Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

renhanxue

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    93

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Everything posted by renhanxue

  1. renhanxue
    I think the metallurgy being shit might also have been due to a lack of certain rare alloy metals. For example, in Sweden it took a long time for the steelworks to figure out a nickel-free steel armor that was as good as the usual alloy. Not up to speed on exactly what went on in Germany in this regard but I'm pretty sure they were short of nickel at least.
  2. renhanxue
    Speaking of the Tiger, the White Elephant link is 404'ing and I need to give it to a wehraboo. Scribd wants real life dollars for it. Could anyone rehost the PDF?
  3. renhanxue
    Yeap, that's me! I'm also Ren Hanxue on YouTube and renhanxue on tanknet, but that's probably obvious.
  4. renhanxue
    Protection provided by steel and aluminum armor against fragments from high-explosive ammunition Aberdeen proving grounds, november 1960. Doesn't seem to be on dtic.mil.
  5. renhanxue
    Don't know if anyone here reads German/is interested, but as far as I can tell this is the original manual for the Leichttraktor: http://tanks.mod16.org/pdf/leichttraktor.pdf Found in the national archives by accident while poking around a few of gigantic boxes of photonegatives on glass plates from the 20's and 30's. I think it's Heigl's (of Taschenbuch der Tanks fame) photo collection, at least most of the boxes are marked with his name. Don't know what to do with it, there's thousands of photos of interwar tanks, mostly from Britain and France, and I have no idea if they're rare or not.
  6. renhanxue
    Noticed I had made a typo. The fuel consumption for driving in rough terrain was listed as 201 liters/100 km, should be 201 l/10 km.
  7. renhanxue
    At that point they had already more or less decided to buy either the M1A1 or the Leo 2, and while they're comparing against the Centurion, the real benchmark is the Leo 2. The reason they were comparing against the Centurion in the first place was probably a political thing. They had been yelling for a new MBT for at least fifteen years at that point and only gotten some mild Centurion modernizations instead, so I'm pretty sure a lot of the testing was intended to go "look, we really would have been fucked if the Russians came knocking, just see how much better their gear was in the 80's".
  8. renhanxue
    http://tanks.mod16.org/2015/04/09/report-from-terrain-trials-with-t-80u/ reports for the reports god
  9. renhanxue
    Being lazy about translating that report, but have a T-72 in the meantime.
  10. renhanxue
    T-80U vs Centurion (re-engined variant, called strv 104 here) only.
  11. renhanxue
    Got the associated report today, not super exciting. It could have been way more exciting because originally it contained comparison values with M1A1 and Leopard 2A4, but the fuckers at the national archives blacked those out before releasing it. Russian secrets aren't as important, it seems. :| Will post on ~my blog~ once I get the relevant parts translated.
  12. renhanxue
    spoilers: the T-80U just completely dominates the others Or, well, the Centurion fends pretty well for itself as far as trenches and vertical obstacles goes, but that's it.
  13. renhanxue
    A friend got this declassified recently. There's a test report that goes with it too that he hasn't scanned yet, will translate and post as soon as he does.
  14. renhanxue
    http://tanks.mod16.org/2015/04/02/report-from-british-strv-103-trials-at-the-baor-1973/ May be entertaining reading to some of you.
  15. renhanxue
    No naked chicks. But here you go anyway, enjoy: http://imgur.com/a/1iSr0 I added some very brief summaries in English to most of the pages.
  16. renhanxue
    I recently found a really weird thing in the archives. (click for bigger) A few drawings of an honest-to-god aircraft carrier (although a tiny one) dated in May 1946. I have no idea how serious this proposal was, and I currently don't know any background information that could explain the existence of this project either. It's very detailed but I really can't figure out what they were thinking they'd do with it - projecting power in the Baltic sea really isn't that big of a deal. Data as given in the drawing Length overall: 148.2 m Designed waterline length: 140 m Greatest beam: 28.4 m Beam at design waterline: 20 m Design draft: 5.5 m Displacement, standard: 7800 tonnes Displacement, full load: 8100 tonnes Speed at 28000 shaft horsepower: 25 knots Aircraft carried: 20 de Havilland Sea Vampire Artillery: - eight 12 cm guns in twin turrets - 16 40mm Bofors autocannons in both single and twin mountings - 17 single-mount 25mm autocannons Armor: - 75 mm waterline belt plus 25 mm in "torpedo compartments" (?) - 25 + 50 mm deck Crew: 535 men Side and top view: Front section Center section Rear section Cross sections and deck plans Cross sections Upper deck plans Lower deck plans
  17. renhanxue
    It's the S-tank equivalent of the Tigerfibel, do you guys want the entire thing even though it's in Swedish?
  18. renhanxue
    Hi hello, Google Analytics referer stalking brought me here. :V I guess I could make a PDF if you want one, shouldn't be too much effort. Also, I guess I should mention I'm TheFluff on SA. sp15 posts almost all drawings I find in the WoT forums thread (well, the low quality handheld camera versions, the scans I have to pay good money for we're a bit more restrictive with) but since almost everything else I find is in Swedish I don't post much of it since there's been very little response to the documents posted to my blog. I do have like 15,000 photographed document pages on my Google Drive at this point though and if you speak Swedish I'd be glad to share them - just send me your email address and I'll share the folder with you. I'm pretty sure the difference in muzzle velocity and pen was kinda insignificant but I can't prove it because it's not declassified yet. I'm also pretty sure I recall reading somewhere that a feasibility study of upgunning the 103 was done but it was discarded as too expensive.
×
×
  • Create New...