|
|
Post by howler on May 8, 2020 2:45:27 GMT
Best tank of WW2. Does one include production value in the equation? My pick would be a medium sized one due to best combination of range, mobility, firepower, protection, production. T34/85 86. Do we count models created near or at end of the war that did not see much or any action? The T34 was originally equipped with a 75mm gun (T34/76) until the Russians found themselves out ranged by the 7.5 cm KwK 42 L/70 on the Panther as well as the Tiger's 8.8 cm KwK 36 when they upgraded the T34 late in the war to the 85mm High velocity gun ( T34/85 ) Opps, meant T34/85. I think it was an American inventor who gave the T34 one of its biggest early innovations, sloping angled armor. The excellent German 88mm was a happy accident for tanks due to its initial intent and use as an anti-aircraft gun...flat shooting. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on May 8, 2020 2:49:40 GMT
The T34 was originally equipped with a 75mm gun (T34/76) until the Russians found themselves out ranged by the 7.5 cm KwK 42 L/70 on the Panther as well as the Tiger's 8.8 cm KwK 36 when they upgraded the T34 late in the war to the 85mm High velocity gun ( T34/85 ) Opps, meant T34/85. I think it was an American inventor who gave the T34 one of its biggest early innovations, sloping angled armor. The excellent German 88mm was a happy accident for tanks due to its initial intent and use as an anti-aircraft gun...flat shooting. The American contribution to the T34 was NOT the sloped armor.. the Russians were the first to use it successfully. The American contribution was the Christie suspension. WHen the US Army dropped it's interest in the Christie suspension, the Russians imported several prototypes without turrets and the export manifests listed them as "tractors"...lol |
|
|
|
Post by Curtis_Louis on May 8, 2020 3:13:27 GMT
What is interesting is that the English have a far more developed AFV (armored fighting vehicle) collecting community than here in the States. You can even get a "tank drivers license" from the Ministry of Transportation; driving a tank on the road requires a category H licence, but amazingly anyone with a full UK car licence is entitled to a provisional H licence. This permits you to drive a road-legal tank as long as you display L plates and are accompanied by a someone with a full H licence. I wonder if part of the reason for the more developed AFV community was the cost & hassle of transport back to the states from the European theater. Tanks have incredible destructive power even without the cannon, as I remember years ago a lunatic stealing a tank and going on a rampage just flattening all in his wake. Come to think of it I also remember a maniac altering a tractor with armor and committing similar mayhem. Instant Juggernaut. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on May 8, 2020 3:16:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by howler on May 8, 2020 3:16:18 GMT
Opps, meant T34/85. I think it was an American inventor who gave the T34 one of its biggest early innovations, sloping angled armor. The excellent German 88mm was a happy accident for tanks due to its initial intent and use as an anti-aircraft gun...flat shooting. The American contribution to the T34 was NOT the sloped armor.. that was a Russian development... The American contribution was the Christie suspension. WHen the US Army dropped it's interest in the Christie torsion bar suspension, the Russians imported several prototypes without turrets and the export manifests listed them as "tractors"...lol Strange. I looked at Wikipedia and they said: "The sloped armor and Christie Suspension were inherited from the design of American J. Walter Christie's M1928 tank". I will say that I noticed they were shipped as turret-less, so makes one wonder. I looked at M1928 on Wikipedia and they gave him credit for sloping too...so I wonder if they are just giving him undo credit and just lumping sloping in with the suspension. In any case, it was the T34 that used it effectively. I'm gonna leave it to you to give the real scoop on it as it was only what I heard years ago and just saw on Wikipedia...not that they are the oracle of truth or anything, but I hope you know from your research. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on May 8, 2020 3:20:13 GMT
The American contribution to the T34 was NOT the sloped armor.. that was a Russian development... The American contribution was the Christie suspension. WHen the US Army dropped it's interest in the Christie torsion bar suspension, the Russians imported several prototypes without turrets and the export manifests listed them as "tractors"...lol Strange. I looked at Wikipedia and they said: "The sloped armor and Christie Suspension were inherited from the design of American J. Walter Christie's M1928 tank". I'm gonna leave it to you to give the real scoop on it as it was only what I heard years ago and just saw on Wikipedia...not that they are the oracle of truth or anything, but I hope you know from your research. The Russians were the first to actually put it into a successful design. The Christie tank never advanced beyond prototypes. |
|
|
|
Post by howler on May 8, 2020 3:21:45 GMT
Strange. I looked at Wikipedia and they said: "The sloped armor and Christie Suspension were inherited from the design of American J. Walter Christie's M1928 tank". I'm gonna leave it to you to give the real scoop on it as it was only what I heard years ago and just saw on Wikipedia...not that they are the oracle of truth or anything, but I hope you know from your research. The Russians were the first to actually put it into a successful design. The Christie tank never advanced beyond prototypes. No doubt about 1st successful design usage I gotta look at a M1928, because were they influenced? Indeed odd that listings were turret less. Btw, I was editing when you typed this so I had more in my post above. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on May 8, 2020 3:34:48 GMT
The Russians were the first to actually put it into a successful design. The Christie tank never advanced beyond prototypes. No doubt about 1st successful design usage I gotta look at a M1928, because were they influenced? Indeed odd that listings were turret less. Btw, I was editing when you typed this so I had more in my post above. They took the turrets off so they could claim they were tractors to export to the communists. If they were turreted .. the US Gov would never have let them be exported to communist Russia. |
|
|
|
Post by howler on May 8, 2020 3:42:50 GMT
No doubt about 1st successful design usage I gotta look at a M1928, because were they influenced? Indeed odd that listings were turret less. Btw, I was editing when you typed this so I had more in my post above. They took the turrets off so they could claim they were tractors to export to the communists. If they were turreted .. the US Gov would never have let them be exported to communist Russia. Interesting, and makes sense. I just looked at a bunch of the Christie tanks (including the M1928) and it appears that the frontal hulls are slopping but not the turrets. Maybe this is the confusing part, first sloping armor vs first sloping armor in turrets. The Soviets REALLY took sloping turrets to extremes on later tanks, to the point of sacrificing comfort and ammo capacity for that low profile and armor protection. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on May 8, 2020 3:51:40 GMT
They took the turrets off so they could claim they were tractors to export to the communists. If they were turreted .. the US Gov would never have let them be exported to communist Russia. Interesting, and makes sense. I just looked at a bunch of the Christie tanks (including the M1928) and it appears that the frontal hulls are slopping but not the turrets. Maybe this is the confusing part, first sloping armor vs first sloping armor in turrets. The Soviets REALLY took sloping turrets to extremes on later tanks, to the point of sacrificing comfort and ammo capacity for that low profile and armor protection. The Russian T34 is one of the most uncomfortable tanks to crew and takes a fair amount of strength to drive. |
|
|
|
Post by howler on May 8, 2020 4:04:32 GMT
Interesting, and makes sense. I just looked at a bunch of the Christie tanks (including the M1928) and it appears that the frontal hulls are slopping but not the turrets. Maybe this is the confusing part, first sloping armor vs first sloping armor in turrets. The Soviets REALLY took sloping turrets to extremes on later tanks, to the point of sacrificing comfort and ammo capacity for that low profile and armor protection. The Russian T34 is one of the most uncomfortable tanks to crew and takes a fair amount of strength to drive. I've heard about that. Simple, spartan. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on May 8, 2020 4:11:21 GMT
The Russian T34 is one of the most uncomfortable tanks to crew and takes a fair amount of strength to drive. I've heard about that. Simple, spartan. Almost as brutal for those inside as for those outside ... |
|
|
|
Post by howler on May 8, 2020 5:05:41 GMT
I've heard about that. Simple, spartan. Almost as brutal for those inside as for those outside ... Ha. Almost, but all kidding aside the T34 was one of the biggest stories of WW2. WW2 was such an interesting war in terms of weaponry, not to mention the vast scale. Mechanized units were just CRAZY in their fascinating variance (and effectiveness when used properly and with communication), the Battleships were still big players (yet being taken over in importance by the plane laden carrier it supported), and the air was full of wondrous designs...but before they just dominated everything with smart bombs and pinpoint accuracy. These are probably reasons so many are interested to this day. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on May 8, 2020 6:19:22 GMT
Almost as brutal for those inside as for those outside ... Ha. Almost, but all kidding aside the T34 was one of the biggest stories of WW2. WW2 was such an interesting war in terms of weaponry, not to mention the vast scale. Mechanized units were just CRAZY in their fascinating variance (and effectiveness when used properly and with communication), the Battleships were still big players (yet being taken over in importance by the plane laden carrier it supported), and the air was full of wondrous designs...but before they just dominated everything with smart bombs and pinpoint accuracy. These are probably reasons so many are interested to this day. WW2 is fascinating to me. It set the mold for the world as we know it today; geopolitical, technology and culture. The battleship was finished with the battle of Jutland/WW1, proven at Pearl Harbor and Midway amd even the battle of Letye Gulf. Almost every Japanese battleship in WW2 was sunk by cruisers, destroyers (torpedos) and aircraft. Bismark and Hood notwithstanding. I know, I served on one in the mid- late 80's. As for armored formations, the Germans use of a 5 man crew with a commander whose only duty was to command and a radio operator/bow machine gunner,combined with the initiative given to and taken by field grade and junior officers in the panzer corps gave the Germans organizational/tactical advantage over their adversaries early in the war. |
|
|
|
Post by howler on May 8, 2020 6:41:03 GMT
Ha. Almost, but all kidding aside the T34 was one of the biggest stories of WW2. WW2 was such an interesting war in terms of weaponry, not to mention the vast scale. Mechanized units were just CRAZY in their fascinating variance (and effectiveness when used properly and with communication), the Battleships were still big players (yet being taken over in importance by the plane laden carrier it supported), and the air was full of wondrous designs...but before they just dominated everything with smart bombs and pinpoint accuracy. These are probably reasons so many are interested to this day. WW2 is fascinating to me. It set the mold for the world as we know it today; geopolitical, technology and culture. The battleship was finished with the battle of Jutland/WW1, proven at Pearl Harbor and Midway amd even the battle of Letye Gulf. Almost every Japanese battleship in WW2 was sunk by cruisers, destroyers (torpedos) and aircraft. Bismark and Hood notwithstanding. I know, I served on one in the mid- late 80's. As for armored formations, the Germans use of a 5 man crew with a commander whose only duty was to command and a radio operator/bow machine gunner,combined with the initiative given to and taken by field grade and junior officers in the panzer corps gave the Germans organizational/tactical advantage over their adversaries early in the war. The sheer scale of WW2 is hard to comprehend. As horrible as it was for America with over 400,000 dead (more died in the Army Air Force than in Vietnam), it was absolutely nothing compared to the losses by Russia and Germany. Off the charts death and destruction. Heck, the Battle Of Berlin, Stalingrad and some other city struggles were bigger than most nations total losses. What a waste. The future of tanks will probably be fully automated. You can free up so much space by taking people out of the vehicle (thus smaller size, increased range, speed and/or greater ammo, fuel options), and no risk of life so you can use the tank in more aggressive ways without worry, to the point of intentionally using the whole tank as a bomb if desired. |
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,599 
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on May 8, 2020 11:12:14 GMT
I only want one tank, and it is the most glorious tank ever designed. I am of course speaking of the Tsar Tank.   |
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on May 8, 2020 11:19:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on May 8, 2020 12:49:00 GMT
I want this one...  |
|
|
|
Post by Tomt24 on May 8, 2020 20:19:07 GMT
I always thought a Panzer II could be a good choice for a replica.
The relativly low weight of 9 tons and the main tank of the Blitzkrieg,
would make it accesible and quite interesting.
Tracks, Wheels and Drivetrain would ideally come from something accesible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on May 8, 2020 23:05:43 GMT
I always thought a Panzer II could be a good choice for a replica. The relativly low weight of 9 tons and the main tank of the Blitzkrieg, would make it accesible and quite interesting. Tracks, Wheels and Drivetrain would ideally come from something accesible. Only a couple original Pz II's left in the world. A friend of mine in Colorado made an exact replica of the late war Pz II Ausf L "Luchs" which was deployed in late 1943/1944 and used as a command and reconnaissance vehicle. MG 34 and a KwK38 20mm. He is currently restoring a Pz IV G he brought back here in pieces from Poland.  |
|
Oct 30, 2023 18:30:22 GMT
Oct 30, 2023 18:30:22 GMT
