Jump to content


Italian Tanks and Military Vehicles

italian tank tree heavy medium light tank destroyer artillery semovente carro armato

  • Please log in to reply
8543 replies to this topic

RanLSX #8461 Posted Aug 19 2019 - 17:53

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostRanLSX, on Mar 07 2018 - 13:44, said:

So recently the Ran keeps getting asked what he would do for a fictional td vehicle for Italy

 

I don't know, probably something different that would technologically  impress the invaders. Something they would think of as clever and interesting. Maybe something with a television to entertain the invading barbarian's short attention span.

 

Maybe try to add this remote control tech with a television for aiming. Use the autoloader 90/53 and give it remote traverse & elevation with maybe a towed generator for power or something. Probably would have to box out the front of the gunners (next to the driver) position to fit the camera. No more need for gunshields.

 
 

Revisiting this fictional project. I still think it's a doable project. 

I found some problems w/ the tech mentioned here:

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/458425-unmanned-patton/

 

Our "prototipo" is pretty much defensive/stationary and our televisions enjoy superior pixels compared to others.

Now here's the thing I find to be the most serious problem that pertains to our model:

 

"The first problem was seeing the target to begin with. Especially if the gunner traversed from a majority light to a majority dark view, or vice versa, the settings on the camera had to be adjusted to compensate. Then the gunner had to adjust himself to the new picture. This was a significant reason why laying on a target took, on average, twice as long for the radio controlled tank as it would for a normally crewed tank. (22-30 seconds, when CONARC’s requirement for a first round was 15 seconds). The second problem was that there was often a delay between controller input and actual tank movement, or cessation of movement. As a result, a lot of fine tuning proved to be required."

 

I think a battery of 3-4 of these could minimize the necessity of excessive traversing. Its still a problem but I think with practice they could focus/re-adjust the camera in no time.

I learned to re-adjust my old black and white in 2- 3 seconds flat, but hey, I'm the Ran. It helps when you turn dials that actually work.

 

Anyway, as far as  the picture quality goes, it looks pretty gud for its time:

BLxRjon.png

...and that's without superior Italian pixels.

                               &

I don't quite understand the need/location of this part but I'm no expert at remote turret gunsights:

 

"There was also an external lens which was used for boresighting, adjusting this whole system to make sure the tank was aiming where it was supposed to was a three-man job and fairly complicated."

 

I was going to connect this next part beside the gun mount so it wouldn't wiggle from the recoil.

 

"The second was the gun camera, fitted with a zoom lens. The lens is listed as an f1:4.5, for use at ranges from 280 to 1,000 yards. There was also a motor-driven iris. The camera observed through the gunner’s periscope, as per a normal tank, but the reticle was replaced with one as part of the camera system." 


Edited by RanLSX, Aug 20 2019 - 00:30.


RanLSX #8462 Posted Aug 19 2019 - 18:12

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

Here's my lay out and such:

iXSDb7i.png?1

 

It still needs finishing touches, but I feel that if I entered it into fictional tank competitions, it would blow the competition away.

 



Spidergrenadier #8463 Posted Aug 21 2019 - 22:22

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 21 battles
  • 97
  • Member since:
    05-13-2017

Sad to admit, but i've realized it'd better to use a Dardo hull instead of marder only during the process. By the way, does anyone have a list of FH-70 ammo specification?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmuGEdXoRak&t=228s



RanLSX #8464 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 18:19

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostSpidergrenadier, on Aug 21 2019 - 16:22, said:

 By the way, does anyone have a list of FH-70 ammo specification?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmuGEdXoRak&t=228s

AFAIK, It should be the same as the Palmaria, PZH- 2000,& AS-90.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_old_pdf.cfm?ARC_ID=1454

"Ammunition. The FH 155-1 artillery piece can fire all present United States/NATO standard 155 millimeter ammunition along with the newer range of NATO standard 155 millimeter ammunition, including the Improved Conventional Munitions types. The M712 Copperhead cannon-launched guided projectile can also be fired."

 

Try this list:

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=818

"155mm BOSS High Explosive Anti-Tank"



RanLSX #8465 Posted Aug 24 2019 - 23:00

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

Putting this here so I don't lose it.

 

Semovente 90/53 @ Favarotta:

https://www.eurasia1945.com/armas/tierra/semovente-9053/

" being then integrated into the 161st and 163rd Self-Propelled Groups (Gruppi Autocanoni) of the 206th Coast Division. It would be in this battle when a few Semovente 90/53 intercepted and destroyed an entire column of Sherman tanks in the Favarotta Gorge, which they left burning on the road from Lucca to Canicatti..

Bibliography:

-Félix Gil Feito, Sicily 1943. The Allies assault the Fortress Europe , “Semovente 90/53”, HRM Ediciones (2013), p.69-70 

 

I don't have anything from the Americans to compare the claim. This is the first I've heard of a "Gorge" 



RanLSX #8466 Posted Aug 28 2019 - 20:14

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

New Semovente 90/53 pic with ammo description:

https://comandosupre...3.152/post-1416

 



RanLSX #8467 Posted Aug 29 2019 - 23:38

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

Ariete & dardo in Poland part 2:

https://comandosupremo.com/forums/index.php?threads/italy-post-wwll-present.92/page-2#post-1432



rivit #8468 Posted Sep 01 2019 - 20:11

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14073 battles
  • 1,536
  • Member since:
    01-19-2012

View PostRanLSX, on Aug 29 2019 - 17:38, said:

Always knockin um dead with those posts about dem Dardoes!



RanLSX #8469 Posted Sep 06 2019 - 21:48

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View Postrivit, on Sep 01 2019 - 14:11, said:

Always knockin um dead with those posts about dem Dardoes!

Welcome back imperious leader! The forum awaits your conquest.


 

Autofortezza guarding the Brenner pass:


 

Kinda a crappy photoshop, I know. I'll do better when I get my 3 million views and final forum conquest. ...so much left to do



RanLSX #8470 Posted Sep 09 2019 - 21:57

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

I'm putting all of SpiderGrenadier's WOT ITT youtube videos in one spot:

 

Pt.1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNlliD_loOQ

Pt.2:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4V4eaIFI5s

Pt.3:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85a_U0XYD8o

Pt.4:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmuGEdXoRak

 



RanLSX #8471 Posted Sep 14 2019 - 22:09

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

This website's link about the Fiat 2000 is harder to find so I'm placing it here:

http://www.fiat2000.it/



rivit #8472 Posted Sep 14 2019 - 22:29

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14073 battles
  • 1,536
  • Member since:
    01-19-2012

New youtube video with Fiat Panda & Ariete tank: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dX7ZzFzNPY



RanLSX #8473 Posted Sep 16 2019 - 17:18

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

Word on the street is double barrel cannons are coming. I am a major supporter of multi barrel.

Have a triple:

vR9vTLp.jpg?1

Developer diaries:

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/611824-double-barrels-gunsyour-thoughts/page__pid__12256383#entry12256383

 



Spidergrenadier #8474 Posted Sep 16 2019 - 20:32

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 21 battles
  • 97
  • Member since:
    05-13-2017

So, the most speculative part is the HTs. It's sadly that GL and p75 projects  have to be shrinked in order to fill the gaps. Also i'm trying to find a Lione armor scheme just to now how bouncy can it possibly be (i've only found out info about a 70mm upper hull plate disposed at 68 degrees, which is actually enough to deflect most APCR or APDS shells in game). I'm also curious about your opinion for this thing down below:

 

 

 



RanLSX #8475 Posted Sep 17 2019 - 18:35

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostSpidergrenadier, on Sep 16 2019 - 14:32, said:

So, the most speculative part is the HTs. It's sadly that GL and p75 projects  have to be shrinked in order to fill the gaps.

 

What do you mean by "shrinked"? Do you mean a lower tier placement, or just less vehicles for each series.

 

GL-3 or 4? 75mm (I put this at tier 3) 

Magrini Fortress Matapan w/ 2 x  76mm guns (tier 4 depending on the engine)

 

GL Ansaldo 107mm (tier 6)

GL Ansaldo 152mm (tier 7) 

GL Ansaldo 203mm (tier 8 or 9)

 

P75 75/18 20mm (tier 4)

P75 75/18, 75/32 20mm (tier 5)

P75 90/42 (tier 6)

 

P75 47mm

P75 75/32 20mm

 

 For the record, I consider the Magrini Mobile Fortress an extension/originator of the GL series until WG can prove otherwise. I'm fairly confident that some aspect of that tank was used or influenced the others in some way- possibly the turret shape. Of course we'll never really know until WG reveals the Ansaldo GL series.

 

Regarding the P75s, I'm unconcerned with the Italian gentleman who later came along and insisted on 47mm pop guns.  We all know that is what eventually happened and we wound up with the M13, but it shouldn't erase the other guns associated with the original  P75 projects.  

The P75 projects should get the 90mm, since that is what was demanded from Il Duce during the project. The size of the vehicle certainly reinforces that fact- along with the mention that the 75/18 was only a place holder. This isn't me saying so, it's from archive material and that trumps silly, pop-corn shooter video game developers and their shills

.

Hell, if I wanted to I could put 90mm on all the P.75.projects.

 

Look at me, I'm a multi-turret with historic 90mm

RzXSKBn.jpg?1

Big guns with more armor and new engine incoming:

udmfwrw.jpg?1

I got a 90mm, what you gonna do about it?

YFwSpns.jpg?1

Pray I don't listen too much to the archives and use whatever 90mm I want.

x2oG52a.png?1

^ That would make your Duce proud^

 

Anyway, a P75 90/42 gets a compatible EP/EPS  round @ 206mm pen. This should help offset the lack of armor. No doubt, the armor's gonna need additional track links. I have the  P/75 90mm or the GL Ansaldo 107mm at tier 6. I suppose one could be a premium. 

 

  



Spidergrenadier #8476 Posted Sep 18 2019 - 11:41

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 21 battles
  • 97
  • Member since:
    05-13-2017

Our potato guys are back onto work of a multi-barreled mechanics, this may do a favor for a GL-series. However, firebutton-pressing delay for a multi-shot is a bad option, because you have to follow your target till the shot is done and estimate possible server lagging.

 

https://www.facebook...82120295518603/


Edited by Spidergrenadier, Sep 18 2019 - 11:43.


RanLSX #8477 Posted Sep 18 2019 - 20:14

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostSpidergrenadier, on Sep 18 2019 - 05:41, said:

Our potato guys are back onto work of a multi-barreled mechanics, this may do a favor for a GL-series. However, firebutton-pressing delay for a multi-shot is a bad option, because you have to follow your target till the shot is done and estimate possible server lagging.

 

https://www.facebook...82120295518603/

It actually makes sense because twin cannons have a nasty habit of throwing off the aim of the other gun unless you wait for the moment at the end of the recoil- when it stops shaking. Multi- turrets have the same problem as well. The big turreted gun knocks off the aim of the smaller turret guns and I suppose vice versa. 

 

The real advantage to having twin barrel or multi-barrel is that I can have them pre-loaded to your single barrel. Even though I'm waiting for the recoil to end, my pre-loaded 2nd barrel will always beat your guns reload and re-aim time. Even autoloaders, while reloading and re- aiming, can't match the speed of a second pre-loaded barrel which simply has to re-aim. 

 

The disadvantage of course is when the twin/ multi-barrel has to reload. Unless you have many, many loaders the twin/ multi-barrels will have to reload one at a time after the initial 2 barrel/ multi-barrel advantage mentioned above. After the initial burst it would be unlikely that you would have both barrels loaded at the same time during the same fight, but you should still get some pretty steady fire. As luck has it, the Italian multi- barrels seem to have a lot of crew. But unfortunately the game has a limit.



Spidergrenadier #8478 Posted Sep 19 2019 - 07:25

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 21 battles
  • 97
  • Member since:
    05-13-2017

"It actually makes sense because twin cannons have a nasty habit of throwing off the aim of the other gun unless you wait for the moment at the end of the recoil- when it stops shaking. Multi- turrets have the same problem as well. The big turreted gun knocks off the aim of the smaller turret guns and I suppose vice versa." - no, you've got me the wrong way, i was talking about 2-barrel blast at one single time. There was a time delay described in a video, when we have both of our cannons loaded, and if we do want to shoot them both at one moment, we should press LMB and hold it for a certain time. That's the point, when the problem comes in, we can easily miss due to this delay, because we have to hold target in a cross for more than 3s till the very final moment.

 



RanLSX #8479 Posted Sep 19 2019 - 16:54

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostSpidergrenadier, on Sep 19 2019 - 01:25, said:

"It actually makes sense because twin cannons have a nasty habit of throwing off the aim of the other gun unless you wait for the moment at the end of the recoil- when it stops shaking. Multi- turrets have the same problem as well. The big turreted gun knocks off the aim of the smaller turret guns and I suppose vice versa." - no, you've got me the wrong way, i was talking about 2-barrel blast at one single time. There was a time delay described in a video, when we have both of our cannons loaded, and if we do want to shoot them both at one moment, we should press LMB and hold it for a certain time. That's the point, when the problem comes in, we can easily miss due to this delay, because we have to hold target in a cross for more than 3s till the very final moment.

 

Oh...

 

Wow, I'm surprised they're going to let them fire both at once. I thought that idea was frowned upon by the establishment (players).

 

So for the Fiat 2000 triple barrel battlestation I can fire 2 X 37/40s and a 65/17 all at once. LOL

 

Wow, just wow, I bet some non- multibarrel tank producing countries are really butt-hurt right now. I wonder how they'll cope with having only one pathetically inadequate single gun? 



RanLSX #8480 Posted Sep 23 2019 - 20:15

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 1,088
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

I'll file this under rare oddities:

https://www.1stdibs.com/furniture/more-furniture-collectibles/collectibles-curiosities/models-miniatures/mid-20th-century-italian-wood-box-shape-military-tank-1940/id-f_14549542/

It's a mid 20th century Italian wooden tank jewelry box

 

uCaWPCJ.jpg?1

 

vjsIfqx.jpg?1

 

llXMVbq.jpg?1

 

That's $393 of wooden awesomeness to house your girlfriend's diamond necklaces.

Lol, UR welcome ladies 






9 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 9 guests, 0 anonymous users