Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

heretic88

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    454
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

heretic88 last won the day on January 14

heretic88 had the most liked content!

About heretic88

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just people who write... AND spend their time studying original archives, documents, reports and the actual surviving vehicles. This is the difference between amateurs (like it or not, all of us are amateurs on forums such as this) and experts... Of course they may make mistakes, but overall, their knowledge about their subjects is FAR above mine, yours, and anybody else on this forum combined.
  2. Ok. Just answer some simple question. Are Spielberger, Jentz, Doyle (and many others) are "wehraboos"? Because neither author share your opinions about the Panther tank... (in fact, barely any) And Im quite sure they are the real experts, not the denizens of this forum... All of us here are only entusiastic amateurs compared to them. Spielberger even "dared" to say that it was an excellent tank. I just said, it was good, instead of mediocre. So Spielberger is an ignorant "wehraboo"? Young? Stupid? Or even a nazi apologist?
  3. @Jeeps_Guns_TanksGo to hell asshole... And you are trying to criticize anybody. You contributed nothing to this discussion, except declaring people with different opinions than yours as ignorant, and at the same time declare your wishful thinking as facts. I bet you didnt read any literature about stuff you claim to be expert of. And when you are totally out of arguments, first you steer the conversation to politics, and finally you insult me... Congratulations. You are a really toxic, sad person. As for the 88 in my user name... Maybe that I was born in 1988? But no, surely it was becaus
  4. It was an excellent fighter in its time. The chronic lack of fuel, and the barely trained pilots werent its fault. One of the best infantry weapon of the war... again, lack of magazines wasnt its fault. Yes, thats why allied soldiers envied german equipment... Please, do not bring politics here! Until now this was a technical/historical discussion. Should remain that. (but if you really want to... khmmm... holodomor... great famines in 1930s... mao's china...)
  5. Exactly that is why it cannot be used for evaluating the Panther's performance. As I told earlier, try looking for literature about the 1944-45 battles in Hungary.
  6. On the other hand, StuG armor was judged excellent... Please... no. T-34 was never a problem for germans. It was a damn good excuse for generals to explain their failures. The REAL bane of german tanks was the KV-1. That one also worth a discussion, how underestimated this tank is. Just like the Panther, it had reliability problems, but its battlefield performance was excellent. A really, really excellent tank in 1941-42. The Sherman didnt suffer so serious losses, but the T-34... Maybe almost 45.000 irrecoverably lost during the war? 82% of production? These are
  7. Just showing that the "unfixable" poor design of the Panther is far from reality. What I mentioned are actual plans that werent implemented due to war.
  8. Just compare it with the T-54... 10 tons difference in favor of the T-54. While the T-54 had better armor and a bigger gun. Yes, the wunderkampfwagen myth is indeed idiotic, and was busted long ago. Sad that some people are still believing it. But it is even sadder to invent new myths to destroy the earlier one. Although the battlefield superiority of the Panther over the Sherman and especially the T-34 arent myths. Larger tank battles werent common in the west, and also the terrain wasnt ideal, so I think we cant really use it as a base for comparison. On the eastern front however
  9. Wrong. Only in 1944 it became variable, and and only from second half of 1944 became shitty. Desing is just one (although important) thing to evaluate a certain weapon system. Even though the Panther wasnt the best (I'd rate it above average, but obviously not excellent) design, it performed well in combat. Its sad that the knowledge about its battlefield history is limited to some select battles in the west where it lost against Shermans. In hungary there were quite significant battles in 1944-45, in fact some of the larger tank battles in ww2. And the Panther excelled there. E
  10. Big surprise... Penetration of BR-240P is 110mm @ 100m... On the other hand, the mantlet was invulnerable* for normal AP of T-34/76, and highly resistant even against the 85mm guns which were effective only out to about 800-1000 meters... * except lucky shots to lower mantlet, but this happened rarely. Side armor: weak. Everybody knows that. But so were the sides of the M-48 Patton in its own time period. Yet it doesnt get bashing for it...
  11. You and your calculations again... If you would even care to look for sources... The correct dimensions of the engine: lenght: 1310mm (includes the end fittings for the exhaust collector) width: 1010mm height: 1185mm INCLUDING THE AIR FILTERS!!! Without them, ~ 960mm. That means the two engines are quite comparable in size. Big surprise! the RR Meteor is again, just as big! And also the Ford GAA... Want a huge engine? Then check the AVDS-1790... And compare it to the V46 then... I have a feeling that your rants about the Panther are just coming from
  12. Yes this is interesting. But according to JCB, their HMEE can reach 96 km/h max speed, which is faster. But we'll see how it turns out in the end for the MAC. https://www.jcb.com/en-gb/products/defence-products/high-mobility-engineer-excavator
  13. Not necessarily. Wheel dozers do exist. For example, the Cat 824. A bit heavier, true (30 tons), but still carries a quite decent sized blade. https://www.cat.com/en_GB/products/new/equipment/dozers/wheel-dozers/18591262.html# Anyway, this new french vehicle is not a well thought out design in my opinion. Both its working attachments are in a very unoptimal postition and configuration, no wonder that its performance is that low (the 20 hours required for a 100m long firing position, I bet a good skid steer operator can do it in less than half that time). I think they either n
  14. I do not really understand the point of the 4 in 1 bucket on a military vehicle. A big, heavy, adjustable dozer blade, like on soviet and russian engineer vehicles (IMR, BAT, UBIM) is much better, much more useful. In military environment, you do not need precision work. You do not need to load trucks. You do not need to grade. Also the position of the excavator arm is quite too far back, and the front bucket limits its movement greatly. Why not do it like on the Wisent-2, or the russian UBIM?
  15. Another result of track-phobia? " The vehicle proposed by CNIM/Texelis is fitted with a full-width front bucket capable to build a 100 meters-long defensive firing position in 20 hours. " What kind of position is this? honestly, 100 meters in 20 hours is pretty miserable performance... Ancient soviet MDK-2M can do it in probably less than a hour.
×
×
  • Create New...