[QUOTE=ewitwins;37330831]The T-28 is just a sick design, especially with the duel treads.[/QUOTE]
I would hate to be the guy that has to replace the inside tread if it were to break.
I'd hate to be inside it period, it's a massive target for dive bombers.
[QUOTE=EvilSkydiver;37338580]I would hate to be the guy that has to replace the inside tread if it were to break.[/QUOTE]
How do you even do that
[QUOTE=Azaz3l;37276891]Newest Indian arjun mk2, looks like a cross between leopard 2 and T-90
[img] http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/1825/arjun1r.jpg[/img]
[/QUOTE]
bollywood tank.
seriously, that paintjob just made it even harder for me to take the indian military seriously.
[editline]21st August 2012[/editline]
Not sure what's wrong with it, it just looks funny
[editline]21st August 2012[/editline]
probably the wreath hanging off the front
[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;37344702]bollywood tank.
seriously, that paintjob just made it even harder for me to take the indian military seriously.
[editline]21st August 2012[/editline]
Not sure what's wrong with it, it just looks funny
[editline]21st August 2012[/editline]
probably the wreath hanging off the front[/QUOTE]
The paint job and the angled tile things on the turret keeps making me think it's made out of Lego's and other bits of plastic.
[QUOTE=O'Neil;37050096]All these tanks and not a single Pershing, disappointed.
[img]http://www.precision-panzer.moonfruit.com/communities/9/004/006/621/409/images/4546517953.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
The pershing was a horrible tank, the allied commander hated it. The people kept sending them and he kept telling them to stop because the things were more likely to burst into flames when you started them than to see an enemy in combat.
are you retarded
[editline]21st August 2012[/editline]
or are you just horrible at history
[editline]21st August 2012[/editline]
because everything you said was false
[QUOTE=DeathBacon;37351848]The pershing was a horrible tank, the allied commander hated it. The people kept sending them and he kept telling them to stop because the things were more likely to burst into flames when you started them than to see an enemy in combat.[/QUOTE]
Almost certain thats bullshit. From what I've read, they had pretty good history against T-34/T-34/85/100's ect. in the Korean war.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jt5bJQOkI1g[/media]
skip to 2:00. It seemed to fair pretty well against this panther, you know, the best tank Germany had to offer. The tank you're thinking of is probably the M4 Sherman.
[QUOTE=Tark;37059972]
[img]http://www.pansarmuseet.se/103B-1.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
I looked everywhere for one of these but couldn't find it at my local Ikea
[QUOTE=Glorbo;37344641]How do you even do that[/QUOTE]
Yes I had to replace a thrown track and it sucked. you have to watch out when breaking the track that you don't get waked by the release of the tension.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;37352153]Almost certain thats bullshit. From what I've read, they had pretty good history against T-34/T-34/85/100's ect. in the Korean war.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jt5bJQOkI1g[/media]
skip to 2:00. It seemed to fair pretty well against this panther, you know, the best tank Germany had to offer. The tank you're thinking of is probably the M4 Sherman.[/QUOTE]
Weren't the Tiger, the KingTiger and the JagdTiger the best tanks Germany had to offer?
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;37363038]Weren't the Tiger, the KingTiger and the JagdTiger the best tanks Germany had to offer?[/QUOTE]
The tiger was way to heavy. Ehile the l/56 was great, the tiger had no slopes, it dient make great use of its armor. The KT was just way to big, there was one incident where one was manuevering in a town, and had a building collapse on it, knocking it out. The Jt isnt a bad tank, just not enough were made
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;37363038]Weren't the Tiger, the KingTiger and the JagdTiger the best tanks Germany had to offer?[/QUOTE]
But too few in numbers, easily got over powered by infantry and Allied tanks.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;37352153]the best tank Germany had to offer. The tank you're thinking of is probably the M4 Sherman.[/QUOTE]
Well still, Panther was rushed to the front and wasn't completely finished, its suspension made so much problems for Germans, most of tanks went out of use even before the combat. But yea, it was overall equal or even better than Tiger.
[QUOTE=Azaz3l;37363582]Well still, Panther was rushed to the front and wasn't completely finished, its suspension made so much problems for Germans, most of tanks went out of use even before the combat. But yea, it was overall equal (or even better) than Tiger.[/QUOTE]
Its not like any of the tigers didnt have their share of problems. When the panther got int combat it typically performed well. The l/70 was fantastic.
[QUOTE=DeathBacon;37351848]The pershing was a horrible tank, the allied commander hated it. The people kept sending them and he kept telling them to stop because the things were more likely to burst into flames when you started them than to see an enemy in combat.[/QUOTE]
Hnng history nerd mode ENGAGED
This 'allied commander' you're talking about is probably Patton and Lesley McNair. In the book [URL="http://www.amazon.com/Death-Traps-Survival-American-Division/dp/0891416706"]Death Traps[/URL] (I have it, its a really good read for those of you interested in US armor during the push to Berlin) the author talks a bit about how poopy the Sherman and Patton were. Mainly Patton, due to the fact that he didn't like the idea of a slower moving tank, which was probably because he anted to get more glory from getting somewhere first. The sherman never exploded when you turned it on, it just had shit armor and a gun that wasn't good enough to poke a hole in most German tanks front glacis. The Pershing may have been slower, but that was because it had more armor, a bigger and better engine(that didnt burst into flames), and a 76mm gun that was pretty good at poking holes in German tanks.
Didnt the pershing get a 90mm?
what the fuck was even the point of the jagdtiger
everything the jagdtiger could do the king tiger could do too, and probably better
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
the king tiger even had a way better gun as well
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;37363930]Didnt the pershing get a 90mm?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, they called those Pattons I think.
No, the Pershing had a 90mm. Same one the M36 used.
[QUOTE=Bumgall;37364129]what the fuck was even the point of the jagdtiger
everything the jagdtiger could do the king tiger could do too, and probably better
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
the king tiger even had a way better gun as well[/QUOTE]
Considering that jadgtiger had a 128mm gun, it was good at destroying fortified positions and tanks with heavy armor.
world of tanks stat discussion thread
[QUOTE=Bumgall;37364129]what the fuck was even the point of the jagdtiger
everything the jagdtiger could do the king tiger could do too, and probably better
[editline]22nd August 2012[/editline]
the king tiger even had a way better gun as well[/QUOTE]
Fear factor, and the jts 128 was more effective at destroying armor and bunkers. Plus the king tiger and jagdtiger are very different types of tanks yhat shouldnt be compared.
[QUOTE=DeathBacon;37351848]The pershing was a horrible tank, the allied commander hated it. The people kept sending them and he kept telling them to stop because the things were more likely to burst into flames when you started them than to see an enemy in combat.[/QUOTE]
First pershings on the field used the same engine as the "Easy Eight" shermans, they didnt burst(Despite the common belief of the gasoline engines exploding for the Shermans, it was actually an ammo rack problem that was fixed with 'wet ammo racks'). They were actually quite good, they had the armor to stand toe to toe with the big cats and had the gun to tank them on . As well. Pershing was going to be the US "Wonder tank". They actually planned quite a lot of variants for it if Russia ever came over after WWII. M26 did somewhat become the "wonder tank" Seeing it was the tank that lead on to other great tanks, like the M47, M48 and M60, pretty much any tank past the Pershing can trace its history to it (M103, T110, T95, T96, T52...ect).
All in all the Pershing was a great tank, just a little late like the Centurion. I would've loved to hear more reports of it engaging german armor. M46 Patton (pretty much an M26 in every way except modernized) was a loved tank in the korean war, dont see why the Pershing wasnt.
FRom waht ive read, the pershing had a tough time with the terrain in korea, its engine just wasnt big enough to carry it up the steep slippery terrain
[img]http://www.chars-francais.net/new/images/stories/galery/1949_amx50-100/amx%2050-100-01%20photo%20dga.jpg[/img]
motherfuckin' AMX 50 100
the baddest boy in frenchtown
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;37364838]FRom waht ive read, the pershing had a tough time with the terrain in korea, its engine just wasnt big enough to carry it up the steep slippery terrain[/QUOTE]
as said, the m46 was a pershing except modernized. it had a better powerplant and bullshit
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
