ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 19th December 2017, 01:54 PM   #201
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 18,138
It was concieved as a tank, the designers called it a tank, the army called it a tank and it was, as pointed out deployed and used as a tank.
If it quacks etc.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th December 2017, 03:22 PM   #202
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,776
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
If it quacks etc.
It would be an Army DUKW.

Sorry. I couldn't help it.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th December 2017, 03:30 PM   #203
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,776
I now want to complain about World of Tanks. (Which I don't play)

Before World of Tanks there were a couple of fairly good tank simulation games. I was addicted to Panzer Elite : Special Edition. ( Not the simplified reboot Panzer Elite Action)

There are no really good realistic WWII tank simulation games left.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th December 2017, 09:11 PM   #204
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,328
While I'll lament the loss of such simulations, I'm not sure how that's the fault of World Of Tanks. Which I also don't play, so I might be talking out the rear end, but from the couple of videos I've seen of World Of Tanks and World Of Warships, it looks like anything but a proper tank simulation. I mean, it may simulate ballistics and penetration, but it's still looking to me more like a third person action game.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th December 2017, 09:21 PM   #205
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,328
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
It was concieved as a tank, the designers called it a tank, the army called it a tank and it was, as pointed out deployed and used as a tank.
If it quacks etc.
The actual official name of the SOMUA S35 was "Automitrailleuse de Combat modèle 1935 S" (or AMC 1935 S), i.e., quite literally "Combat Machinegun Carrier, model 1935 S". It was conceived under that designation, the designers most certainly called it that, the cavalry also called it that, and at least officially it was deployed and used under the role of an AMC, because the French cavalry had no other roles for it in the official doctrines. (Well, it had two more categories and roles for lighter machinegun carriers, but not for a tank.)

So, would you say it's a machinegun carrier then?
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2017, 12:40 AM   #206
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,139
Tank destroyer is a role and a doctrine, not a shape.

They can be tracked or on wheels.
They can have turrets, or be turret-less.
Usually they are less armored than tanks, but sometimes they have more armor.

But it is the way they are used in, the doctrine that guides their deployments that makes a weapon a tank destroyer instead of it being a tank (or something else).
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"
erwinl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2017, 12:50 AM   #207
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,139
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
While I'll lament the loss of such simulations, I'm not sure how that's the fault of World Of Tanks. Which I also don't play, so I might be talking out the rear end, but from the couple of videos I've seen of World Of Tanks and World Of Warships, it looks like anything but a proper tank simulation. I mean, it may simulate ballistics and penetration, but it's still looking to me more like a third person action game.
There is always War Thunder. This has three modes of operation.
Arcade, which looks a lot like World of Tanks. Realistic, where you don't get a lot of the arcade helpers (like aiming pointers) and the physics are a lot more like in real life. And then there is Simulation mode, where there are no helpers whatever and the only view you have is through the commanders binoculars or the gunners sight. Sucks to be in a low tank then.

Aside from that there is also Steel Beasts. The Professional version which is used by militaries in their simulations, where there are multiple simulations running under a common simulation leader. There is also a Pro Personal edition, which is targeted at military personel for personal training and hardcore simulation fans.

Bit pricey though.
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"

Last edited by erwinl; 20th December 2017 at 12:57 AM.
erwinl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2017, 12:52 AM   #208
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,562
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
While I'll lament the loss of such simulations, I'm not sure how that's the fault of World Of Tanks. Which I also don't play, so I might be talking out the rear end, but from the couple of videos I've seen of World Of Tanks and World Of Warships, it looks like anything but a proper tank simulation. I mean, it may simulate ballistics and penetration, but it's still looking to me more like a third person action game.
WoT is more on arcade side. On the other hand WoWS is hybrid of arcade and simulation. (Few things are simplified to facilitate gameplay for wider audience)
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2017, 12:48 PM   #209
TX50
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,906
In toy tank games, there's also "Steel Armor - Blaze of War" (not WW2 though - M60 vs T55).

So how would Centurion Mk1 have fared against the PzKpW V Panther?
TX50 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2017, 02:04 PM   #210
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,139
Originally Posted by TX50 View Post
In toy tank games, there's also "Steel Armor - Blaze of War" (not WW2 though - M60 vs T55).

So how would Centurion Mk1 have fared against the PzKpW V Panther?
Given that the Panther was soundly defeated by the tanks the allies had in real life, I think Centurion would have done rather well.
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"
erwinl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 12:40 AM   #211
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,072
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
WoT is more on arcade side. On the other hand WoWS is hybrid of arcade and simulation. (Few things are simplified to facilitate gameplay for wider audience)
They're pretty much both equally arcade IMO.

I think the reason simulators tend to fail is that the closer to real life you get, the more boring the game becomes.

For example, imagine a FPS game that was realistic. It would have features like
  • Run out of ammunition really fast
  • Get shot even once - die
  • Can't carry 50 different weapons
  • Sprain your ankle while walking - No more gaming for 3 months
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 01:10 AM   #212
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,139
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
They're pretty much both equally arcade IMO.

I think the reason simulators tend to fail is that the closer to real life you get, the more boring the game becomes.

For example, imagine a FPS game that was realistic. It would have features like
  • Run out of ammunition really fast
  • Get shot even once - die
  • Can't carry 50 different weapons
  • Sprain your ankle while walking - No more gaming for 3 months
highlighted

That was what brought me off War thunder.

When not in Arcade mode the only way to spot enemies is by actually seeing them. Every tank and airplane is rendered all the time. It's just that they're only a pixel or even smaller in the beginning of the game.

Very realistic, but a bit of a disadvantage if you play on a laptop as opposed to people who play on a true gaming rig with corresponding monitor.
Very often the first moment you know you have been spotted is when your tank explodes. No hit points. Getting hit is getting killed (there are some ways that you can survive penetrating shots, but my experience was 'one penetration = one kill').

That and the fact that the maps of War thunder were much larger than those of WoT (which in some cases are indeed too small), meant that it often took you several minutes to reach the battle area, only to die immediately after. This combined with a waiting period of 5-7 minutes to even enter the battle (that was back then, I believe it is better now) and this just wasn't fun anymore.

But looked stunning. Oh yes it did.
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"

Last edited by erwinl; 21st December 2017 at 01:11 AM. Reason: Edit: higlight in quote doesn't work
erwinl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 03:18 AM   #213
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,171
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
The actual official name of the SOMUA S35 was "Automitrailleuse de Combat modèle 1935 S" (or AMC 1935 S), i.e., quite literally "Combat Machinegun Carrier, model 1935 S". It was conceived under that designation, the designers most certainly called it that, the cavalry also called it that, and at least officially it was deployed and used under the role of an AMC, because the French cavalry had no other roles for it in the official doctrines. (Well, it had two more categories and roles for lighter machinegun carriers, but not for a tank.)

So, would you say it's a machinegun carrier then?
I would say it's a legal fiction created for political reasons, which has very little if anything to do with the design, capabilities or role of the vehicle. The US Army had a similar level of confusion, and for a similar reason, in the 1930's; US law (the 1920 National Defense Act) stated that only the infantry was allowed to operate tanks, so the only way the cavalry could develop AFVs was to call them something else. Hence, the M1 and M2 'combat cars' shared the entire hull with the M2 light tank - in fact, they were so obviously also tanks that they were redesignated as light tank M1A1 and M1A2 respectively. AFAIK France had a similar law stating that only the infantry could have tanks, which is why the cavalry had to call its tanks something else. By any reasonable definition, both the Somua S35 and the Renault AMC35 were clearly tanks; it just wasn't politically acceptable to call them what they were.

Slightly OT, but the Royal Navy's "Through-deck cruisers" are another classic example of the same thing; aircraft carriers were politically forbidden from existing, so another name had to be found.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 06:54 AM   #214
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,562
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
They're pretty much both equally arcade IMO.

I think the reason simulators tend to fail is that the closer to real life you get, the more boring the game becomes.

For example, imagine a FPS game that was realistic. It would have features like
  • Run out of ammunition really fast
  • Get shot even once - die
  • Can't carry 50 different weapons
  • Sprain your ankle while walking - No more gaming for 3 months
I don't have to imagine that. Operation Flashpoint and ArmA demonstrate that stuff very well. (And Virtual Battlefield Simulation for armies)

Originally Posted by erwinl View Post
highlighted

That was what brought me off War thunder.

When not in Arcade mode the only way to spot enemies is by actually seeing them. Every tank and airplane is rendered all the time. It's just that they're only a pixel or even smaller in the beginning of the game.

Very realistic, but a bit of a disadvantage if you play on a laptop as opposed to people who play on a true gaming rig with corresponding monitor.
Very often the first moment you know you have been spotted is when your tank explodes. No hit points. Getting hit is getting killed (there are some ways that you can survive penetrating shots, but my experience was 'one penetration = one kill').

That and the fact that the maps of War thunder were much larger than those of WoT (which in some cases are indeed too small), meant that it often took you several minutes to reach the battle area, only to die immediately after. This combined with a waiting period of 5-7 minutes to even enter the battle (that was back then, I believe it is better now) and this just wasn't fun anymore.

But looked stunning. Oh yes it did.
And that's why WoT had small maps and simplified mechanics. To be actually entertaining and time to contact relatively short. Although they botched that a bit with premium ammo...
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:10 AM   #215
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,600
Originally Posted by erwinl View Post
Given that the Panther was soundly defeated by the tanks the allies had in real life, I think Centurion would have done rather well.
Centurion (with upgrades) remained a viable first line tank into the 1990's which is more than can be said of any other tank that had its genesis in WW2. It is still a front-line tank (with lots of upgrades) in South Africa. Centurion is the tank the British should have had instead of Comet.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:22 AM   #216
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,171
Originally Posted by erwinl View Post
Originally Posted by TX50 View Post
So how would Centurion Mk1 have fared against the PzKpW V Panther?
Given that the Panther was soundly defeated by the tanks the allies had in real life, I think Centurion would have done rather well.
I suspect, though, that a more accurate representation of a realistic scenario would correspond to the question, "So how would ten Centurion Mk1s have fared against one PzKpw V Panther?" The well-worn myth that it took four Shermans to defeat one Tiger has never really been validated, but one thing that's for certain is that there were far more than four Shermans for each Tiger.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 12:36 PM   #217
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,501
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
They're pretty much both equally arcade IMO.

I played WoWs for a while, but I haven't in nearly a year, for a variety of reasons. I enjoyed some aspects of it, although I wasn't very good; my scores for most ship types (except aircraft carriers, which I refuse to play) were well below average, except for destroyers, which were close to average. Part of the problem is that they have to try to make all ships of each level roughly equal in combat power, for game balance, and I presume that goes for WoTs, too.

Also, I'm not sure if this is true, but I've seen comments on the forum that because WoWs evolved from WoTs, the gunnery model in WoWs rewards you for keeping your bow pointed at the enemy and trying to take any hits on your front armor, rather than your sides or rear.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 01:00 PM   #218
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,252
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
The well-worn myth that it took four Shermans to defeat one Tiger has never really been validated, but one thing that's for certain is that there were far more than four Shermans for each Tiger.

Dave
Meh, comparing Normandy to Arracourt, it seems that unit experience and being able to take advantage of the tactical situation mattered far more than whether you were in a Sherman or a Panther.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 01:01 PM   #219
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 18,138
Royal Engineers still used the AVRE version in the Gulf War.

Jordan and Israel use APC conversions.

South Africa still has gun tanks.

Centurions have been in service with 19 countries.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 01:10 PM   #220
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,562
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
I played WoWs for a while, but I haven't in nearly a year, for a variety of reasons. I enjoyed some aspects of it, although I wasn't very good; my scores for most ship types (except aircraft carriers, which I refuse to play) were well below average, except for destroyers, which were close to average. Part of the problem is that they have to try to make all ships of each level roughly equal in combat power, for game balance, and I presume that goes for WoTs, too.

Also, I'm not sure if this is true, but I've seen comments on the forum that because WoWs evolved from WoTs, the gunnery model in WoWs rewards you for keeping your bow pointed at the enemy and trying to take any hits on your front armor, rather than your sides or rear.
Definitely not. Gunnery model is quite different. Front rewards you for smallest target, but you cannot fire full salvo while there is increased chance of getting citadeled. (Only for few ships it is viable strategy like Dunkerque)

Most of the time best way it is to be in angler (ship dependent) that just gets all guns on target without exposing too much of side. (aka forcing most of shots to either ricochete or hit superstructure.

In short there is not much to be found from WoT.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 05:06 PM   #221
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,600
In the category of what the hell were they thinking, I present, the Char 13t-75 Modèle 51, aka the AMX-13.

Fire 12 shots, get out, reload while standing fully exposed outside the vehicle. Rinse and repeat.

Major combat users:

Israel used the vehicle in large numbers during the 1967 war, then immediate sold them all to Singapore even while they were desperately short of tanks due to war losses.

India used them against Pakistan in 1965 but apparently reduced to just a single operational squadron by 1971.

Hmmmmmmm,....
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 05:22 PM   #222
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,328
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
I suspect, though, that a more accurate representation of a realistic scenario would correspond to the question, "So how would ten Centurion Mk1s have fared against one PzKpw V Panther?" The well-worn myth that it took four Shermans to defeat one Tiger has never really been validated, but one thing that's for certain is that there were far more than four Shermans for each Tiger.

Dave
I'm not sure that (A) there's enough data to have a statistically useful sample, nor that (B) it really mattered anyway. Far as I know, there have been exactly three confirmed encounters between Shermans and Tigers, and one of them was when the Tigers were being loaded onto a train, so maybe not the most meaningful comparison between the two.

That said, there was some truth in the story that you had to send 5 Shermans against a German tank: a WW2 US tank platoon was 5 tanks. So yeah, there was no doctrine for using less than a platoon, so, yeah, you had to send all 5
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2017, 01:18 AM   #223
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,072
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
I'm not sure that (A) there's enough data to have a statistically useful sample, nor that (B) it really mattered anyway. Far as I know, there have been exactly three confirmed encounters between Shermans and Tigers, and one of them was when the Tigers were being loaded onto a train, so maybe not the most meaningful comparison between the two.

That said, there was some truth in the story that you had to send 5 Shermans against a German tank: a WW2 US tank platoon was 5 tanks. So yeah, there was no doctrine for using less than a platoon, so, yeah, you had to send all 5
With regards to the highlighted, I think this myth came from Zaloga's Armored Thunderbolt where he was highlighting that Tigers were actually pretty rare and that most German tanks in '44 and '45 were Pz IV's and StuG's.

Unfortunately this has grown into a bit of an internet tank meme and people quote the stat (which I don't doubt to be well founded) not realising it only relates to American M4's in NW Europe.

It needs to be borne in mind that the British and Canadian forces, having landed at the eastern beach-heads, would be engaging most of the German armoured reserves as they were being fed in from the Calais region where they were being held in anticipation of the "main invasion" due to the success of the Overlord deception plan.

In Operation Epsom alone, most of two Panzer Korps were committed to battle and counted amongst their casulaties no fewer than 25 Tigers.

Of course, its hard to say how many of these were knocked out by Shermans, and even less so what the ratio of Shermans to Tigers in any one engagement was. Which also highlights the point that IRL is not WoT and tanks fight as part of a combined arms system wherein the 1v1 stats comparisons are somewhat useless.

However, and I'm struggling to find the original source for this:

Quote:
A British study concluded, during the Normandy campaign, that if the allies outnumbered the Germans 2.2 to 1 then victory was practically ensured. On the flip side, the Germans needed a 1.5 to 1 numerical superiority to ensure victory.
That's certainly not a 5:1 disparity.

There is another interesting document which records a British M4 platoons combat record over a few days in which they record shooting up quite a few Panthers and Tigers. I'll see if I can find it.
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2017, 04:43 AM   #224
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,328
My bad. It's indeed about American M4s.

The Brits had the Firefly, though, so I doubt that conversely people quoting the "it took 5 Shermans to kill a Tiger" refer to Fireflies.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2017, 04:49 AM   #225
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,171
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
The Brits had the Firefly, though, so I doubt that conversely people quoting the "it took 5 Shermans to kill a Tiger" refer to Fireflies.
My impression is that, between a Tiger and a Firefly, it basically came down to who got the first shot in.

(Thinks idly: What if Han Solo had had a Firefly? And that gets me into the whole Joss Whedon thing, and hence deep into XKCD-space...)

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 22nd December 2017 at 04:49 AM. Reason: D'oh!
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2017, 04:59 AM   #226
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,600
The British certainly faced a greater proportion of German armor moving across France than the American's did. Even so, I recall reading accounts from several British divisional anti-tank regiments which made it all the way to Holland without ever firing a shot because they never saw any German armor.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2017, 09:03 AM   #227
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 18,138
Towed Anti Tank guns were never going to get much action following an advance, they were essentially defensive units. Same with the Tank Destroyers to an extent.

Even the Fireflies didn't see as much action as the 75s.
There is a reason unrelated to availability that the proportion of Fireflies to 75s never got above 2 to 1 and was usually 3 to 1.
Most targets weren't tanks.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2017, 12:24 PM   #228
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,837
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
My bad. It's indeed about American M4s.
It wasn’t even just M4s. One of the encounters was between a Tiger and a Pershing.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2017, 07:42 AM   #229
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,600
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Towed Anti Tank guns were never going to get much action following an advance, they were essentially defensive units. Same with the Tank Destroyers to an extent.
Not sure about British doctrine for anti-tank regiments (many of which had a mix of towed and SP guns - particularly in the armored divisions), but American TD doctrine was very much offensive, even with the towed guns that made up a sizable portion of American TD battalions.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2017, 10:28 AM   #230
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,837
Can't link from the phone but Lindybeige and The Chieftain released a video with both of them going over the Churchhill tank yesterday.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.

Last edited by kookbreaker; 23rd December 2017 at 10:30 AM.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2017, 07:06 PM   #231
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 18,138
Originally Posted by Mark F View Post
Not sure about British doctrine for anti-tank regiments (many of which had a mix of towed and SP guns - particularly in the armored divisions), but American TD doctrine was very much offensive, even with the towed guns that made up a sizable portion of American TD battalions.
Becausevthe US had a separate Tank Destroyer Force whosejob was to attack enemy tanks, whereas British AT guns were part of the artillery. Tanks were supposed to attack enemy tanks, AT guns were for defence.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2017, 04:46 AM   #232
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,072
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
Can't link from the phone but Lindybeige and The Chieftain released a video with both of them going over the Churchhill tank yesterday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yc78EZqHA3U
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2017, 07:39 AM   #233
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,600
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Becausevthe US had a separate Tank Destroyer Force whosejob was to attack enemy tanks, whereas British AT guns were part of the artillery. Tanks were supposed to attack enemy tanks, AT guns were for defence.
The American Tank Destroyer Branch was spawned from the artillery branch and its cadre of officers were all artillery men, hence the predilection for towed guns.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th December 2017, 10:14 AM   #234
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 18,138
Here is a tank and a half

The Conquorer Mk1 with Extra Spaced Armour.

Makes even a Tiger 2 look like a toy.

Lovely new kit about to be added to my workbench.

https://www.scalemates.com/products/...8-pristine.jpg
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th December 2017, 06:05 AM   #235
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,072
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Here is a tank and a half

The Conquorer Mk1 with Extra Spaced Armour.

Makes even a Tiger 2 look like a toy.

Lovely new kit about to be added to my workbench.

https://www.scalemates.com/products/...8-pristine.jpg
There Conq' in Bovington is parked next to the Chieftain and it dwarfs it. That is one big bloody tank.

Mind you, its only a couple of inches taller than the Tiger II (including the commanders cupola) and about 4 tonnes lighter.....

One of the interesting things about the Tiger II is that due to shortages, the only rubber on the roadwheels was between the two halfs of the roadwheel assembly. Otherwise it was bare-metal wheels on metal tracks and at just shy of 70 tonnes, it must have been pretty bloody noisy!
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th December 2017, 07:34 AM   #236
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 18,138
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
There Conq' in Bovington is parked next to the Chieftain and it dwarfs it. That is one big bloody tank.

Mind you, its only a couple of inches taller than the Tiger II (including the commanders cupola) and about 4 tonnes lighter.....

One of the interesting things about the Tiger II is that due to shortages, the only rubber on the roadwheels was between the two halfs of the roadwheel assembly. Otherwise it was bare-metal wheels on metal tracks and at just shy of 70 tonnes, it must have been pretty bloody noisy!
Late panthers also had the same type of wheel.

Churchills had steel whells on to the tracks as well.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th December 2017, 09:09 AM   #237
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,600
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
One of the interesting things about the Tiger II is that due to shortages, the only rubber on the roadwheels was between the two halfs of the roadwheel assembly. Otherwise it was bare-metal wheels on metal tracks and at just shy of 70 tonnes, it must have been pretty bloody noisy!
Noise is something folks don't give too much thought too.

Before it was forced to close a few years ago an armor museum just down the street from me would have an annual open house and vehicle demonstration. Among other items in the collection they had a number of restored M3 Half Tracks (ex-IDF) and a Sdkfz. 251/1 (really a backdated Czech OT-810).

The M3's with their rubber band tracks sounded no different than a deuce-and-a-half truck. The 251/810 sounded like a tank. That one you could hear coming from a way off.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th December 2017, 10:01 AM   #238
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,072
Amazed at how loud the T-34 is also. CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK... RUDDY HELL!
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th December 2017, 10:07 AM   #239
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,072
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Churchills had steel whells on to the tracks as well.
Speaking of Churchills, I was gutted that neither the Churchill nor the Matilda II were running when I went to tankfest.

I'm hoping they will have at least one of these at next years event - They will have an IS-3 making a cameo so think I might make my way to it.
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th December 2017, 12:38 PM   #240
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 18,138
Eden Camp near Malton in North Yorkshire has a Churchill Crocodile, none running.

It's an ex Prisoner of War camp. Now a museum.
Worth a visit if you are in the area.

They also have an Israeli M51 Super Sherman a T-34/85, White M16 Half Track, SdKfz 251, Bren Gun Carrier and a Ferret Scout Car.

Not to mention the artillery and wheeled vehicles on display.

Each of the huts is dedicated to a different aspect of the war. Some huts are as they were when it was operating as a POW camp.

http://www.edencamp.co.uk/discover/
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:32 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.