Tonks: Tigers, Armatas, T-72 Alphabets

I have to admit, when I was much younger and really deep diving into tank studies I was always sold on powerful guns, sloped armor that could take a hit, and looks. Never did I consider ease of manufacture, availability of spare parts, etc.

I would have argued all day long nonstop about how one particular tank was better because it could punch holes through their opponents with ease. Who cares if they were fewer in number. Now though I totally can see the argument for efficient mass production and availability of spares, fuel, etc.



True, but the Germans used the StuH, and PzIV for anti-infantry battles.
Not just that the Americans had to transport the shermans as well.

r16 posted a reference about my claim that around 85% of the time tanka didn't engage other tanks.

Also soft stats. Sloped armor was a thing but the downside is very cramped inside a tank like the t-34. This meant it that in combat conditions its rate of fire was almost halved.

Better optics also meant the Germans had around double the effective range. This kind of implies that the Panzer IV could potentially kill them 4-1. Then you see the Soviet losses. Tigers apparently did come close to a 10-1 kill ratio.

A WW2 "leopard" would be a tank more like the Panzer III or IV with the Panther 75mm L70. Great gun and optics on something reliable and maneuverable. Use that range and sights and then scoot. Would require a new design as they couldn't fit said gun on PzIII/IV
 
Last edited:
By 44 and 45 the Germans were using whatever they could get, wherever they could get it.
That's true, during market garden, in their desperation they adopted a kitchen sink approach, with everything from Panzer IIIs from a training school to King Tigers. The latter wasn't exactly a big hit given that they had to maneuver in the narrow confines of Oosterbeek and were kind of like trying to crack a nut with a sledgehammer given that they were only facing lightly armed Paras. The fact that the supporting infantry was often of poor quality due to the kitchen sink approach didn't help either as many units had little or no combat experience and almost zero training in working alongside tanks
 
@privatehudson that play by play was excellent. Somebody did their homework!
 
@privatehudson that play by play was excellent. Somebody did their homework!
Also as an aside one type of armour knocked out by the airborne near the Oosterbeek perimeter was repurposed Char B tanks that the Germans had converted into flamethrower tanks. There was also reports that one of Graebner's vehicles may have been a British Humber armoured car. He captured one in France IIRC and may still have had it by Arnhem
 
Another cool "tonk" design:

1682838655271.png


Though I am not sure what the point is in not protecting the tank tread.
 
dude , stay on topic !

30-04-2023.jpg
 
Ok shameless Civ III advertisement time!

This thread pretty much sums up why Civ III is the best. We've got so many cool model tank units to play with thanks to our unit creators. :)
 
Ok shameless Civ III advertisement time!

This thread pretty much sums up why Civ III is the best. We've got so many cool model tank units to play with thanks to our unit creators. :)
Check out how many tank graphics are available for Civ II sometime.
 
05-05-2023a.jpg



and doing people a favour by providing a clickable link . The Star Wars Dwarf Spider Droid being not an exact match ...


and while ı was googling it ...

Spoiler :

05-05-2023b Smurf-Army-random.png


identifying the model took some time . Imagined it was an Italian turret , then looked for Russians . Finally tried Americans and yeah , it is a M-6 of 1940s .

also a "Mushroom Droppod Army" of Smurfs for WH40K or whatever .

O5-05-2023c brainy squad.jpg
05-05-2023d poppa smurf.jpg


 
...A close imitation of a battleship , to travel on land , and had anti tank guns/cannons not grown in numbers and power since WW l it would have been really effective . This , on the other hand is the original idea of Churchill and company , a 300 ton thing , only because they couldn't do the 1 000 ton version .

View attachment 618790


and this is the Tsar Tank , the Russian everybody laughs at . Despite being specifically meant to fix the shortcomings of Churchill's . You know , months before Winston assembled a committee to discuss the very concept of landships ...

View attachment 618791
historical context
 
might have posted this before

14-05-2023c artwork-by-Longque-Chen-15.jpeg

but like it's the adress , including the spider somewhere above ...

 
Surely the best tank has to be the Renault FT. Service life 1917 - 1980s and as static defenses into this millenium.



 

use of the thing in Afghanistan . Searched for it basically because of the picture in the middle ; once famous . Gotta be wrong , because elsewhere it is said the picture dates back 1990s . Its fame comes from the long barrel , supposedly finally explained as a pipe welded on to make it more tank like . Had it been 2000s , Americans would take it immadiately .
 
Top Bottom