Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/04/2021 in Posts

  1. Now give poor old delete some credit. It DOES say something about the respective auto technologies... Just not what he thinks it does. The Pershing worked specifically because american engineers were capable of engineering something that was within the limits of their automotive technology while the Germans couldn't even manage to not fuck that up! Anyone Actually capable in their field would have known that the panther final drives wouldn't have even been satisfactory on something 15 tons lighter, like the Pershing, so they built final drives that would act
    4 points
  2. Ha, thanks. Flattery will get you...well pretty far, I suppose. Indeed. The state of German automotive technology was unprepared for mass-production of a 45,000 kg tank. As we've been over, and as Spielberger notes, "Since it was envisaged to produce the Panther in large numbers, production costs of various subassemblies would have to be kept to a minimum...If it had been possible to foresee what difficulties the final reduction gearing was to cause, it would have been a much better solution to have selected a more expensive final drive which provided a greater degree of reliability. I
    3 points
  3. OK, with this you can seriously fuck off. Your beloved fuckers murdered millions of innocent people and I'm sure I'm not the only one on this forum whose ancestors fought the Nazi scum and eventually died on the battlefield. Go fuck yourself.
    3 points
  4. Sorry but that is fantasy and wishful thinking on your side and a clear misunderstanding how AFV development process is complicated and what needs to be done between the drawing board and the serial production. I'm sorry but if you don't understand how utterly useless is to over and over bring these dream projects into the discussion, I have nothing more to add to the subject. You can keep living in your fantasy land. Seriously, WTF? Those heavier vehicles were an unreliable nearly useless mass of steels which failed miserably and you somehow expect that if you take som
    3 points
  5. Stimpy75

    Turkish touch

    Cobra II Mrap
    3 points
  6. So another side note: this game also works really well in reverse... Discussing, let's call it the A42 "Cataphract", as developed by the British in 1943: Designer: "Overall its dimensions were comparable to Tiger 1, but about 60cm longer and 30cm narrower. For all that, the turret ring diameter was 160cm. The vehicle weighed around 45 tonnes, ten tonnes less than Tiger, but had a lopsided armour scheme with equivalent (or better) frontal protection and about half the armour everywhere else." Wehraboo: "Typical poor British design: over-emphasising some aspec
    3 points
  7. Stimpy75

    Turkish touch

    some more
    2 points
  8. I occasionally play this mental game where I imagine describing, let's call it the Schwer-mittel panzerkampfwagen 44 "Cougar", to the typical wehraboo. "It had a low profile, only 10cm taller than the PzIV. But the vehicle is much more heavily armed and armoured (equivalent or better to a Tiger frontally, only a little thinner on the side)." "Fantastic. Really good, compact design. The Germans were known to be good at efficient layouts." "The drivetrain was extremely compact and reliable, with a better power-to-weight ratio than PzIV, as well as a slick automatic g
    2 points
  9. Object 478M, from Baron Kharkovite. Vehicle is from second half/late 70s. Interesting parts - turret with build in APS (launchers were integrated into frontal armor of the turret), RCWS with 23 mm autocannon, panoramic sight for commander. RCWS schematics: Possibly scan of a photo of a prototype: Boxes on the side are probably radars (other components were mounted on rear plate of the turret), interceptors are visible in the roof of frontal armor of the turret.
    1 point
  10. Finally, in this video this Chinese HIFV model was filmed from close distance, and in 1080p
    1 point
  11. This seriously needs to stop. Not helping anyone, especially if the messages are insulting or no arguments are provided.
    1 point
  12. Halloooo Deutschland hat den Krieg trotzdem verloren!!! Trotz hart wie Krupp Stahl und zäh wie Leder und beste Technologie und Panzerschokolade und Düsenjäger und Sturmgewehr....so plz stop wanking one on German war Technology.....it has been mentioned before, Russian took a monument of an IS-2 fueled it up and put some oil in the engine and started the engine with press air...try that with an Über Panther and this was not long ago, less watching discovery channel or dmax or history channel...and especially stay away from tank game forums
    1 point
  13. I have this idea that most of our irrational attachments are due to the fact that our brains can only process things as a web of the other things its related to - you pull on a word and the whole person comes out. Take the word "carriage". For me the word has built-in associations from children's stories and rhymes (Private Parrige brought the carriage), illustrated history books read in the school library, and the carriages rented for the matric dance. I cannot think the word without some tiny part of me remembering sitting on my mother's lap as she read to me as a child. So I pro
    1 point
  14. Anybody else just... mentally exhausted? Who new just reading about people talking to a brick wall would be tiring, let alone actually arguing with said brick wall. Blessings to you, brave souls.
    1 point
  15. I'm sorry but building a prototype (or in this case just a turretless demonstrator) is something very different than to develop vehicle suitable for production. The Schmalturm on the picture was not an integral Panther II feature but a separate later development considered for various vehicles but it also never got anywhere - not even to the final specification. In the end Panther II was replaced by another, this time pure-paper project E-50 before there was even an attempt to start Panther II production done. No prototype testing was done, no trials, not even any final design spe
    1 point
  16. This. This right here is an absolute choice bit of consequential apologism. It doesn't occur to you at all that Panther might have been a dysfunctional product of a dysfunctional system. If it does occur to you, your brain runs interference and blocks you from allowing yourself to even imagine such a thing could be true. Hitler has cucked your brain. Your raising his little aryan kiddies in your head! Only question is: why?
    1 point
  17. And you remind me of an idiot who fails to understand the point. Edit: since I'm trying, this outburst aside, to approach things in a constructive manner I'll spell it out for you: the point is to sharpen critical thinking by taking the object you are examining and pulling it outside of its context. Because people are shit at objective judgements and good at motivated reasoning. If you approached your assessment of Panther the way you approach your assessment of Pershing, you'd come to a more balanced, objective conclusion about the vehicle. Which is, and I keep harping
    1 point
  18. When you want to play Escape from Tarkov, but you have only STALKER disk.
    1 point
  19. I see you guys have this idiot in hand already. Panther worst tank, WWII Germany worst country, losers be losers.
    1 point
  20. TIL that sauropods had terrifying nightmare feet:
    1 point
  21. 5 sets of vents on one side, must be lucky number to confuse enemy for which one is the real.
    0 points
  22. You say that while shitposting?
    0 points
  23. Guys, I've gotta be honest, I'm starting to feel a bit bad about the dogpile going on here. Therefore, I've decided to play Devil's advocate and jump into the discussion as part of team of Wehraboo. I've put together a carefully crafted list of evidence to help convince you all. Exhibit A: I think that speaks for itself, but if somehow that objective assessment by a SME doesn't have you convinced, then please take a look at Exhibit B: According to most sources, Panther tanks maintained an average readiness rate of anywhere from 30-35% fo
    0 points
  24. You flatter me, but I'm really here more in a comedy role myself
    0 points
×
×
  • Create New...