Jump to content


Five worst tanks of WW2


  • Please log in to reply
1737 replies to this topic

Krieger_07b #1701 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 05:59

    Captain

  • Players
  • 12773 battles
  • 1,896
  • Member since:
    09-30-2011

View PostSupertroopertanker, on Feb 10 2014 - 22:55, said:

considering everyone posting here is a typical suspect in these type of things. I mean I knew this would happen. 1 guy vs 10, and you guys have to spin everything that I say in some way that you think makes your idea seem superior, neg repping me and giving each other your positive votes. does anyone actually like your opinions?

 

Persecution complex ahoy, captain!

 

View PostSupertroopertanker, on Feb 10 2014 - 22:56, said:

 mail that out to my department


"I ONLY ACCEPT PROOF THAT IS SPOON FED TO ME FOR I AM A LARGE MAN SIZED BABBY"

 

View PostSupertroopertanker, on Feb 10 2014 - 22:57, said:

 I don't think I've posted anything incorrect. I mean I could go look


The only thing that you've posted that was true was the fact that the panther's UFP was, indeed, 80mm thick.



EnsignExpendable #1702 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 05:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostSupertroopertanker, on Feb 10 2014 - 23:57, said:

 I don't think I've posted anything incorrect. I mean I could go look but I won't because I am incapable of reading and comprehension

 

I think you clicked Post too soon. It's ok, you got the message across.



PlaidPony #1703 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 9430 battles
  • 10,630
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
I'd have to say a close, competitive second was "T-34 engine can operate with 20% dirt mixed in with the fuel? BIG ISSUE" vs. "Panther engines spontaneously burst in to flame? Minor fault, prove it ever happened!"

EnsignExpendable #1704 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

"Who needs HE? Our tank has machine guns for infantry support!" 

- Supertroopertanker, a British tank officer from 1930



SergeantMatt #1705 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 23190 battles
  • 2,527
  • Member since:
    11-09-2011
That's why no modern tank carries HE shells or any sort of dedicated anti-infantry shell, they have machine guns so why bother?

PlaidPony #1706 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 9430 battles
  • 10,630
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
If you want a vision of the WoT forum's future, imagine a Panther spinning furiously in place- forever. Goodnight, little thread. Godspeed.

EnsignExpendable #1707 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

"Explosive filler has no room on the battlefield. We're taking out the enemy with direct hits, and that's that!" 

- Supertroopertanker, siege engineer from the 13th century



Krieger_07b #1708 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:16

    Captain

  • Players
  • 12773 battles
  • 1,896
  • Member since:
    09-30-2011

"Flanking? Gentlemen officers are obliged to face each other face to face, three ranks deep in line abreast and I will hear no more talk of the cowardly tactic of movement!"

-Supertroopertanker, 1700's French officer



EnsignExpendable #1709 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostPlaidPony, on Feb 11 2014 - 00:11, said:

If you want a vision of the WoT forum's future, imagine a Panther spinning furiously in place- forever. Goodnight, little thread. Godspeed.

 

I think we can harvest the rotational momentum of thousands of engineers spinning in their graves as a result of these forums in order to power WoT servers.



Supertroopertanker #1710 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 5073 battles
  • 2,111
  • Member since:
    03-14-2013

View PostKrieger_07b, on Feb 10 2014 - 23:59, said:

 

Persecution complex ahoy, captain!

 


"I ONLY ACCEPT PROOF THAT IS SPOON FED TO ME FOR I AM A LARGE MAN SIZED BABBY"

 


The only thing that you've posted that was true was the fact that the panther's UFP was, indeed, 80mm thick.

 I asked you to send it to the highway department. and I also listed the specifications for various tanks



EnsignExpendable #1711 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostSupertroopertanker, on Feb 11 2014 - 00:25, said:

 I asked you to send it to the highway department. and I also listed the specifications for various tanks

 

You posted random numbers that did not support your points or excuse your adherence to 1930s British tank doctrine.

 

I'm sorry, that's an offense to the British. The British had the brains to keep tanks that spontaneously combusted during service out of the battlefield.



WulfeHound #1712 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 12919 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View PostKrieger_07b, on Feb 11 2014 - 00:16, said:

"Flanking? Gentlemen officers are obliged to face each other face to face, three ranks deep in line abreast and I will hear no more talk of the cowardly tactic of movement!"

-Supertroopertanker, 1700's French officer

"Bow and arrow? Charging wildly with a blunt ax is the best way to hunt for tribe!"

-Supertroopertanker, hominid around 10000 BCE



Supertroopertanker #1713 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 5073 battles
  • 2,111
  • Member since:
    03-14-2013

View PostEnsignExpendable, on Feb 11 2014 - 00:26, said:

 

You posted random numbers that did not support your points or excuse your adherence to 1930s British tank doctrine.

 

I'm sorry, that's an offense to the British. The British had the brains to keep tanks that spontaneously combusted during service out of the battlefield.

 I said the panther could do 55km/h and you all threw a fit because you lot said it wasn't possible



Krieger_07b #1714 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:32

    Captain

  • Players
  • 12773 battles
  • 1,896
  • Member since:
    09-30-2011

View PostSupertroopertanker, on Feb 10 2014 - 23:30, said:

 I said the panther could do 55km/h and you all threw a fit because you lot said it wasn't possible



Because it wasn't. Has it really not dawned on you yet?



Supertroopertanker #1715 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 5073 battles
  • 2,111
  • Member since:
    03-14-2013

View PostKrieger_07b, on Feb 11 2014 - 00:32, said:



Because it wasn't. Has it really not dawned on you yet?

 it did go that fast


Edited by Supertroopertanker, Feb 11 2014 - 06:33.


Krieger_07b #1716 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:34

    Captain

  • Players
  • 12773 battles
  • 1,896
  • Member since:
    09-30-2011

View PostSupertroopertanker, on Feb 10 2014 - 23:33, said:

 it did go that fast

 

No, it theoretically went that fast. It's been posted 100 some odd times in this thread. You just stuck your fingers in your ears and shouted "Nuh uh!" the whole time, so you don't remember it.



EnsignExpendable #1717 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostSupertroopertanker, on Feb 11 2014 - 00:33, said:

 it did go that fast

 

Show me proof of it going that fast.

 

As Jentz and Doyle write, the max speed in the technical documents is taken from calculations of the gear ratios, and was never guaranteed to be achievable. 

 

 



balmung60 #1718 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 06:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 5668 battles
  • 3,016
  • [401ST] 401ST
  • Member since:
    10-02-2011

I believe that there's a quote about needing to win the war on paper, even if it is hopeless in reality.  The Panther was one of the ultimate weapons in this effort to win on paper.  Hence the big, high-pen gun, thick frontal armor, and high nominal top speed, as well as its sharp angles and imposing size.  However, it also represents how doomed German was in reality.  Each of these seemingly impressive attributes was less than it seemed at first.  The gun didn't defeat much of anything that the existing 8,8cm L/56 and 7,5cm L/48 guns didn't already defeat and had a sub-par HE round.  The thick armor was brittle, poorly welded, and actually not that thick for a vehicle of its weight.  Trying to reach its nominal top speed would ruin its hopelessly overstressed drivetrain and later models had to be governed down to keep people from trying to do it.  And that imposing appearance made it hard to hide and hard to put an actually meaningful amount of armor on it.

 

Essentially, it had all these impressive capabilities that it couldn't actually use because of bad design and bad construction.


Edited by balmung60, Feb 11 2014 - 06:55.


Primelaw #1719 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 07:18

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20856 battles
  • 928
  • [PANSY] PANSY
  • Member since:
    07-27-2011

View PostPlaidPony, on Feb 11 2014 - 00:11, said:

If you want a vision of the WoT forum's future, imagine a Panther spinning furiously in place- forever. Goodnight, little thread. Godspeed.

Problem with that is that it would burn out before it managed to even get through one circle.



magosjared #1720 Posted Feb 11 2014 - 07:25

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 47 battles
  • 204
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    11-22-2012

View PostPrimelaw, on Feb 11 2014 - 07:18, said:

Problem with that is that it would burn out before it managed to even get through one circle.

 

Sounds pretty fitting to me.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users