Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

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


EnsignExpendable
 Share

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, delete013 said:

"The bottomline is that the credited claims do indeed match soviet losses on this day in general and 5th SA and 2nd GTA losses in particular."

 

@Beer You might want to read it too. It is basically how most panzer ace myths came about. Wrongly attributed kill claims and missing reports on Allied losses. The improbable story is blamed on the soldier, instead of on book writers. The same goes to Wittmann, perhaps the most slandered soldier of ww2.

 

 

Are you really comparing that with total losses of two entire armies? Get real. Tens of thousands of German soldiers contributed to those soviet losses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, delete013 said:

I'm not sure you know what you posted. This is one of those articles, where in comments, critical mass dismantles tankarchives. He provides a good answer to Körner's mistery. The latter only claimed 11 tanks and 39 possible. Secondary sources then misinterpreted it. But in the words of critical mass:

 

"The bottomline is that the credited claims do indeed match soviet losses on this day in general and 5th SA and 2nd GTA losses in particular."

 

@Beer You might want to read it too. It is basically how most panzer ace myths came about. Wrongly attributed kill claims and missing reports on Allied losses. The improbable story is blamed on the soldier, instead of on book writers. The same goes to Wittmann, perhaps the most slandered soldier of ww2.

 

 

Truly your retardation knows no bounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, delete013 said:

The key to that report is that artillery can damage drive train and that recovery was usually impossible. Allied tanks featured similar problems if hit by artilley, only that German artillery wasn't much present in the west.

 

Or is it because Körner was in a tiger B?

 

I apologize for reading the Tiger B as JT (I was very, very tired) - not that the Tiger B was known for having really any better mobility. And if he, good boy that he is, was following orders by this point in the war - his Tiger B wouldn't be carrying much more ammo than a JT. With the turret stowage verboten, he gets only 48 rounds per tank.

 

And since this is a *tank* unit and not a *TD* unit, it means that a good chunk of his ammo is gonna be HE which is not going to do much to the IS-2s frontally to say the least. And even with 48 rounds of AP, with every shot a killing hit, *you still don't have enough ammo for all of the kills he claimed*. This is far and away the logically hardest argument in favor of him talking shit - it is physically impossible for them to have knocked out more tanks than they had ammo for.

 

And yes, Artillery can cause immense problems - often of the 'oh god the front plate caved in' sort the ML-20 was famous for. But you'll note he didn't claim artillery knocked out the tanks, just that somehow it only broke track links and final drives. Track links are somewhat understandable as pressure and shrapnel from near bursts can blow off links - but the final drive is such a tiny target that is covered from most angles that nobody else in the war recalls final drives being destroyed by arty to be an issue. You don't even see other Panther/JgPanther units trying to blame arty for their final drives exploding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:

 

I apologize for reading the Tiger B as JT (I was very, very tired) - not that the Tiger B was known for having really any better mobility. And if he, good boy that he is, was following orders by this point in the war - his Tiger B wouldn't be carrying much more ammo than a JT. With the turret stowage verboten, he gets only 48 rounds per tank.

Full capacity of the production model was 84. Without rear turret stock, 68. Plus what they can store elsewhere. Plus what others can give him. Better go back to sleep.

 

10 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:

And since this is a *tank* unit and not a *TD* unit, it means that a good chunk of his ammo is gonna be HE which is not going to do much to the IS-2s frontally to say the least. And even with 48 rounds of AP, with every shot a killing hit, *you still don't have enough ammo for all of the kills he claimed*. This is far and away the logically hardest argument in favor of him talking shit - it is physically impossible for them to have knocked out more tanks than they had ammo for.

Considering the treat, they likely put more AP shells that HE. But unless we have some testimony, I can't say for sure.

 

10 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:

And yes, Artillery can cause immense problems - often of the 'oh god the front plate caved in' sort the ML-20 was famous for. But you'll note he didn't claim artillery knocked out the tanks, just that somehow it only broke track links and final drives. Track links are somewhat understandable as pressure and shrapnel from near bursts can blow off links - but the final drive is such a tiny target that is covered from most angles that nobody else in the war recalls final drives being destroyed by arty to be an issue. You don't even see other Panther/JgPanther units trying to blame arty for their final drives exploding.

The report doesn't say that there were no other causes. But enough to get mentioned. Smth which very likely happened considering the availability and reliance of WAllies on artillery. This artillery was mostly indirect l that rarely hit the vehicle directly. Hence, k.o. is a matter of interpretation. Mobility kill, I guess.

Almost all failed German armoured attacks that Americans casually attribute to their skill and tanks were stopped this way. With many many many artillery shells (or by CAS). This usually had two important effects, destruction or retreat of German infantry and damaging of tanks. After the artillery finished, US tanks and infantry shot up what was left on the field. This includes a lot of immobilised and abandoned vehicles then appearing as kill claims, which is understandable. The only direct fire unit that likely did destroy many manned German tanks were TDs, because they were a dedicated defensive weapon with a single task of waiting in the back for panzer breakthroughs and placed on potential venues of attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Toxn said:

You're ignoring the part where critical mass founds his argument on the Soviet losses of that entire part of the front for that day, then elides his way into the two numbers being similar and that therefore Korner's account is somehow legit.

 

Peter goes into this at length.

No, critical mass specifically states that Körner hadn'tdestroyed all 100 T-34s, nor did he claim them. Claims and losses are for the entire Heeresgruppe Weichsel and mostly 1st Belorussian front of which most (not all) can be attiributed to Panzerabteilung 503, considering the location of units. Critical mass also mentions that Soviet reports indicate mostly "projectile hits", hence the long 8,8 the most probable candidate. Unless he messed up primary sources is this a very solid explanation of the situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, delete013 said:

No, critical mass specifically states that Körner hadn'tdestroyed all 100 T-34s, nor did he claim them. Claims and losses are for the entire Heeresgruppe Weichsel and mostly 1st Belorussian front of which most (not all) can be attiributed to Panzerabteilung 503, considering the location of units. Critical mass also mentions that Soviet reports indicate mostly "projectile hits", hence the long 8,8 the most probable candidate. Unless he messed up primary sources is this a very solid explanation of the situation. 

 

When you die, please donate your brain to science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, delete013 said:

No, critical mass specifically states that Körner hadn'tdestroyed all 100 T-34s, nor did he claim them. Claims and losses are for the entire Heeresgruppe Weichsel and mostly 1st Belorussian front of which most (not all) can be attiributed to Panzerabteilung 503, considering the location of units. Critical mass also mentions that Soviet reports indicate mostly "projectile hits", hence the long 8,8 the most probable candidate. Unless he messed up primary sources is this a very solid explanation of the situation. 

Ah yes, "hit by projectile" a surefire way to determine the cause of destruction to be the 'long 8,8' since that thing is unique in the sense that it's the only thing on the battlefield that fires projectiles!

 

The rest of the guns fire... what exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, delete013 said:

No, critical mass specifically states that Körner hadn'tdestroyed all 100 T-34s, nor did he claim them. Claims and losses are for the entire Heeresgruppe Weichsel and mostly 1st Belorussian front of which most (not all) can be attiributed to Panzerabteilung 503, considering the location of units. Critical mass also mentions that Soviet reports indicate mostly "projectile hits", hence the long 8,8 the most probable candidate. Unless he messed up primary sources is this a very solid explanation of the situation. 

Which is of course why Soviet forces in the area overran the position that that unit was based at and then complained about anti-tank guns and panzerfausts.

 

It all makes perfect sense so long as you ascribe every single lost vehicle to tigers that can magically shift position by 100km.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Bronezhilet said:

Ah yes, "hit by projectile" a surefire way to determine the cause of destruction to be the 'long 8,8' since that thing is unique in the sense that it's the only thing on the battlefield that fires projectiles!

 

The rest of the guns fire... what exactly?

The point of that classification is to exclude Panzerfausts. Sure, there were other cannons too. Let's ask here, what are the best AT tools at hand? I believe they are Tiger Bs. This on its own wouldn't be enough, but critical mass matched their location with those of the affected Soviet units and that is a credible motive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what's the point of this obsession with propaganda-driven made-up stats of several individuals leaving the other millions of common German soldiers looking like a useless inept crowd. That applies twice more if those individuals are hardcore nazi from SS. That's not only weird but also rather sick fetish. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Toxn said:

Which is of course why Soviet forces in the area overran the position that that unit was based at and then complained about anti-tank guns and panzerfausts.

Error in secondary sources.

Quote

Though this article went so far in claiming that nothing happened on 19th of April in the area and that´s not any better than what secondary accounts made out of the events,...

...

Yet they [Germans] made one local counter attack and significantly delayed the main progress.

...

This is important because the regulations required losses to be notified within two days. The revised document can therefore be considered as reliable for information of the reporting period.

...

It appears that the 5th Shock Army recorded 175 tanks/SPG knocked out until apr. 20th, of which 84 were IS-2 Heavy tanks. Total write offs for IS-2 were 32 with 24 more heavy tanks send to medium time repair. Considering that on the evening of the 18th, the two units reported 48 and 50 operational IS-2, it´s possible to reasonably deduce that at least 31 of these heavy tank knock outs occured before the 19th and consequently up to 53 IS-2 heavy tank knock outs may have occuring on 19th and 20th, alone (presuming no double knock outs are present, which may be too simplistic).

Quote

The only assets east of Strausberg were the 103./503. PzAbt. (9 operational Tiger Ausf. B and 7 operational Flakpanzer with 20mm guns) reinforced by 5 StuG, some remnants of the 9th Para. infantery Div. and PzGr.Reg NORGE in reserve (some APC, mortars). It´s possible that the latter had a few 37mm or 50mm ATG.

 

47 minutes ago, Toxn said:

It all makes perfect sense so long as you ascribe every single lost vehicle to tigers that can magically shift position by 100km.

Quote

Finally, Köerner doesn´t need to be cloned to be everywhere. Prädikow, Grunow and Bollerdorf are all closeby. If You take the road it´s less than 7km from Prädikow in the north via Grunow to Bollersdorf in the south. From the platoons prepared position at the eastern edge of the Schwarzberge it´s approx. 2km to Prädikow (to the NNE) and Grunow (to the E), a bit more than 3km to Bollersdorf (to the SE). Even with detour that requires a march less than 6km for Körners group to regroup and join "NORGE"s local counterattack.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, delete013 said:

I'm not sure you know what you posted. This is one of those articles, where in comments, critical mass dismantles tankarchives. He provides a good answer to Körner's mistery. The latter only claimed 11 tanks and 39 possible. Secondary sources then misinterpreted it. But in the words of critical mass:

 

"The bottomline is that the credited claims do indeed match soviet losses on this day in general and 5th SA and 2nd GTA losses in particular."

 

@Beer You might want to read it too. It is basically how most panzer ace myths came about. Wrongly attributed kill claims and missing reports on Allied losses. The improbable story is blamed on the soldier, instead of on book writers. The same goes to Wittmann, perhaps the most slandered soldier of ww2.

 

 

You didn't read all of that guy's comments, even:

 

"The whole story was blown out of proportion in subsequent german tertiary reception of the action, most likely due to inaccurate descriptions and lack of access to source documents. Someone started putting the whole units claim incorrectly to Körners credit and then kept on adding whatever Harrer, Diers, Schäfer, Turk, Müller et al. claimed on their own on top to arrive with a new unit claim. And instead of "for no losses", I have hard evidence to confirm that four TIGER Ausf. B were total write offs on this day (two caught by artillery or Katyusha barrage, one to side penetration and another one abandoned and not recovered) and two further tanks received sufficient damage to forcing their pre-emptive retreat."

 

So in other words, it's fiction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

 

You didn't read all of that guy's comments, even:

 

"The whole story was blown out of proportion in subsequent german tertiary reception of the action, most likely due to inaccurate descriptions and lack of access to source documents. Someone started putting the whole units claim incorrectly to Körners credit and then kept on adding whatever Harrer, Diers, Schäfer, Turk, Müller et al. claimed on their own on top to arrive with a new unit claim. And instead of "for no losses", I have hard evidence to confirm that four TIGER Ausf. B were total write offs on this day (two caught by artillery or Katyusha barrage, one to side penetration and another one abandoned and not recovered) and two further tanks received sufficient damage to forcing their pre-emptive retreat."

 

So in other words, it's fiction

What is fiction is Körner alone and 100 kills. That is also what I deemed unbelievable, if you recall. German army never claimed that and the point of that article and Beer's post was to prove that it did, is therefore untrustworthy. I don't care what propaganda or post-war writers said. You can call them biased, but not the German army. Facts were wrongly interpreted but the core of the story is real = extraordinary damage dealt by a few tigers and that the actual claims are credible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Lord_James said:


Yes, because the kraut’s had only 88mm guns in their arsenal... 

 

No 

Other 

Common

AT guns

The man went so far to check the composition and equipment of the units involved:

Quote

Notice that there was no Panzerjäger platoon employed. Towed ATG (75mm up) were further south near Buckow and north in direction Eberswalde.
The only assets east of Strausberg were the 103./503. PzAbt. (9 operational Tiger Ausf. B and 7 operational Flakpanzer with 20mm guns) reinforced by 5 StuG, some remnants of the 9th Para. infantery Div. and PzGr.Reg NORGE in reserve (some APC, mortars). It´s possible that the latter had a few 37mm or 50mm ATG.

Brilliant work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

You have to wonder why it's so important to Delete, that these Nazi Propaganda victories be true, it's weird.  Who white knights for the Nazis these days? 

My primary goal in such historical analysis is the truth. This case is especially interesting because a proper analysis is new to me and because it appears to be one of those beleaguered "myths".

It is exciting to know that certain people of the past were capable of such performance against impossible odds, in times, where individuals became but insignificant gears in the machinery of industrial warfare. It is very unfortunate that they gave their best for a perfide regime, but those are some of the finest feats in the recorded military history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, delete013 said:

but those are some of the finest feats in the recorded military history.

 

wait a fucking second... 

 

1 hour ago, delete013 said:

What is fiction is Körner alone and 100 kills. That is also what I deemed unbelievable

 

:what:

 

what the fuck are you arguing then?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, delete013 said:

What is fiction is Körner alone and 100 kills. That is also what I deemed unbelievable, if you recall. German army never claimed that and the point of that article and Beer's post was to prove that it did, is therefore untrustworthy. I don't care what propaganda or post-war writers said. You can call them biased, but not the German army. Facts were wrongly interpreted but the core of the story is real = extraordinary damage dealt by a few tigers and that the actual claims are credible.

 

Wriggling out of it only works if the fisher doesn't have a fork, you spineless agnathan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2021 at 9:31 AM, delete013 said:

I also think these numbers are extreme. I'm not sure historians are clear on what happened there. To my info Körner encountered dozens of tanks rearming and refueling in a counter attack. There he could have begged many. I would never choose such unclear case to prove some point.

 

First, it's "unclear" whether Korner's tank could have teleported behind the enemy bagging hundreds of them, now you're saying it's "fiction" - which was Beer's whole point you were attempting to refute!

 

 

 

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

  • Similar Content

    • By SH_MM
      Found a few higher resolution photographs from the recent North Korean military parade. We didn't have a topic for BEST KOREAN armored fighting vehicles, so here it is.
       
      New main battle tank, Abrams-Armata clone based on Ch'ŏnma turret design (welded, box-shaped turret) and Sŏn'gun hull design (i.e. centerline driver's position). The bolts of the armor on the hull front is finally visible given the increased resolution. It might not be ERA given the lack of lines inbetween. Maybe is a NERA module akin to the MEXAS hull add-on armor for the Leopard 2A5?
       
      Other details include an APS with four radar panels (the side-mounted radar panels look a lot different - and a lot more real - than the ones mounted at the turret corners) and twelve countermeasures in four banks (two banks à three launchers each at the turret front, two banks à three launchers on the left and right side of the turret). Thermal imagers for gunner and commander, meteorological mast, two laser warning receivers, 115 mm smoothbore gun without thermal sleeve but with muzze reference system, 30 mm grenade launcher on the turret, six smoke grenade dischargers (three at each turret rear corner)
       


       
      IMO the layout of the roof-mounted ERA is really odd. Either the armor array covering the left turret cheek is significantly thinner than the armor on the right turret cheek or the roof-mounted ERA overlaps with the armor.
       


      The first ERA/armor element of the skirt is connected by hinges and can probably swivel to allow better access to the track. There is a cut-out in the slat armor for the engine exhaust. Also note the actual turret ring - very small diameter compared to the outer dimensions of the turret.
       
      Stryker MGS copy with D-30 field gun clone and mid engine:

      Note there are four crew hatches. Driver (on the left front of the vehicle), commander (on the right front of the vehicle, seat is placed a bit further back), gunner (left side of the gun's overhead mount, next to the gunner's sight) and unknown crew member (right side of gun's overhead mount with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher mounted at the hatch). The vehicle also has a thermal imager and laser rangefinder (gunner's sight is identical to the new tank), but no independent optic for the commander. It also has the same meteorological mast and laser warner receivers as the new MBT.
       
      What is the purpose of the fourth crew member? He cannot realistically load the gun...
       
      The vehicle has a small trim vane for swimming, the side armor is made of very thin spaced steel that is bend on multiple spots, so it clearly is not ceramic armor as fitted to the actual Stryker.

       
      The tank destroyer variant of the same Stryker MGS copy fitted with a Bulsae-3 ATGM launcher.
       

      Note that there is again a third hatch with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher behind the commander's position. Laser warning receivers and trime vane are again stand-out features. The sighting complex for the Bulsae-3 ATGMs is different with a large circular optic (fitted with cover) probably being a thermal imager and two smaller lenses visible on the very right (as seen from the vehicle's point of view) probably containing a day sight and parts of the guidance system.
       

      Non line-of-sight ATGM carrier based on the 6x6 local variant of the BTR, again fitted with laser warning receivers and a trim vane. There are only two hatches and two windows, but there is a three men crew inside.
       
       
      There are a lot more photos here, but most of them are infantry of missile system (MLRS' and ICBMs).
    • By Monochromelody
      Disappeared for a long period, Mai_Waffentrager reappeared four months ago. 
      This time, he took out another photoshoped artifact. 

      He claimed that the Japanese prototype 105GSR (105 mm Gun Soft Recoil) used an autoloader similar to Swedish UDES 19 project. Then he showed this pic and said it came from a Japanese patent file. 
      Well, things turn out that it cames from Bofors AG's own patent, with all markings and numbers wiped out. 

      original file→https://patents.google.com/patent/GB1565069A/en?q=top+mounted+gun&assignee=bofors&oq=top+mounted+gun+bofors
      He has not changed since his Type 90 armor scam busted. Guys, stay sharp and be cautious. 
       
    • By LostCosmonaut
      Backstory (skip if you don't like alternate history junk)
       
      The year is 2239. It has been roughly 210 years since the world was engulfed in nuclear war. Following the war, the United States splintered into hundreds of small statelets. While much knowledge was retained in some form (mostly through books and other printed media), the loss of population and destruction of industrial capability set back society immensely.
       
      Though the Pacific Northwest was less badly hit than other areas, the destruction of Seattle and Portland, coupled with the rupturing of the Cascadia Subduction Zone in 2043, caused society to regress to a mid-19th century technology level. However, in the early 2100s, the Cascade Republic formed, centered near Tacoma. The new nation grew rapidly, expanding to encompass most of Washington and Oregon by 2239. The Cascade Republic now extends from the Klamath River in the south to the Fraser River in the north, and from the Pacific roughly to central Idaho. Over time, the standard of living and industrial development improved (initially through salvaging of surviving equipment, by the late 2100s through new development); the population has grown to about 4.5 million (comparable to 1950 levels), and technology is at about a 1940 level. Automobiles are common, aircraft are less common, but not rare by any means. Computers are nonexistent aside from a few experimental devices; while scientists and engineers are aware of the principles behind microchips and other advanced electronics, the facilities to produce such components simply do not exist. Low rate production of early transistors recently restarted.
       
      The current armored force of the Cascade Republic consists of three armored brigades. They are presently equipped with domestically produced light tanks, dating to the 2190s. Weighing roughly 12 tons and armed with a 40mm gun, they represented the apex of the Cascade Republic's industrial capabilities at the time. And when they were built, they were sufficient for duties such as pacifying survivalist enclaves in remote areas. However, since that time, the geopolitical situation has complicated significantly. There are two main opponents the Cascade Republic's military could expect to face in the near future.
       
      The first is California. The state of California was hit particularly hard by the nuclear exchange. However, in 2160, several small polities in the southern part of the state near the ruins of Los Angeles unified. Adopting an ideology not unfamiliar to North Korea, the new state declared itself the successor to the legacy of California, and set about forcibly annexing the rest of the state. It took them less than 50 years to unite the rest of California, and spread into parts of Arizona and northern Mexico. While California's expansion stopped at the Klamath River for now, this is only due to poor supply lines and the desire to engage easier targets. (California's northward advanced did provide the final impetus for the last statelets in south Oregon to unify with the Cascade Republic voluntarily).
       
      California is heavily industrialized, possessing significant air, naval, and armored capabilities. Their technology level is comparable to the Cascade Republic's, but their superior industrial capabilities and population mean that they can produce larger vehicles in greater quantity than other countries. Intelligence shows they have vehicles weighing up to 50 tons with 3 inches of armor, though most of their tanks are much lighter.

      The expected frontlines for an engagement with the Californian military would be the coastal regions in southern Oregon. Advancing up the coastal roads would allow California to capture the most populated and industrialized regions of the Cascade Republic if they advanced far enough north. Fortunately, the terrain near the border is very difficult and favors the defender;


      (near the Californian border)


      The other opponent is Deseret, a Mormon theocratic state centered in Utah, and encompassing much of Nevada, western Colorado, and southern Idaho. Recently, tension has arisen with the Cascade Republic over two main issues. The first is the poorly defined border in Eastern Oregon / Northern Nevada; the old state boundary is virtually meaningless, and though the area is sparsely populated, it does represent a significant land area, with grazing and water resources. The more recent flashpoint is the Cascade Republic's recent annexation of Arco and the area to the east. Deseret historically regarded Idaho as being within its sphere of influence, and maintained several puppet states in the area (the largest being centered in Idaho Falls). They regard the annexation of a signficant (in terms of land area, not population) portion of Idaho as a major intrusion into their rightful territory. That the Cascade Republic has repaired the rail line leading to the old Naval Reactors Facility, and set up a significant military base there only makes the situation worse.
       
      Deseret's military is light and heavily focused on mobile operations. Though they are less heavily mechanized than the Cascade Republic's forces, operating mostly armored cars and cavalry, they still represent a significant threat  to supply and communication lines in the open terrain of eastern Oregon / southern Idaho.


      (a butte in the disputed region of Idaho, near Arco)
       
      Requirements
       
      As the head of a design team in the Cascade Republic military, you have been requested to design a new tank according to one of two specifications (or both if you so desire):
       
      Medium / Heavy Tank Weight: No more than 45 tons Width: No more than 10.8 feet (3.25 meters) Upper glacis / frontal turret armor of at least 3 in (76mm) LoS thickness Side armor at least 1in (25mm) thick (i.e. resistant to HMG fire) Power/weight ratio of at least 10 hp / ton No more than 6 crew members Primary armament capable of utilizing both anti-armor and high explosive rounds Light tank Weight: No more than 25 tons Width: No more than 10.8 feet Upper glacis / frontal turret armor of at least 1 in thickness Side armor of at least 3/8 in (10mm) thickness Power/weight ratio of at least 12 hp / ton No more than 6 crew members Primary armament capable of utilizing both anti-armor and high explosive rounds  
      Other relevant information:
      Any tank should be designed to operate against either of the Cascade Republic's likely opponents (California or Deseret) The primary heavy machine gun is the M2, the primary medium machine gun is the M240. Use of one or both of these as coaxial and/or secondary armament is encouraged. The secret archives of the Cascade Republic are available for your use. Sadly, there are no running prewar armored vehicles, the best are some rusted hulks that have long been stripped of usable equipment. (Lima Tank Plant ate a 500 kt ground burst) Both HEAT and APFSDS rounds are in testing. APCR is the primary anti-armor round of the Cascade Republic. Either diesel or gasoline engines are acceptable, the Cascade Republic is friendly with oil producing regions in Canada (OOC: Engines are at about a late 1940s/early 50s tech level) The adaptability of the tank to other variants (such as SPAA, SPG, recovery vehicle, etc.) is preferred but not the primary metric that will be used to decide on a design. Ease of maintenance in the field is highly important. Any designs produced will be compared against the M4 Sherman and M3 Stuart (for medium/heavy and light tank), as these blueprints are readily available, and these tanks are well within the Cascade Republic's manufacturing capabilities.  
       
       
       
       
    • By Sovngard
      Meanwhile at Eurosatory 2018 :
       
      The Euro Main Battle Tank (EMBT), a private venture project intended for the export market.
       


×
×
  • Create New...