VW Vortex - Volkswagen Forum banner
261 - 280 of 331 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,798 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Mooosman)

Quote, originally posted by Mooosman »


Yep. Most of the early French designs only had enough room in the turret for the tank commander. He had to command the tank, work the radio, and fire and reload the turret gun(s).

Cricky - he had to do all of this and surrender??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Corbic)

Quote, originally posted by Corbic »

Needless to say, the Germans also failed to develop any of their technology into a practical purpose. Where were the heavy bombers and long range fighters? That is great they had a King Tiger, how many did they make, how reliable where they? Rather stupid to build gas hungry jets, expensive rocks, precision material required, fuel jugging tanks at a point where you are running out of fuel, money and raw material... no? Not to mention you could never have competed production number wise on a good day, let alone an improvised factory in the middle of a battle field. Short sighted, short sighted, short sighted.

Germany could never win a war of mass production against the US and Russian Juggernauts. They instead choose the only other option which was to build the best equipment the world had ever seen.
Sure the Sherman was cheap to build but it was also a piece of crap.
BTW All jets including those of WWII Germany use a much less refined fuel (kerosene)than Aviation Gas used in piston powered planes. Germany had much less problems finding fuel for the ME-262 then their conventional fighters.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
33,221 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Gruppe B)


unprotected fuel on the SIDES of the vehicle?!?!?!!?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
Re: FV-QR (.LSinLV.)

The AS42 Sahariana was a long range recon vehicle designed for the African desert (no fuel dumps to rely on).
It was an amazing vehicle for its time. Four wheel drive, extremely competent off road and carried some serious firepower.
Here is a photo of the SAS Desert Jeep which was it's main rival

Got a match?



Modified by Gruppe B at 7:20 PM 11-29-2009

Modified by Gruppe B at 7:22 PM 11-29-2009


Modified by Gruppe B at 7:23 PM 11-29-2009
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,092 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Gruppe B)

Quote, originally posted by Gruppe B »

Germany could never win a war of mass production against the US and Russian Juggernauts. They instead choose the only other option which was to build the best equipment the world had ever seen.
Sure the Sherman was cheap to build but it was also a piece of crap.
BTW All jets including those of WWII Germany use a much less refined fuel (kerosene)than Aviation Gas used in piston powered planes. Germany had much less problems finding fuel for the ME-262 then their conventional fighters.

You clearly don't understand the Sherman.
It was hardly a "Piece of Crap". Its armor was sufficient, it suspension amazing and it was extremely quick and reliable. It was also easy to maintain.
It's short coming was the usage of a 57 and 75mm cannon, typically with explosive shells. It lacked fire power to take on heavy German tanks, it also used explosive Gasoline fuel, rather then diesel and crews where often poorly trained.
It's power was nerfed because of the conflict between infantry and tank commanders I mentioned earlier. The US had M10 Jackson "tank destroyers" which featured heavy 90mm guns, easily able to slice German armor apart. The M10 however, had an open turret and little armor. This was so it relied heavily on infantry support and also so infantry field commanders could relay information and orders easily to the M10's crew, direct their fire on enemy tanks.
Notice, the M10 rides a Sherman chassis, however it lacks the thicker armor and it also does not have a haul mounted machine gun. It was designed to be helpless against infantry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,613 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Corbic)

The German vs. Allies argument continues on as heated today as it has been for the past 65+ years.
The simple fact was Germany did not have the production capability to successfully arm and equip themselves - as the war evolved into something they were ill prepared to handle.
The German war philosophy tried to evolve as elements of the war changed. When they failed to cripple or eliminate Russia...the failure to invade and subdue the United Kingdom. The failure of Italian forces to hold up their share of the workload in the grand scheme of things. The ferocity and capacity that the United States brought to the fight.
The limited production capabilities meant that Germany concentrated on different areas. They had plans for various long-range bombers, but these were put on the back burner for smaller theatre based bombers which served them very well for the first few years of the war. They also realized that carrier fleets were inexpensive, and defendable/useable ports were few and far between - and in general a bit too risky.
They did concentrate on building very advanced tanks (competition amongst designers to win Hitler's favour played a big part in this). However, much as I see the US military today - favouring fewer, but massively advanced war machines --- you can never beat quantity. So, as Hitler began to suffer from physical and mental ailments, and his decision making became less and less effective, the mighty complicated machine began to ground itself into nothingness.
The King Tiger was, for all intents and purposes, a gigantic waste of funding/time/energy. If they had concentrated on fixing the Panther (arguably their best tank of the war) and its flaws - that would have been better spent time and money.
If you look at the weapons, philosophies, tactics...you'll see that they did become the standard of the world, and that continues on to this day. The combined arms blitzkrieg philosophy. Modular, small, self-led units. Heck, even things as simple as the M60 machine gun is almost a carbon copy of the MG34/42 (still used today in the MG3 with the German Bundeswehr). When the B2 stealth bomber was penned/designed - they dug up various designs from the Luftwaffes plans for flying-wing long range bombers.
If you compare, instance for instance - German soldiers outperformed their counterparts in almost every single engagement. Their general training was significantly better (though tapered off as the war ground to a halt). Germany managed to take over ground almost as expansive as that of the Roman Empire, in a mere 2-3 year span - and they fought the entire world kicking and screaming until it ended.
Their designs, technology and advancements (regardless of the human toll or immoral standing) live on today, and became the very foundation of NASA, and Moscow's space programs. The horrible medical research exacted upon POWs, and political prisoners provided a wealth of knowledge in the medical field.
You can consider this impressive, or scary. Either way I think its both. A country smaller than Texas bringing the entire world to the edge of complete and utter chaos twice...in a twenty year span. Condemn it all you like, but to disregard it is silly. Luckily US industrial might, and a long-forgotten jingoistic Patriotism won the day...and we then settled in for the onset of the Cold War.
I think our very best weapon/tool ever used during the second World War was the absolutely brilliant development of the Intelligence services. Both US, UK, and other allies. The technologies, techniques, tactics, agents, operatives and case officers really played a massive part in the final undermining of the Third Reich.
Either way, its over, we won. Thousands of vital technologies came out of the war. As always. Lets move on, yet not forget what happened.


Modified by Elbows at 7:59 PM 11-29-2009
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,613 Posts
Re: FV-QR (DCIdevil)

RE: Exposed fuel cans.
These are raid trucks, and not front-line combat units, but even modern British vehicles (see my post on previous pages) run exposed fuel cans.
Now I'm not 100%, but I know diesel (which most of these are) is significantly less likely to explode violently when struck (a problem common amongst non-diesel based armoured vehicles, and a stigma for the gasoline Shermans to be referred to as "Ronsonols" or something to that effect, a popular light at the time, because they "lit the first time" when struck by enemy tank shells.
Anyone care to enlighten us? What effect would a bullet punching a tank of diesel have. Instant explosion? Slow burn?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,694 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Corbic)

If Rommel would have had 3 panzer divisions(plus gas) instead of only 2 he would have driven through the ME oil fields and taken the Russian oil fields from the south. Instead, often in the last couple years of WWII German panzer divisions would authorize only 1 or 2 tanks to patrol the divisional front lines in order to save their meager gas stocks.
The stolen German diesel design that powered the Russian T34, along with it's sloped armor, American Christie high-speed suspension(rejected by America), and seemingly endless numbers guaranteed at least a Russian stalement by the beginning of 1943, except if the Afrika Corps had received that 3rd panzer division in the middle of 1942. Assuming Rommel could retain control of the air of course.
Corbic considering we have been fighting these last 9 years in the ME don't underestimate what we learned from watching once powerful panzer divisions turn into fuel-immobilized sitting ducks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,613 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Spa_driver)

^Random note...thats one of my biggest gripes with our current Abrams tanks.
The Abrams for all its great design, amazing (GERMAN) gun, excellent optics, fire control systems, brilliant armour, and blazing speed...can operated only 2-4 hours under combat conditions without needing fueling (my numbers are not precise obviously).
Normal Leopard IIs etc run on classic diesel powertrains can operate up to 24 hours. Thats a HUGE advantage when the war is not being fought on our own terms.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,486 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Elbows)

Quote, originally posted by Elbows »
, and a stigma for the gasoline Shermans to be referred to as "Ronsonols" or something to that effect,

The Ronson or Zippo reference to Shermans was more related to the extreme probability that the flame-throwing version would burst into a giant napalm fireball at the first hit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,121 Posts
Re: FV-QR (winstonsmith84)

Quote, originally posted by winstonsmith84 »

The Ronson or Zippo reference to Shermans was more related to the extreme probability that the flame-throwing version would burst into a giant napalm fireball at the first hit.

Yep, the Germans called the Shermans "Tommy cookers" for a good reason. The ammo was stored in the hull sponsons. Which means it would more than likely be hit when a shell penetrated the side of the hull. This would cause the explosion and resulting fireball. A temporary fix was tried by welding extra armor plates to the side of the Sherman. Then something called "wet storage" was developed. The storage of shells was moved to the floor of the tank. The shells were submerged in water to reduce the chance of them cooking off.

Erik
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,092 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Elbows)

Quote, originally posted by Elbows »
^Random note...thats one of my biggest gripes with our current Abrams tanks.
The Abrams for all its great design, amazing (GERMAN) gun, excellent optics, fire control systems, brilliant armour, and blazing speed...can operated only 2-4 hours under combat conditions without needing fueling (my numbers are not precise obviously).
Normal Leopard IIs etc run on classic diesel powertrains can operate up to 24 hours. Thats a HUGE advantage when the war is not being fought on our own terms.

A normal Leopard II can't cruise at 50mph and its hardly a battle proven design. We know the Abrams will take a wallop and keep coming.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,181 Posts
Re: (Merc-MarkO)

Here's an oddball for you: Wirbelwind (FlakPanzer). Some dispute about actual numbers, but around 100 of these were produced:




Even more rare is it's successor, the Ostwind, with around 45 produced:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,385 Posts
Re: (VWAudiRally)

Quote, originally posted by VWAudiRally »
Here's an oddball for you: Wirbelwind (FlakPanzer). Some dispute about actual numbers, but around 100 of these were produced:

FlakPanzer Gepard.



Modified by The Kilted Yaksman at 8:26 PM 11-30-2009
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,098 Posts
Re: FV-QR (Corbic)

Quote, originally posted by Corbic »

It's short coming was the usage of a 57 and 75mm cannon, typically with explosive shells. It lacked fire power to take on heavy German tanks, it also used explosive Gasoline fuel, rather then diesel and crews where often poorly trained.

A minor point, but the Sherman never had a 57mm (6 pdr) gun fitted during production. The short low velocity 75mm installed in the early versions was ineffective against Tigers, Panthers and the later assault guns. Against the Pz III and the early versions of the Pz IV it was quite sufficient for the most part.
The later 76.2mm gun on the late A1s, the A3s and later was at least effective in combating the up rated German tanks. The A3E8s were the version whose cross country and suspension travel were really good with HVSS versus the VVSS suspension systems.
The Sherman was a good all around design, not remarkable in any particular area beyond its serviceability, general reliability and the sheer number of them built.
Keep in mind Germany only produced a bit under 5000 Panthers in the entire war and under 1500 Tiger I's, the US made
 
261 - 280 of 331 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top