|
Duzzy Funlop posted:The latter part is true, the former is not...at all. Yeah I can agree with this, its certainly a mixed bag. Jagdpanther had a pretty good record for capability, but the death of a lot of German armor, especially the good ones, was using the vehicle where it was not suited. It was such a common issue that StuG companies started briefing replacement infantry troops in the field when/where to call for a StuG and where not to. German Propoganda really muddied the water as to the capabilities of their vehicles
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 09:52 |
|
|
I thought stugs had the best "KDR" of german tanks, but it was also their most produced tank as well I'm pretty sure
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 17:48
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Panther final drive weakness wasnt due to being a prototype: It was due to bombing wiping out the neccessary machining tools to make the proper final drive gearing. The Panther went straight from the first prototype to the first finished tanks in 3 months without really any design changes. It was rushed into battle in an over-engineered, incomplete state with numerous design flaws that a longer development and testing period could have uncovered. And it's pretty far from a T-34 copy; the only inspiration it took was a general design inspiration and an effort to defeat T-34s. It would be like calling the AK-47 an "StG 44 copy."
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/xbcL_kMRGv0
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
WoT, War Thunder, and wargames in general warp opinions, because all the AFVs always make it to the match in reasonably good condition. Even if you have to pay extra availability points to get those German big cats on the field, they will arrive in game just as planned. But in real life, the total lack of reliability means commanders are utterly at the mercy of mechanical reliability RNG. That doesn't enter into games, because losing a match based solely on mechanical reliability RNG is incredibly unfun. Likewise, problems with optics, spotting, and crew moral are hard to measure, and even harder to put into a game without making players hate them. It would be realistic for a green Panther crew to randomly panic after taking a few 75mm hits to the front, but it's not fun to lose a major unit to RNG. For more modern vehicles, mine clearing vehicles like the UR-77 keep being used in urban shock assaults. https://gfycat.com/dampdishonestgermanshepherd
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 00:45
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:The Panther went straight from the first prototype to the first finished tanks in 3 months without really any design changes. It was rushed into battle in an over-engineered, incomplete state with numerous design flaws that a longer development and testing period could have uncovered. And it's pretty far from a T-34 copy; the only inspiration it took was a general design inspiration and an effort to defeat T-34s. It would be like calling the AK-47 an "StG 44 copy." This is true.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 15:11
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:It would be realistic for a green Panther crew to randomly panic after taking a few 75mm hits to the front, but it's not fun to lose a major unit to RNG. Steel Division is more like this, it made me realize that basically tanks are loving pieces of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
soy posted:Steel Division is more like this, it made me realize that basically tanks are loving pieces of poo poo. Also they're useless without infantry support. People have it in their minds that tanks are unstoppable metal beasts marauding across the battlefield, destroying everything in their paths. In reality it's really hard to see anything from inside, and the TC standing in the cupola is a bullet magnet. At the point of contact, without infantry around you to clear away missile teams and sappers a tank is a big, blind, lumbering gun.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
soy posted:Steel Division is more like this, it made me realize that basically tanks are loving pieces of poo poo. Men of War has probably the most realistic tank combat of any game I've played. Each tank has a crew that can bail out if they get shot up and each crew member can die individually. It's hilarious to directly control one of your MGs or snipers and shoot the commander out of an enemy tanks cupola.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:Also they're useless without infantry support. People have it in their minds that tanks are unstoppable metal beasts marauding across the battlefield, destroying everything in their paths. In reality it's really hard to see anything from inside, and the TC standing in the cupola is a bullet magnet. At the point of contact, without infantry around you to clear away missile teams and sappers a tank is a big, blind, lumbering gun. This, it was both the downfall of French tanks during Case Yellow and Russian AND German tanks during Case Blue. StuG teams got so pissed about being called in to support and then find no infantry support, they handed out pamphlets and held impromptu orientation meetings for reserves coming to the front to tell them when/where a StuG is useful and when it is not. Its not even a modern issue, German Propaganda was so effective at portraying tanks as 'invulnerable' that their own infantry bought into it and didn't support the tanks in the field properly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
The Russians learned the whole "Tanks need Infantry" the hard way during the Winter War.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 19:22
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:The Russians learned the whole "Tanks need Infantry" the hard way during the Winter War. Also: "We need a better tank" since the T-34 had just come on the scene, and most of their tanks were older model Cav and Infantry Support tanks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 19:26
|
|
|
 Red Army Solution: tank takes infantry with it. always have little buddies around that way
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:
Yeah, this solution happened 1942(?), it was recognized that just using the T-34s for long distance travel was easier than trucks. Its worth noting early T-34s suffered from the same sort of Transmission issues the Germans did, it was not uncommon for T-34s to have a spare transmission strapped to the engine deck.  Probably because they were using straight cut gears, and the Soviets had metallurgy issues: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
Speaking of tanks, I'm trying to dig up some recent-ish footage or documentation of folks knocking out armor with fuel soaked carpet or some other similar material. I want to say this was happening when Libya started popping off, but maybe it was in Syria? The bundle would get crammed into the top rear of the track and be ignited, disabling the tank or at least forcing it to stop and the crew to bail out. I've asked a tank smart buddy if this is even feasible and he tells me it sure is, especially if the tank has gently caress all infantry support to keep people from running up on the thing and doing whatever they please, but I can't actually find examples of this happening.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:04
|
|
|
Capn Beeb posted:Speaking of tanks, I'm trying to dig up some recent-ish footage or documentation of folks knocking out armor with fuel soaked carpet or some other similar material. I want to say this was happening when Libya started popping off, but maybe it was in Syria? The bundle would get crammed into the top rear of the track and be ignited, disabling the tank or at least forcing it to stop and the crew to bail out. This is a fairly old tactic, the Soviets did this with Molotovs against Tigers, dropping them on the engine deck and forcing the crew to evacuate the tank. https://youtu.be/Gyv7VTXvAfw Basically, its a known weakness of tanks. If they get around your sides or rear, you are probably dead. Its why tanks are terrible in urban environments.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:15
|
|
|
In Syria dudes where running up to tanks and throwing explosives down the barrel and igniting the inside. I'll try and find the video
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
Hot Karl Marx posted:In Syria dudes where running up to tanks and throwing explosives down the barrel and igniting the inside. I'll try and find the video There are multiple
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:20
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGxNzZYr_1k its at the 1 minute marker
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:21
|
|
|
Hot Karl Marx posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGxNzZYr_1k  Wow, that flared up quick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:22
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
This is the autoloader on a T-72. It's in the turret ring. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:27
|
|
|
ded posted:This is the autoloader on a T-72. It's in the turret ring. Oh look, its a campfire ready to go!
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
They made thousands and thousands of T-72's, who cares about a few lost to cook offs
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
Hot Karl Marx posted:They made thousands and thousands of T-72's, who cares about a few lost to cook offs Yeah, Crew survival was not a huge concern to the Soviets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
Also, for various reasons, the soviets really, really wanted their MBTs to be small. But they still need to carry the typical amounts of tank ammo, and that ammo has to go somewhere. Just look at how the T-72 is way smaller than the M1 in this picture.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 23:43
|
|
|
The Soviets were also nuts in that they air dropped light armored vehicles with the crews inside https://warisboring.com/the-ussrs-air-dropped-fighting-vehicles-tore-through-cold-war-conflicts/
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:This is a fairly old tactic, the Soviets did this with Molotovs against Tigers, dropping them on the engine deck and forcing the crew to evacuate the tank. Yep, people just refuse to believe that fire is Bad for tanks for some reason. Hot Karl Marx posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGxNzZYr_1k This too. I don't know why people think tanks are some unstoppable killmachine, ever since they came about it seems if you catch one without anyone looking out for it they're loving doomed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
Capn Beeb posted:This too. I don't know why people think tanks are some unstoppable killmachine, ever since they came about it seems if you catch one without anyone looking out for it they're loving doomed. Modern war videos have created the opposite bias in me in that I now think they're completely worthless deathtraps
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 00:22
|
|
|
Capn Beeb posted:This too. I don't know why people think tanks are some unstoppable killmachine, ever since they came about it seems if you catch one without anyone looking out for it they're loving doomed. Most people have no idea how anything with war works. They see a big thing with armor and a fuckoff huge gun and assume that it must be basically invincible, and the videos of the Syrian Army rolling through towns blasting buildings virtually unopposed doesn't really dispel that notion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 01:24
|
|
|
But tanks are unstoppable killing machines. Until they aren't.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 01:26
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Oh look, its a campfire ready to go! If they just turned the rounds sideways a few degrees, the turret could go up like those lame ground bloom fireworks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 02:34
|
|
|
EBB posted:The Soviets were also nuts in that they air dropped light armored vehicles with the crews inside My old PL had a story about meeting Russian paratroopers at some event or other he did years ago and that's how he learned the Russians air-dropped their vehicles with their crews aboard. Upon seeing the look of incredulity on his face, the two enlisted men with the Russian officer took off their berets and revealed they had identical scars on their heads from smashing into things. The Russian officer then barked a command and they mimed bracing for impact. They only had lap-belts. The officer had a harness.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 02:47
|
|
|
ded posted:But tanks are unstoppable killing machines.  Unstoppable slag!
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 04:46
|
|
|
ded posted:But tanks are unstoppable killing machines. This. When I first joined the Army, I went in with very little practical knowledge of how the the modern Army worked, and when I got assigned to AntiArmor company, I asked if we dropped in our trucks. I knew the Russians did, and I knew G.I.Joe did. Seemed reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 17:41
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:
Spall liner usually goes on the inside
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 20:33
|
|
|
That Works posted:Spall liner usually goes on the inside That's not the spall liner, it's the ablative armor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 21:31
|
|
MrYenko posted:That's not the spall liner, it's the ablative armor. Right right of course
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2019 23:06
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:That's not the spall liner, it's the ablative armor. Train the soldiers well, and it becomes reactive armor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2019 06:31
|
|
|
The Germans coated their tanks with a special barium-sawdust-wood glue paste to protect against magnetic anti-tank grenades, because they were worried the Russians would use magnetic anti-tank grenades against their tanks. The Red Army never deployed a magnetic anti-tank grenade. Neither did the British or Americans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2019 07:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 09:52 |
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:The Germans coated their tanks with a special barium-sawdust-wood glue paste to protect against magnetic anti-tank grenades, because they were worried the Russians would use magnetic anti-tank grenades against their tanks. How does that coating do against limpet mines?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2019 08:50
|
|