be changed in a matter of hours. (Propaganda claims it’s “less than an hour” but a 88mm going into the block will undoubtedly complicate opening the rear grille and bend some stuff jamming the engine in place) The engine bay sides are basically fuel and batteries, the actual armor is rather thin even on the sides of it. Yes, in a modern MBT a full fuel cell counts as armor since they don’t combust and they are dense enough to act as extra buffer layer. But this would mean a side hit to engine would require resealing a fuel cell and/or replacing batteries too. Again, a mission kill for the day and a pain for your company maintenance team but that tank will be back in the next battle if there are parts and a crane that can lift 8000kg. So yes, any end-tier ww2 AT gun can temporarily take out any modern MBT in one or two shots given a free selection for angle of attack, less than 500m range and a minute to freely keep shooting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 01:35
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:if it's difficult to acquire resources it'll be difficult to drink, but thinking of how you would prove this is interesting If it has some form of starch or sugar, it can be turned into alcohol. Alcohol is humanity's oldest friend, and it will take more than a lack of supplies before we abandon a friend.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 01:55
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:i love the common thread between the union guys in the article i linked who kept whiskey in their musket barrels to the vietnam guys in that video smoking weed out of a shotgun. truly war never changes, or whatever the video game said Is that why they call it barrel aged? :P chitoryu12 posted:And the Soviet soldiers who stored alcohol in whatever they could. There was one story where an inspector looking for illicit booze found that they were going so far as to fill vehicle fuel tanks and radiators that weren't actively in use with alcohol (often just the mostly pure ethanol used as antifreeze). There were a bunch of incidents during WWII where soldiers used to ethanol being used as antifreeze would get into the habit of draining some and drinking it... until they got to a vehicle filled up with ethylene glycol. Oops.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 02:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Let's assume everything is rolled homogeneous armour because that's what you build tanks from and have a go. I appreciate the effort in this post but your info is somewhat dated. First, following one of the SEP upgrades (I think #1 but I'm not sure) American Abrams have composite or heavy armor on every targetable surface, and even heavier stuff on most of the key surfaces. In other words, this assumption is incorrect. FYI, the majority of the SEP upgrades to protection were putting advanced heavy armor on the exact areas you're discussing. Second, I'm unsure how old that Soviet/Russian document is, but if you're posting on the internet, and it claims to be for an A1, then it is at least 25 years old, and probably closer to 30. In other words, it isn't discussing a modern MBT. You can't really draw any conclusions about a post-2014 American Abrams from it, in any case...that's like looking a a blueprint for an IS-2 and trying to apply it to a T-72. Third, I've no idea what that picture is, but there's next to no way it is a modern American Abrams hull, because taking that picture would be illegal, and posting it on the internet wouldn't be a great idea. It is either very old, or a monkey model. OneTruePecos posted:Lack of resources doesn't explain the east-west difference within the union, though. My theory is that in general the further west you went, 1) the less there was to do, especially after you got past the Mississippi and 2) the leadership wasn't nearly as competent. quote:greater evangelicalism in the CSA This is an interesting theory and I would like to know more. bewbies fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Dec 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2018 02:38
|
|