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

Wiedzmin

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    623

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    97

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Wiedzmin

  1. Wiedzmin
    i understand what it is i talking about this
  2. Wiedzmin
    btw is this a turret backplate(welded over casted base) stiсking out from "cosmetic armour" damage ? or just weld seams of cosmetic armour itself ?
  3. Wiedzmin
    geometry is such a b&tch lol...
  4. Wiedzmin
    maybe i had to point out that R975 is worst case.
  5. Wiedzmin
    thanks, but here difference between T-34(and SU85 which is based on T-34 but not T-34, and which T-34 ? 76 ? 85 ? 76 + 85 ? ) not that big 185-190 vs 195-205 and this does not seem to contradict what i wrote about similar or worse reliability ? and again, it all depends a lot on the level of maintenance and crew training.
  6. Wiedzmin
    Sherman is not one model A2 right ? and T-34 is not only early war period 76mm version, so it's comparsion of all what is out there, as for M4A2 lifespan for it was 300 hours by factory IIRC, during trials M4A2 76mm in USSR right engine dead after 949km due to hard road conditions, second engine 2126 km and needed light repairs, suspension start to break after 1339 km, as for average lifespan of M4A2 from early 75mm version to late war 76mm never saw any good reports, maybe you have some ?
  7. Wiedzmin
    Centurion with some addon plates(spaced steel, not very thick) could stop L23A1 point blank for example, it's not about "wow that's can penetrate over 9000mm at distance over 9km", but about specific round design, alloy, weaknesses etc. but again - strange articles and holes on real tank - no any details on distances etc - the presence of indirect confirmation of the problem with penetration by the Austrian docs
  8. Wiedzmin
    thats interesting, considering the fact that firing trials 1942 with HE and APHE from F34 doesn't have any problems vs III and IV, thank you, will read p.s even with bad ammo F34 penetrate 50mm/30deg from 800 meters in 1940, so...
  9. Wiedzmin
    only problem what 45mm has was 50mm plates IIRC, 76mm doesn't have any problems with Panzer IV or III even when firing HE at 900 meters, with up-armoured III(spaced armour) and IV(welded/bolted 30mm plate over 50mm and solid 80mm) yes there was problems for 76mm guns.
  10. Wiedzmin
    thank you, wish there be more details on any T-72M1 tests...
  11. Wiedzmin
    that's quite high for 105mm.... btw https://www.parlament.gv.at/PAKT/VHG/XX/I/I_01286/fname_140175.pdf some more about problems with T-72 ? https://www.parlament.gv.at/PAKT/VHG/XVIII/III/III_00146/imfname_547596.pdf but what written here(menthos posted) ?
  12. Wiedzmin
    the problem is "470mm pen" could mean anything, for example 160mm/70 deg is almost 470, and 235/60 is 470, and so on, what kind of steel was used etc, so it's very hard to compare "some penetration numbers" with "some protection numbers" IMHO
  13. Wiedzmin
    numbers have nothing to real protection/penetration on complex structures capability, every APFSDS will work different against different structures and will give different "numbers" due to design features of each round, for example conqueror APDS often quted as "400+mm pen" but it can't penetrate T-72 with more ore less "same" numbers for protection level. that's why correct way of showing protection level for tank is indicate striking velocity for specific round at which tank will be penetrated/not penetrated. as for article, it's strange, holes doesn't look like APFSDS hits IMHO same tank
  14. Wiedzmin
    Strange article from AFV News Vol.35 No.2 and other strange from AFV News Vol.40 No.2
  15. Wiedzmin
    and ? if you referring to escape hatch on transmission roof plate, well, good luck to crew trying to escape from these hatches(especially when full radio set is in place) lol yeah, super reliable, stronk engineering skills
  16. Wiedzmin
    https://earlesspierre.livejournal.com/275281.html https://earlesspierre.livejournal.com/111253.html and more.
  17. Wiedzmin
    did you encounter ANY reports on Panzer III/IV ?:) because i'm not, only that it have shitty optics before long barelled gun was installed(+ some other british test on tank) nope, there is no complete tanks. oh really ? since the Chieftain said it lol ? he has seat, and doesn't need to dance around any shaft's, and no one is rotating turret during loading procedure, so if it's not a problem for shitty Pz3 ergonomic, it's not a problem and for T-34. i don't need to watch video of empty Panzer IV, i know exactly how it look like when all ammo, spare, MG, MP is inside,but "famous youtubers and book writers" don't want to mentoin it somehow. started from 1942 IIRC, and your conclussion came from where ? if you maintain gerbox normaly, it woudn't be any problems, if you doesn't maintain it, well sledgehammer for genius. polish + hungarian T-34 units it's a 80% or RKKA tank fleet or what ? level of maintenance in this units ? better optics(1943 report on Sherman in Italy), better or same REAL reability than almost any modification of M4(read reports on tankarchives) and ? http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p4013coll8/id/3344/rec/206 Fire control.-(1) Because of the excessive dispersion which occurs with the M4 periscope, firing of tank guns is confined almost entirely to the artillery method of sensing and locating bursts and giving corrections in mils to the gunners. The average dispersion which occurs as a result of slack in the periscope holder and linkage extends 4 mils in both planes. This dispersion is so great that guns do not stay bore-sighted with the telescope after any operation. The modification consisting of a spring between the periscope holder and turret will be greatly welcomed. The officers who saw the M4A1 periscope liked it extremely, but all were emphatic in saying that only one reticle pattern should be used and that if these new periscopes are used the telescope mounted on the gun mount should have the same reticle. (2) There is very little use of the coaxially mounted telescope; the dispersion which results from its use is even greater than that experienced with the M4 periscope. In addition, the optics of the M55 telescopes are unsatisfactory, resulting in unsatisfactory light-transmission characteristics. Furthermore, most gunners report that it is very difficult for them to get their heads into proper position for sighting through the coaxial telescope. When tanks are operating in combat, the crash helmet is always worn; in most cases, the steel helmet without liner is worn over the crash helmet. (3) About 75 percent of the tanks in England are equipped both with azimuth indicators and with the M9 range quadrant. Less than half of the tanks in Italy are equipped with the azimuth indicator, and few have the M9 range quadrant. Both of these items are essential equipment in this theater h. Ammunition stowage.-Except for the ready rounds in the turret, the ammunition stowage is unsatisfactory and should be improved. Experience in Italy indicates that 2 rounds out of every 40 in the stowage bins will separate, creating a very serious fire hazard and making it difficult to remove the rest of the rounds from the stowage bin. When going into combat, the crew invariably puts a full complement of ammunition in the floor of the turret basket because they are anxious to carry a very large quantity of ammunition. Tank crews are very little concerned with protection of ammunition and consider accessibility and quantity of primary importance. it was bad tank, with many flaws as any other, but main problems often was it's crew and people who command operations, but all this old shitty myths about "bad soviet sights" etc only a myths...
  18. Wiedzmin
  19. Wiedzmin
    yes it's seen on photo, near to bended area it's get thicker, but this area is track tension system IIRC, so it could be very tricky
  20. Wiedzmin
    but no any photos of this measures ?
  21. Wiedzmin
    i researched III, IV, 34, VI and V much closer tnan that videos in empty tanks as for "very ergonomic panzer III" loader doesn't have turntable, and will dance around cardan shaft or "gunner position is not bad" with open side hatch, no commander in place lol, superb! driver and radiooperator don't have hatches and it has a 50mm little gun vs 76mm, well... loader site, tank doesn't have MG which will reduce free space in turret...and again open hatches(vision block on hatch again will reduce free space) with this turret has some problems. same level of force was needed on Sherman steering levers , 30-35 kg max for T34 and Sherman, as for gearshift on 4 speed gearbox it was fixed on 5 speed gearbox and human memory never was and never be a good source. it's not problem of a turret, but basic idea of that tank at the moment. horrible in what term ? or in comparison with what tank ? Panzer III with commander sitting on ammo bin ? or Panzer III rack in engine room ? or Panzer IV gunner have ammo oh his foots ? maybe Comet where loader can't load gun without hurting himself ? great conclusion and again, all of that it's not in protection of "holly T-34", just hate tons of stupid old myths and new made by Chieftain sitting in empty tank and making conclusions out of nowhere.
  22. Wiedzmin
    as far as i remember ther was some discussion about AMX-30 UFP thickness, and that it's 50mm not 80, external diam of smoke discharger 80-85mm ?
  23. Wiedzmin
    70M http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=43380&page=13 from "with all due respect to Chieftain's work, is it real to correct old article ?"
  24. Wiedzmin
    @SH_MM is it known why upper hull front addon steel on marder get rubber on some plates, and some plates without it ? thermal signature reduction for engine deck?
  25. Wiedzmin
    try to fit in fully stowed(ammo, spare parts etc) Panzer IV(where gunner have 4 round on his legs etc) or III lol driver live inside powder cellar commander behind gun etc or Tiger with his cramped gunner site, or any other tank, bigger tank doesn't mean that it's 100% super comfortable ^^ strange T-34-76(maybe stamped turret with additional racks) SU-85-100-122 was really very cramped in soviet russian you obliged to return all shell cases after firing to commander, and it's better to be undamaged... during combat use haven't heard anything about disabled by crew, there was was T-72 failure, when crew stowed felt boots outside near ejection hatch, and during ejection it jammed in to it or something like that which cause a case fall in tank, but no any damage to anyone lol Syria... i doubt that they can use something more sophisticated than spoon(or just keep up in working order)... he often make strange conclusions out of nowhere, or just get in empty tank (no ammo, no radio, nothing) and says "oh look how comfy it is!"
×
×
  • Create New...