roguetechie

Unless you're Emeric, then it's a suppression study

Well it all started when I was about four years old, my father, you see, he...

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 actually WORK with what they had!
 
Delete keeps trying to act like it's some sort of accomplishment to build a "medium" that's 15 tons heavier than it should be while having inferior fit out because he apparently doesn't understand that the goal is to get x set of capabilities with y mobility at the lowest weight and bulk possible.
 
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the purpose of tanks truly is at it's core.
 
Delete believes in the stat block over all else while sane people understand that AFV design is about striking the best compromise between all the competing factors and design considerations to come out with a system that does the most with the least so that you can make deploy and supply as many of them as possible.
 
These are not vegas air races aircraft delete. No points are awarded for the most sleek sophisticated and on the edge of your technological capabilities designs.
 
Your entire approach for deciding what is good is based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of afv's.

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 actually WORK with what they had!
 
Delete keeps trying to act like it's some sort of accomplishment to build a "medium" that's 15 tons heavier than it should be while having inferior fit out because he apparently doesn't understand that the goal is to get x set of capabilities with y mobility at the lowest weight and bulk possible.
 
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the purpose of tanks truly is at it's core.
 
Delete believes in the stat block over all else while sane people understand that AFV design is about striking the best compromise between all the competing factors and design considerations to come out with a system that does the most with the least so that you can make deploy and supply as many of them as possible.
 
These are not vegas air races aircraft delete. No points are awarded for the most sleek sophisticated and on the edge of your technological capabilities designs.
 
Your entire approach for deciding what is good is based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of afv's.

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 actually WORK with what they had!
 
Delete keeps trying to act like it's some sort of accomplishment to build a "medium" that's 15 tons heavier than it should be while having inferior fit out because he apparently doesn't understand that the goal is to get x set of capabilities with y mobility at the lowest weight and bulk possible.
 
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the purpose of tanks truly is at it's core.
 
Delete believes in the stat block over all else while sane people understand that AFV design is about striking the best compromise between all the competing factors and design considerations to come out with a system that does the most with the least so that you can make deploy and supply as many of them as possible.
 
These are not vegas air races aircraft delete. No points are awarded for the most sleek sophisticated and on the edge of your technological capabilities designs.
 
Your entire approach for deciding what is good is based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of afv's.

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 actually WORK with what they had!
 
Delete keeps trying to act like it's some sort of accomplishment to build a "medium" that's 15 tons heavier than it should be while having inferior fit out because he apparently doesn't understand that the goal is to get x set of capabilities with y mobility at the lowest weight and bulk possible.
 
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the purpose of tanks truly is at it's core.
 
Delete believes in the stat block over all else while sane people understand that AFV design is about striking the best compromise between all the competing factors and design considerations to come out with a system that does the most with the least so that you can make deploy and supply as many of them as possible.
 
These are not vegas air races aircraft delete. No points are awarded for the most sleek sophisticated and on the edge of your technological capabilities designs.
 
Your entire approach for deciding what is good is based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of afv's.

Oh indeed, and no doubt they wouldn't stop there. Germans are very resourceful after all! They'd also redesign the hull for a low profile, sponsonless arrangement with rear drive, switch from interleaved roadwheels to a Christie type arrangement, delete the bow gunner, redesign the exhaust system, replace the troublesome turret traverse mechanism, integrate new unity periscopes for every crew station, delete the unnecessarily complex and difficult to replace dual torsion bars with a slicker single bar arrangement, redesign the KwK 43 to have a concentric recoil mechanism and enlarge the bore to 105mm for new Hohlladungsgeschosse projectiles, delete the interlocking plate welding scheme and use automatic welders, convert over to production lines, switch the manufacturer from MAN to Daimler Benz, and have the tanks license-produced in the USA.

Yes the old unreliable r34.... So unreliable that during the recent ukraine festivities we have MULTIPLE documented instances of t34's parked on display in the weather for the last 7 decades being started in short order and driven into battle.
 
Truly a disgrace that some impudent curs had the gall to call these moscovite failure tractors tanks!

This breaks the improvements down very well:
 
https://tankandafvnews.com/2015/02/08/from-the-editor-panther-reliability/
 
In general: the engine got worked on extensively (the changes being minutely detailed), with non-specific fixed applied to the transmission and final drives.
 
By 1944 you're looking at the following:
- Engine: maximum lifespan of 1800 km (unknown average)
- Transmission: maximum lifespan of 1800 km (unknown average)
- Final drives: maximum lifespan unknown, replacement rate at around 3% of vehicles per day (ie: horrific)
- Tracks: maximum of 1800 km (unknown average)
 
Basically: Panthers were, in the best case, around 70% as reliable as T-34s (maximum lifespans of components being reported at around 2500 km) only if you exclude the final drives. If you include the final drives then they were an unmitigated dog-show compared to more or less anything.

What would your Abrahams be without British armour?  Hiw many Abrahams have been list? How many Chally's have been lost. Answer 1 to another Chally.  End of argument. 

I know right?!
 
Also, I love how he's so free with his critiques of the competition threads and our "general knowledge Levels" Along with singing his own praises...
 
And yet, he's been here ALL THIS TIME and has somehow not managed to find subforum DOCUMENT REPOSITORY LINKS stickied at the top of every forum menu for each subcategory at SH!
 
Real high IQ hours.
 
If you read this spoony boy, go look in the clearly marked fucking folders... Reevaluate your life, reevaluate your attitude, realize that we all also have a metric fuck ton of shit that isn't even in these places, realize that we've all read large portions of these archives, and maybe come back apologize and show proper respect for people who have in fact already done all the hard work for you...
 
And maybe 6 months or a year after that you'll actually begin posting stuff interesting and worthwhile enough to actually get thoughtful and helpful responses from people here.

I know right?!
 
Also, I love how he's so free with his critiques of the competition threads and our "general knowledge Levels" Along with singing his own praises...
 
And yet, he's been here ALL THIS TIME and has somehow not managed to find subforum DOCUMENT REPOSITORY LINKS stickied at the top of every forum menu for each subcategory at SH!
 
Real high IQ hours.
 
If you read this spoony boy, go look in the clearly marked fucking folders... Reevaluate your life, reevaluate your attitude, realize that we all also have a metric fuck ton of shit that isn't even in these places, realize that we've all read large portions of these archives, and maybe come back apologize and show proper respect for people who have in fact already done all the hard work for you...
 
And maybe 6 months or a year after that you'll actually begin posting stuff interesting and worthwhile enough to actually get thoughtful and helpful responses from people here.

I know right?!
 
Also, I love how he's so free with his critiques of the competition threads and our "general knowledge Levels" Along with singing his own praises...
 
And yet, he's been here ALL THIS TIME and has somehow not managed to find subforum DOCUMENT REPOSITORY LINKS stickied at the top of every forum menu for each subcategory at SH!
 
Real high IQ hours.
 
If you read this spoony boy, go look in the clearly marked fucking folders... Reevaluate your life, reevaluate your attitude, realize that we all also have a metric fuck ton of shit that isn't even in these places, realize that we've all read large portions of these archives, and maybe come back apologize and show proper respect for people who have in fact already done all the hard work for you...
 
And maybe 6 months or a year after that you'll actually begin posting stuff interesting and worthwhile enough to actually get thoughtful and helpful responses from people here.

I suppose you must be charmed enough to have never encountered such personalities at the top of any organizational hierarchies. Or Miltwitter.
 
More than a few of us have been published with proper bylines, covering subject matter more relevant to today than a 62 year old tank. We have been there and done that, the difference is that for the most part we weren't so certain of our own intellectual superiority just because we got published someplace for the first time.

I must admit to being a little hurt that my posts didn't rate more highly with Calicifer. I honestly thought they were masterpieces (replete with high quality links/sources) compared to what you'd get from most other fora. *Sigh* back to the drawing board I guess... 

That's a very broad question that's going to be hard to answer. Can you narrow it down for us?
 
On what kind and class of vehicles meant for what roles?
 
Also, how much money are you allowed to spend and are you the US or a US ally we'll transfer the good stuff to?

Towed artillery would get counterbatteried 10 ways to hell so fast it'd make your head spin. Fire systems incapable of dodging or surviving counterbattery fire will have fuckall survivability in a big boy war. Doubly so for towed guns with substantially less range than enemy artillery, such as say the M777 compared to pretty much anything modern on the opposite side.
Fire-finding radars are everywhere since the 1990s, and the gun's survivability has to be evaluated under the understanding that the enemy is going to shoot back. 
Given that, the ability to shoot and scoot before enemy fire arrives is a critical survivability measure.

Seriously though, the cannon is the important part of Brutus and it's actually a very major development that heralds not only interesting future possibilities but also the era where foob and etc weapons are finally crossing the technical maturity line in a meaningful way.
 
This is all but the textbook definition of a big deal.
 
This and the gd ngsw bullpups are harbingers of actual advancements in gun technologies across the board which have the potential to let us do things we haven't actually been able to do before in pretty significant ways which also happen to be pretty synergistic with other stuff being developed as well as having some low key potential to dig us out of some holes we're currently in or facing capabilities wise.
 

I had forgotten how much I enjoy the witty repartee so often a feature of forums in general.  Thank you for reminding me of both that enjoyment and my own failings.
 
 

Just some FAMAS photos for... reasons.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 

Walter, 
I have the blueprints for the Canadian 7.62 NATO M37retrofit if you want them let me know.
Sidenote: the Browning 1919/m37 is just outright an awesome gun that you can get to run just about any round between .22 lr and 8x63 Bofors...
Including 303 & x54r... I helped a buddy do a x54r version...
Fun fact: the Finns even figured out a really simple push feed link to convert mg42's to x54r... Aimo Lahti was a genius.

Each flat light ERA casette provides 36mm RHAE of protection, but they need to be spaced 36mm apart from each other.  So, the TE isn't all that great.

The weaponized Passive Aggression in this post is so dangerous and a threat to national security that the Government is threatening to cordon off this entire Forum section and declare it Top Secret.
 

The AN-94 of tank guns?
 
It's a better idea than two actual main guns, which is likely not going to end well if the Russians already had issues with unwanted rotation mounting autocannons.
 
At that point your best bet is likely supersizing the 76 & 90mm CT autocannons we already developed.
 
I can't really speak to the quality of this suggestion, but it's a way to pound out two shots really fast.

For serious, though: missiles are only getting cheaper and cheaper to make. Firing them four or five at a time should be enough to saturate any APS not based on future-lasers. And they're accurate out to maximum range.
 
Fuck sticking twin 40mm guns or whatever onto the turret.