Jump to content


Exercise Dracula


  • Please log in to reply
287 replies to this topic

Xlucine #21 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 18:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 7663 battles
  • 7,603
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    03-03-2011

That was quick!

 

View PostIcon_Charlie, on Jul 05 2014 - 10:27, said:

IMHO most of the British Tanks were Dogs during WWII.  Only when the very successful Centurion tank came out is when the militarys  of the world took notice that British can build a quality tank.

 

 

Cent got lucky with the timing, I see nothing about the design that makes it superior to the vehicles of any other nation at the time (and it's a lot worse off than the russian stuff of equivalent vintage). It wasn't especially more reliable than earlier british tanks either, there's a reason most users put an american engine in it

 

View PostAnlushac11, on Jul 05 2014 - 15:58, said:

Valentine tank was a good Brit tank that stayed in service right up to just before D-Day. Was used in Italy, Pacific, and CBI til end of the war.

 

 IMHO Valentine was probably the most mechanically reliable Brit tank made in WW2. Started with a 2lbr main gun, then 6lbr, and ended war with a OQF 75mm main gun firing same ammo as Sherman. 65mm armor wasnt too bad for the day either.

 

The Valentine was very low profile and easy to hide and very quiet, one of the reasons Soviets used them in Recon units even til end of war.

 

Into the vally mentions that the russians did not believe valentine was a british tank, because it was so much more reliable than the other british vehicles

 

Block Quote

 Many of the Pacific Valentines were flamethrower units and some had 3in howitzer for close infantry support.

 

There were only 13 flamethrower equipped valentines produced for testing purposes and the 3" wasn't common - only 18 were converted, and only 9 of those were sent to the fighting of which they only participated in a single operaton (SQUAREPEG, in feb '44)

 

Block Quote

 Im also surprised to hear all the problems with Meteor's since these were basically non supercharged de-tuned Merlin V12's.

 

As the article points out, tank engines are under very different conditions to aero engines



Jagdneko #22 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 19:01

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 26967 battles
  • 604
  • [NEET] NEET
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012

View PostAnlushac11, on Jul 05 2014 - 10:58, said:

Im also surprised to hear all the problems with Meteor's since these were basically non supercharged de-tuned Merlin V12's.

 

Airplane:

All the cooling air in the world

Outside air clean enough they didn't have air filters

Serviced almost every day on a schedule

Easy access for maintenace

Long periods of constant RPM and constant load

Not much idling

 

Tank:

Cooling system packed into a steel box

Dirty, dusty environment

Rarely near a proper mechanic

Hard to fix anything

Engine speed and operating load going up and down by the minute

Idling for long periods

 

Detuned aero engines did quite well on torpedo boats, as far as I know, which share most of the conditions with airplanes.



Geophage #23 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 19:05

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 17260 battles
  • 479
  • Member since:
    10-16-2012
How much would it change the game if reliability issues were included in tank stats?  Crew skills could mitigate some of that to keep the worst tanks from being abandoned by the player base, but it would add an extra layer of realism to the game.

Dominatus #24 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 19:12

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,790
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010

View PostGeophage, on Jul 05 2014 - 14:05, said:

How much would it change the game if reliability issues were included in tank stats?  Crew skills could mitigate some of that to keep the worst tanks from being abandoned by the player base, but it would add an extra layer of realism to the game.

Stock Panther would light on fire immediately after leaving spawn.



Daigensui #25 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 19:38

    Major

  • Players
  • 32027 battles
  • 29,987
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

View PostAnlushac11, on Jul 05 2014 - 07:58, said:

Im also surprised to hear all the problems with Meteor's since these were basically non supercharged de-tuned Merlin V12's.

 

Cooling is always a major problem.



Eleven_Hotel #26 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 19:48

    Captain

  • Players
  • 95060 battles
  • 1,258
  • [1VETS] 1VETS
  • Member since:
    02-03-2012
Interesting Article.

xsoulbrothax #27 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 19:52

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 10615 battles
  • 106
  • [SHACK] SHACK
  • Member since:
    04-23-2011

View PostAhrtoo, on Jul 05 2014 - 06:14, said:

It appears that British tanks are like British sports cars... "fitter" time is part of the experience.

Yeah, that was my very first thought too.

 

Oil leak, oil leak, oil leak.... yep, British. :D (I say this affectionately!)

 

edit: Also, yes - this was a GREAT read!


Edited by xsoulbrothax, Jul 05 2014 - 19:58.


the_moidart #28 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 20:44

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 30486 battles
  • 2,155
  • Member since:
    10-22-2010
Great article, excellent find. I recall the excessive claims of national bias from the aforementioned article.

Anchobi #29 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 21:09

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 13571 battles
  • 400
  • [ANZIO] ANZIO
  • Member since:
    01-04-2013
they should have tested more superior Italian tanks

doonglerules #30 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 21:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 5631 battles
  • 3,499
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011

View PostAnchobi, on Jul 05 2014 - 22:09, said:

they should have tested more superior Italian tanks

I want to argue

 

But i don't want to.



Jagdneko #31 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 21:33

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 26967 battles
  • 604
  • [NEET] NEET
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012
It's interesting that for all the "historians" who dump on the Sherman, Sherman tank derivatives have served into the 2000s with some smaller countries, meanwhile the Panther couldn't be kept running by a major European power with all the spare parts they got from the Germans right after the war.

doonglerules #32 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 21:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 5631 battles
  • 3,499
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011

View PostJagdneko, on Jul 05 2014 - 22:33, said:

It's interesting that for all the "historians" who dump on the Sherman, Sherman tank derivatives have served into the 2000s with some smaller countries, meanwhile the Panther couldn't be kept running by a major European power with all the spare parts they got from the Germans right after the war.

That's because those shermans carried frickin 122mm or 155mm guns

How

(That's an A-19 ftr)

 


Edited by doonglerules, Jul 05 2014 - 21:35.


Jagdneko #33 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 21:43

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 26967 battles
  • 604
  • [NEET] NEET
  • Member since:
    11-08-2012

But they wouldn't be putting those silly guns on a bad platform. No one bothered using Panther chassis for anything notable after the war. Mexico still has a Sherman recovery vehicle in service as far as I know.

 

The tank which can actually make it to the fight is superior to the one that can't, regardless of armament.


Edited by Jagdneko, Jul 05 2014 - 21:44.


Anlushac11 #34 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 22:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 39385 battles
  • 2,361
  • Member since:
    05-25-2013

View PostJagdneko, on Jul 05 2014 - 16:33, said:

It's interesting that for all the "historians" who dump on the Sherman, Sherman tank derivatives have served into the 2000s with some smaller countries, meanwhile the Panther couldn't be kept running by a major European power with all the spare parts they got from the Germans right after the war.

 

The general consensus is that the Sherman was a excellent tank with a excellent record for reliability.

 

The French kept their Panthers til about 1950 when they were replaced with French produced ARL44's which themselves werent reliable either when they entered service.

 

One has to wonder how much of the Panthers being replaced were due to Panthers shortcomings or French national pride insisting that French forces use French vehicles. French were offered American tanks for free and rejected them, it was more important to use a inferior, obsolete, unreliable made in France tank that a German tank or even free US tanks.



xthetenth #35 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 22:04

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 14695 battles
  • 3,528
  • [SEAMN] SEAMN
  • Member since:
    09-02-2010

The French were crazy enough to develop the German jet lineage rather than work from the British, which even the USSR did even though they had the German data and had to show a crack in their show of strength by asking the British for a good jet design to develop in order to get good jets in decent time.

 

However, even when the Panthers were getting used they weren't actually being used to do things, those duties fell to other tanks.



Darthgunny #36 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 23:12

    Private

  • Players
  • 7 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    06-14-2013
if your intrested in british tank design during ww2, a good book to read is Death by design written by peter beale

Anlushac11 #37 Posted Jul 05 2014 - 23:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 39385 battles
  • 2,361
  • Member since:
    05-25-2013

The first domestically produced French jet aircraft after WW2 was the Ourangen produced in 1949 using the Rolls Royce Nene.

 

The SNEMECA Atar was developed from the BMW 018 using BMW engineers.

 

The Atar family once the bugs were worked out seemed to be a pretty good engine, was good enough for the Mirage III.

 

I can see not copying the Panther suspension.

 

The overlapping and interleaved road wheels would be unnecessarily complex and a headache if one had to go replacing inside wheels. The double torsion bar system was also more complex and costly than a single torsion bar system.


Edited by Anlushac11, Jul 05 2014 - 23:21.


starcaptain63 #38 Posted Jul 06 2014 - 01:28

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 3945 battles
  • 57
  • Member since:
    07-24-2013

Who knew my beloved Crommie was such an un-polished turd? As to British tech.....

Q: Why don't the Brits make refrigerators?

A: 'Cuz they can't figure out how to make them leak oil.

*Buh-dump-chik.*

Great article, though.   :D



doonglerules #39 Posted Jul 06 2014 - 01:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 5631 battles
  • 3,499
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011

View Poststarcaptain63, on Jul 06 2014 - 02:28, said:

Who knew my beloved Crommie was such an un-polished turd? As to British tech.....

Q: Why don't the Brits make refrigerators?

A: 'Cuz they can't figure out how to make them leak oil.

*Buh-dump-chik.*

Great article, though.   :D

It's Ba-dum-tss



StrohsVonPabst #40 Posted Jul 06 2014 - 04:37

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6821 battles
  • 202
  • [LUPUS] LUPUS
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011
https://www.youtube....h?v=6zXDo4dL7SU




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users