One word: Kursk.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
I need to read "What is the best MBT?" thread.
Collapse
X
-
Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?
-
Yeah, but the Sovs had good intelligence and were heavily entrenched at Kursk.One word: Kursk.
By the same argument the Panzer IV was better than the early T-34 because of Smolensk, Kiev, etc.Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
Comment
-
EDIT: Oh. MBT = Main Battle Tank.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum
Comment
-
Run along - it was before your time
Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?
Comment
-
Yes but the Panther series had more technical/maintainance problems especially wrt the engine.Originally posted by David Floyd
What a load of ****. There's no way the T34 was better than a Panther D, IMO, there were just more of them....
We can but hope!Originally posted by David Floyd
And so it begins anew
Comment
-
True, but by the later production models - I'd say Panther D and above - those problems were getting worked out.Yes but the Panther series had more technical/maintainance problems especially wrt the engine.Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
Comment
-
In terms of overall versatility, the StuG III G was far more important than the Panther series, even though it wasn't a tank, technically.
From a technological standpoint, the Panzer IV series is it - the only prewar design to go all the way through the war, and there are more features in modern MBTs that originated with the Panzer IV than with any WW2 or earlier tank.When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."
Comment
-
Actually the famous battle episodes at Kursk were tank on tank.Originally posted by David Floyd
Yeah, but the Sovs had good intelligence and were heavily entrenched at Kursk.
By the same argument the Panzer IV was better than the early T-34 because of Smolensk, Kiev, etc.
Do I need to rehearse the sections of Guderian's memoirs where he notes how much German tankers feared the T34 in 1941 and 1942 because rounds from their heaviest tank at that time, the Panzer IV, simply bounced off the T34's armour.Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?
Comment
-
And technically we're talking about tanksIn terms of overall versatility, the StuG III G was far more important than the Panther series, even though it wasn't a tank, technically.
Hmmm. Yes that's a good point, but even the Panzer IVH was getting a bit long in the tooth by the end of the war, don't you think?From a technological standpoint, the Panzer IV series is it - the only prewar design to go all the way through the war, and there are more features in modern MBTs that originated with the Panzer IV than with any WW2 or earlier tank.
Yes, but the Germans still won most of the battlesDo I need to rehearse the sections of Guderian's memoirs where he notes how much German tankers feared the T34 in 1941 and 1942 because rounds from their heaviest tank at that time, the Panzer IV, simply bounced off the T34's armour.
And IIRC, the losses were comparable - but favored the Soviets because they had more. I'd have to double check numbers on that though. And I'm primarily talking about the Battle of Prokorhovka, but of course there were others.Actually the famous battle episodes at Kursk were tank on tank.Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
Comment
-
15,000 AFV (tank and TD) kills, and a 3:1 armor kill ratio across the entire production series says it's at least an "honorary" tank - especially because the only thing which could tangle with a 1941-1942 T-34 was the early StuG III B through D series, or else 88's in an AT role.Originally posted by David Floyd
And technically we're talking about tanks
No longer in the tooth than the Sherman.Hmmm. Yes that's a good point, but even the Panzer IVH was getting a bit long in the tooth by the end of the war, don't you think?
When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."
Comment
-
True, but up-gunned Shermans (Sherman 76s) weren't actually that bad.No longer in the tooth than the Sherman.Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
Comment
-
Floyd, as MTG mentions, the Germans won the battles in 41 and 42 against T34 because more by luck than good planning they had this handy little 88mm anti aircraft gun which they found worked quite well in the anti tank role.
The Tiger and Panther series were developed to counter the T34.Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?
Comment
Comment