Jump to content

StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)


EnsignExpendable
 Share

Recommended Posts

Shitty French magazine TnT invented another wonderwaffle

 

 

 

However, it's a well known fact that the laws of physics hold a deep Russian Bias

 

 

I've seen copies of that magazine on some of the PDF magazine download sites but never bothered to download one since they are in French.  I guess I'm not missing anything important.  French Wehraboos is a weird concept. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep; it's a Leo 1 hull fitted with a rolling axis turret, which is why the bottom of the thing looks like a ball-and-socket joint.  Ogorkiewicz mentions it briefly and even has the first of those pictures in his book.  

 

From what I've read they found that stabilizing the turret like that requires a lot of horsepower.  There's a hydraulic motor somewhere that has to roll the entire turret when the vehicle is going over terrain.  Also, it seriously cuts down on the available space in the turret since the available turret envelope is hemispherical instead of cylindrical.

 

There was another proposed German design that would have had three axis turret stabilization, the gloriously insane Borgward leo proposal:

Bf4uCybl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, there is no real benefit for doing that. On top of problems with size and power consumption of stabilizer, turret become very hard to upgrade/upgun, add here problems with ammunition loading process and turret weight limitations (turret armor upgrades would be pain in the a$$).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I'm curious why the US continued using the M4 and other domestic tanks, instead of picking up German tanks after the war. The M4 had terrible armor and lit on fire every time it was hit (hence the "zippo" nickname), where the Tiger or Panther could reliably kill enemy tanks out to two kilometers while being invulnerable from as near as 100m away, and being much more mechanically reliable. I'm sure that the blueprints for German tanks weren't destroyed after the war, and after some retooling and upgrading, I'm sure the US industry would have been capable of producing them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I'm curious why the US continued using the M4 and other domestic tanks, instead of picking up German tanks after the war. The M4 had terrible armor and lit on fire every time it was hit (hence the "zippo" nickname), where the Tiger or Panther could reliably kill enemy tanks out to two kilometers while being invulnerable from as near as 100m away, and being much more mechanically reliable. I'm sure that the blueprints for German tanks weren't destroyed after the war, and after some retooling and upgrading, I'm sure the US industry would have been capable of producing them. 

I have several German wartime sources citing this if you would like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...