Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

renhanxue

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    93
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

renhanxue last won the day on September 18 2016

renhanxue had the most liked content!

About renhanxue

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 09/10/1986

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Stockholm, Sweden

Recent Profile Visitors

575 profile views
  1. Did I post this here before? Go to the three minute mark (and/or 3:45) to find out why the Viggens were painted in green camo.
  2. I wrote a little piece on the rb 04E based on the SFI's. Figured people might be interested. Robot 04E (with "robot", abbreviated "rb", being military Swedish for "missile") was the AJ 37 Viggen's signature weapon: a radar-guided, sea-skimming anti-ship missile, developed from the rb 04C which had originally entered service in the 1961 on the A 32 Lansen. The E version entered service in 1975, with 315 missiles produced. Let's have a look at how it works. Rb 04C or D on a A 32 Lansen. Missiles on the assembly line at the air force's Central Aircraft Workshops in Arboga. First, so
  3. The slide show on the start page you mean? Yeah, I think I'll need to get rid of that, everyone hates those carousel things and for good reason.
  4. I've been poking at a gallery site with old Swedish military press photos, and I figured I might link it and hopefully get some feedback before I link it from the blog/reddit/whatever. Some questions I'm curious about: - Are just images with a very brief description fine or do you want more context? Usually the images in the photo archives don't come with a lot of context so I'd have to write about the equipment/regiment in general rather than what's specifically in the photo. - Right now image titles/captions are in Swedish. Is it important to you for them to be in English? - What shoul
  5. Right. Maybe the easiest explanation is that one of the two tanks tested had the wheel system while the other had the handle system? In any case here's the entire report, flaws and oddnesses and all: http://tanks.mod16.org/2016/10/01/swedish-impressions-of-the-sherman-part-2/ Thank you guys so much for your help and feedback!
  6. Hm. It literally says "Traversing the turret with electrical power and turning the wheel", and in the second case "With electrical power and the control handle set to full speed". Weird. Does it sound plausible to manual traverse the turret a quarter turn in 6 seconds? What is the electrical power referring to in the first case?
  7. Working on another Sherman report, and I'm back for some more terminology help - this time it's about the turret traverse.
  8. Help me out with terminology, tank gurus. The strv m/42 (and strv 74) is steered with two levers. Pulling one of the levers, says the manual, gears that track down to 2/3, and the tank turns in that direction, giving a fixed turn radius of about 9 meters. To avoid burning up the brake discs in the steering gears, you steer by yanking on the steering levers firmly - don't try to "slip on the clutch" so to speak. However, if you want to make a really tight turn, you can also press a button on top of the steering levers to instead completely brake the inner track and turn around a point about hal
  9. The EMIL sketches were very early concept drawings and I agree with Pasholok that it doesn't make sense to assume they're what the tank would actually look like in reality. On top of that there were like a good dozen variants proposed and drawings for only one of them have survived. That drawing he posts in connection to the Lago is actually the Terro which is a completely different tank, so I don't know what that is about. Most of what he writes about the Lago actually seems to be caused by communications problems really, I think we're actually in agreement on the facts. It is also true t
  10. What do you mean, blocks? Again, for the extra track links thing I think they just placed them under the track, drove over them and picked them up at the rear of the tank when it had passed over them. That's why it took so much time.
  11. I don't think they were fastened permanently, but how exactly they got them to stick to the tracks is unclear. The strv 74 has a device called a "track anchor", which I believe works according to roughly the same principle: Place it under the track, it digs down and you pull yourself up. When it appears on the rear end of the tank, pick it up and place it in front again.
  12. Thanks for the feedback, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks! Your remark about the 105 being a M4 is interesting, because I know Swedes were pretty good at misidentifying what Shermans they actually had. In one report they refer to a Firefly in a junkyard as a M4A1, but as far as I know no Firefly conversions were made from the M4A1, only from the M4 and M4A4. In this case it would seem that the tank they call a "Sherman II" is actually a Sherman IB or M4 105. Maybe they just didn't think the M4 "A0" was a thing. I think the reason there's no photos of the Sherman III is that it didn't have any main gun and d
  13. Link would be nice, I can't see it on his LJ. I know he's not happy about it and I've talked to him about it.
  14. Thanks! Suddenly I understand what they were talking about with the wedges. Here's the full report. Let me know if I messed up something in the translation.
×
×
  • Create New...