The Tank and other related AFVs. - General

Kursk was lost because of political actions taken by the Germans prior to the event. If the German army was allowed to attack when they were ready to the soviets would have suffered a devastating defeat. Hitler made the army group wait for something like 3 months so they would be able to use enough tiger tanks in the battle. He also re directed supply trains to carry jews to camps, slowing the preparation. I've seen German tiger crews talk about their experiences before and they laughed at the notion that there were enemy tankers who thought they had any advantage what so ever against a tiger. Nice leather reclining seats, a heater and a few inches of steel armor, they had it good. Really good. Not to mention that sporty 8.8cm gun which with they could pop off T34s with at 2000 meters. Hitler was the USSRs greatest advantage.

...that doesn't disprove his point, which was [quote]Oh, was the T-34 a tank proven to fail their crews in combat? I wonder how in the hell they managed to win those armored battles like Kursk.[/quote] especially when it was against more modern german tank designs at that time, like the panther. also tigers weren't invincible, nor were there no advantages allied tanks could have over the tiger. allied tanks had one huge advantage over the tiger, reliability and speed. both of which gave the people who had these tanks under their command opportunities to counter tigers. and even then, there were allied tanks that could go toe-to-toe with a tiger. anyways. The USSR's greatest advantage was its resources. it had the manpower, the leadership, the motivation, and the industrial strength to take the fight to the germans even if it had suffered a costly defeat prior.

You're basically saying that it was only because of German blunders that the Soviets won Kursk. Not true. Sure the Tiger outranged the T-34. Big deal. That doesn't mean that the Tiger's untouchable. They closed the range when facing those tanks that the 88mm guns' superior range turned insignificant. On the operational and strategic scale, the Soviet officers learned much from previous battle experience and as Kursk has shown, they were in many ways equal or superior to their German counterparts. As the Germans shown to the French in 1940, tactical victories have little value if your side doesn't have the advantage on the operational and strategic levels.

[QUOTE=Idi Amin;21171802] I'd rather it broke down and the crew got out alive than destroyed along with its crew against another tank.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.warbirdalley.com/images/P47-bankleft-02.jpg[/img] King Tigers are actually huge targets for one of these bad boys.

[QUOTE=Linelor;21169194]Because they're huge, slow, and one hit turns them into a massive falling fireball.[/QUOTE] Helium.

[QUOTE=Tac Error;21181101]You're basically saying that it was only because of German blunders that the Soviets won Kursk. Not true. Sure the Tiger outranged the T-34. Big deal. That doesn't mean that the Tiger's untouchable. They closed the range when facing those tanks that the 88mm guns' superior range turned insignificant. On the operational and strategic scale, the Soviet officers learned much from previous battle experience and as Kursk has shown, they were in many ways equal or superior to their German counterparts. As the Germans shown to the French in 1940, tactical victories have little value if your side doesn't have the advantage on the operational and strategic levels.[/QUOTE] You know what, I'll stop posting in this thread. You said the USSR had good leadership, the political snake pit of the USSR had good leadership... I need a big glass of water after that one.

[QUOTE=Jund;20914301][IMG]http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us/mauspic/ratte100.jpg[/IMG] Do I win?[/QUOTE] Ova-lord is way-ting. [editline]12:02PM[/editline] They-are brit-tle.

[QUOTE=Idi Amin;21183134]You know what, I'll stop posting in this thread. You said the USSR had good leadership, the political snake pit of the USSR had good leadership... I need a big glass of water after that one.[/QUOTE] I'm talking about the military officers buddy, not those political cronies and Party officials of Stalin's.

[QUOTE=mastermaul;21183071]Helium.[/QUOTE] Riddle one with flack and Machine Gun bullets and see how well it flies then. Airships = big targets in the sky that [B][I]EVERYONE[/I][/B] is going to be shooting at it. as awesome as these things are they just ain't practical for wartime engagements.

[QUOTE=Tac Error;21172825] Oh, was the T-34 a tank proven to fail their crews in combat? I wonder how in the hell they managed to win those armored battles like Kursk. [/QUOTE] ACtually german aircrafts and tanks absolutely fucking steamrolled the T-34's. Soviets suffered major losses and their 5 armies were nearly wiped out entierly if only hitler hadn't stopped Operation Citadel. That one stupid decision saved Soviets from a major defeat and and allowed third reich to fall. [editline]07:48PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Conscript;21180895] anyways. The USSR's greatest advantage was its resources. it had the manpower,[B] the leadership, the motivation[/B], and the industrial strength to take the fight to the germans even if it had suffered a costly defeat prior.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/for_forums/haha_oh_wow.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Kyle902;21181690][img]http://www.warbirdalley.com/images/P47-bankleft-02.jpg[/img] King Tigers are actually huge targets for one of these bad boys.[/QUOTE] IIRC after they checked all the records of WWII only 8 tanks had actually been killed by anti tank rockets. 50 Caliber machine guns can rip through pretty much all armoured cars the German's used and if fired very steeply down on the engine deck of a Panzer IV could destroy them. One thing that is a myth though is how 50's could kill Tigers. So if you ever do hear a P40/P-47 or P-51 pilot going on about how they used to bounce their rounds underneath the Tiger so it would kill them then they're completely talking out their asses.

[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;21188752]ACtually german aircrafts and tanks absolutely fucking steamrolled the T-34's. Soviets suffered major losses and their 5 armies were nearly wiped out entierly if only hitler hadn't stopped Operation Citadel. That one stupid decision saved Soviets from a major defeat and and allowed third reich to fall. [/QUOTE] I'm not even going to explain how myopic this is. In fact this isn't even worth bickering about anymore seeing as how a lot of you fail to look beyond popular perception.

[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;21188752] [IMG]http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/for_forums/haha_oh_wow.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Oh look, another germanophile. The USSR had the strong political and military leadership needed to fight the germans, there really isn't any arguing this. The nazis learned this themselves after they underestimated soviet resolve, believing the government was top heavy and would collapse with the overwhelming shock of a blitzkrieg. As for motivation, this is given. It was a patriotic war.

[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;21160300]If only the tank designers would look in this direction :sigh:[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://keiththompsonart.com/images/full/st-38.jpg[/IMG] need more landships!!!

[QUOTE=Conscript;21190708]Oh look, another germanophile. The USSR had the strong political and military leadership needed to fight the germans, there really isn't any arguing this. The nazis learned this themselves after they underestimated soviet resolve, believing the government was top heavy and would collapse with the overwhelming shock of a blitzkrieg. As for motivation, this is given. It was a patriotic war.[/QUOTE] Ussr political leading was a piece of joke. Our history basically goes really in depth of soviet policies. Plus the country was led by the biggest paranoid uneducated asshole who has ever taken the throne. The army was kept poorly diciplined only by fear and the order to shoot down all retreaters, especially in the later years of war. I'm not germanophile, I just happen to live in a country that had first hand experience with the soviets. My grandfather was in the soviet army, my father was and my grand-grandfather was. I know that all things are not black and white. Soviet army sucked. German army was much, much better place to serve in. But neither top American and british armies. winners write the history. [editline]10:04PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Tac Error;21190644]I'm not even going to explain how myopic this is. In fact this isn't even worth bickering about anymore seeing as how a lot of you fail to look beyond popular perception.[/QUOTE] And it's you who are behind the popular perception. Name 7 good things about Nazi Germany. Without using any help.

[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;21191335]Ussr political leading was a piece of joke. Our history basically goes really in depth of soviet policies. Plus the country was led by the biggest paranoid uneducated asshole who has ever taken the throne. The army was kept poorly diciplined only by fear and the order to shoot down all retreaters, especially in the later years of war. I'm not germanophile, I just happen to live in a country that had first hand experience with the soviets. My grandfather was in the soviet army, my father was and my grand-grandfather was. I know that all things are not black and white. Soviet army sucked. German army was much, much better place to serve in. But neither top American and british armies. winners write the history. [editline]10:04PM[/editline] And it's you who are behind the popular perception. Name 7 good things about Nazi Germany. Without using any help.[/QUOTE] Why should I? You're claiming that the Soviet Army was wholly incompetent at all levels of war and it was only the German blunders that they saved their own asses.

[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;21191335]Ussr political leading was a piece of joke. Our history basically goes really in depth of soviet policies. Plus the country was led by the biggest paranoid uneducated asshole who has ever taken the throne. The army was kept poorly diciplined only by fear and the order to shoot down all retreaters, especially in the later years of war.[/quote] restating your opinion doesn't make it true. the government was in the firm grip of a bureaucracy that kept things orderly. regardless I'm not sure how any weak political leadership could lead the country through a disadvantaged position in a civil war, industrialization in less then a generation, fighting in a war that outmatched all other theatres combined with the germans throwing everything, short of some manpower, they had at it, and generally making the country resurgent by every meaning of the definition. you're thinking of what hitler thought of the soviet government. it didn't work for him the red army was second rate initially, but changed drastically by the time the tables had turned on the germans in the eastern front. by the end of the war it was, without a doubt, the best land army in the world. by then, tactics were more developed, equipment was modernized, officers became veterans, and so on. comparing the red army prior to barbarossa to after 1945 is like comparing the army of the russian empire to the german empire during WW1. commissars, NKVD retreat executions, and the no retreat order fell out of use as the red army developed itself. after 1941 with the halt of the german blitzkrieg, the no retreat order started to lose its use as the USSR wasn't losing ridiculous swaths of land anymore. by the later years of the war it was largely a thing of the past. the germans were no longer an unstoppable monster, quite the contrary, the red army was breaking their back and driving to berlin. morale was at its highest by this time. you're really wrong on this. [QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;21191335]I'm not germanophile, I just happen to live in a country that had first hand experience with the soviets. My grandfather was in the soviet army, my father was and my grand-grandfather was. I know that all things are not black and white. Soviet army sucked. German army was much, much better place to serve in. But neither top American and british armies.[/quote] yea the german army was nice to serve in when it wasn't getting its ass kicked on all fronts. and vice versa for the red army. also [quote]I know that all things are not black and white.[/quote] [quote]Soviet army sucked.[/quote] ???

I've been working on a Challenger 2 tank for my uni project! [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQ_o115cdOY[/media] And a picture of the textured version (still WIP) [img_thumb]http://i43.tinypic.com/15hofeu.jpg[/img_thumb]

[QUOTE=goon165;21184550]Riddle one with flack and Machine Gun bullets and see how well it flies then.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airship#Safety[/url] Quite well actually.

[QUOTE=Conscript;21194899]???[/QUOTE] 47 years of occupation certainly generates a bias in the next generation.

[QUOTE=Second-gear-of-mgear;21039337]Seems like a nice way to park a tank. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ti7z807Dmk&feature=related[/media][/QUOTE] I've always wanted to do that.

[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;21191335]Stuff.[/QUOTE] Eh... you are an Estonian, so your point is obviously biased. I am Russian, so mine as well. I would say one of the reasons you guys were treated so harshly, especially right after the war, was due to your compliance with the Germans and Finish. Perhaps not as far as Hungarians did, but non the less.

[QUOTE=Acezorz;21194918]I've been working on a Challenger 2 tank for my uni project! [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQ_o115cdOY[/media] And a picture of the textured version (still WIP) [img]http://i43.tinypic.com/15hofeu.jpg[/img] sorry for the massive size, I forgot the BBcode for thumbnail.[/QUOTE] You are aware that Challenger 2 Tanks are painted plain darker olive green or has smaller blotches of black on. Also, the texture looks a little like fabric :P Either way, i think the Scimitar or Warrior are the ultimate AFV's.

[QUOTE=Retarded Turtle;21197769]You are aware that Challenger 2 Tanks are painted plain darker olive green or has smaller blotches of black on. Also, the texture looks a little like fabric :P Either way, i think the Scimitar or Warrior are the ultimate AFV's.[/QUOTE] Img_thumb bitch, use it!

The Carro P.40 is kinda cool, it has an optional AA mount that you can stick on the back so it will be defended from both aircraft and armor. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carro_Armato_P_40[/url]

[QUOTE=Retarded Turtle;21197769]You are aware that Challenger 2 Tanks are painted plain darker olive green or has smaller blotches of black on. Also, the texture looks a little like fabric :P [/QUOTE] Yeah, as I said the texture is WIP, my latest texture is the olive green you described and as far as the fabric goes, I was just experimental with filter effects to see how the texture would turn out. I'm quite inexperienced at texturing, but I'm learning :)

If you need some tips on texturing i could help :) Pm me and i could give you some help with the UV map and texturing over skype :D Sorry for the offtopic post :P

[QUOTE=Second-gear-of-mgear;21198223]The Carro P.40 is kinda cool, it has an optional AA mount that you can stick on the back so it will be defended from both aircraft and armor. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carro_Armato_P_40[/url][/QUOTE] The Italian tanks had very little in the way of armor. They were opposite of the British tanks (somewhat). They had little armor but good firepower VS British armored tank that had severely underpowered weapons.

Yup, early British armoured doctrine was even worse than US, the concept of infantry and cruiser tanks is 1800s thinking. Infantry tanks less so, but cruisers are stupid, the concept only really worked in the desert, and there only slightly.

I think cruiser tanks were developed to avoid trench warfare again, so I don't think it's 1800s thought. But yea it didn't fare very well though.