2004 replies to this topic

[Giganaut]

yeap. Redesigning WW2 tanks with google sketchup.


hey. i need more help from you guys to help develop the tanks im redesigning.
so this will kinda be a joint development of the tank.

all you need to do is to tell me your idea what to add, and a rough sketch (ON PAPER) of the object or part.

ok, here's the first 2 tanks imma gonna need help developing:

the Tiger "IV"

here's the one with "iron skirting"


any ideas making this tank good will be really appreciated.

-Giganaut

[Mow_Mow]

If you look at the E-50/E-75 etc. you can see that their late war paper tanks have separate welded plates on the front corners to cover the tracks. Yours is missing those :S

Additionally, it seems that the Germans really liked 50-55 degree slope on the front armor, you might want to take that into account. The turret sides could also slope more like the KT's second turret because it's much easier to machine flat slopes than it is to forge a turret like the one in your drawing. The hatch would probably be alot taller. IIRC the Germans also ditched the front machine port on by the E-series, but I'm not 100% sure on that.

EDIT: Don't forget the periscopes for the driver! (and whoever sits to the side of him)

[RedShocktrooper]

I look at the Iron Skirting one and instantly think of the Type 36 Heavy Tank of Valkyria Chronicles 2.

Something I'd add is some sort of anti-mine plow on the front of the tank to deal with... well, mines. It'd also serve to cover up the "bottom" of the hull. Also move the skirts down lower (like on the Panzer IV) to cover the treads.

[FaustianQ]

One thing to suggest - lower the profile. The Germans were moving to place engines entirely in the rear compartment to save weight, reduce engine fatigue, and lower the height of the vehicle - literally every other nation had done so by 1944. This is why certain tanks were able to achieve better weight to armor ratios and were a bit easier to maintain.

You may also want to look at the Sturmtiger for ideas on hull upgrades to a standard Tiger.

[Mow_Mow]

FaustianQ, on Jun 01 2011 - 03:58, said:

One thing to suggest - lower the profile. The Germans were moving to place engines entirely in the rear compartment to save weight, reduce engine fatigue, and lower the height of the vehicle - literally every other nation had done so by 1944. This is why certain tanks were able to achieve better weight to armor ratios and were a bit easier to maintain.

You may also want to look at the Sturmtiger for ideas on hull upgrades to a standard Tiger.

Unfortunately, judging from the E-series this wasn't likely to happen in the timeframe of late WWII, I think. Though generally I take the E-series tanks as basis for my guesstimations, so I can't exactly say no to that idea either. The E-series were not any lower in profile than the KT. Also, a fact that lends support to your idea is that Germany was likely running low on war materials (steel, etc.) by making their tanks lower in profile and therefore lower in mass and surface area it might have saved the Germans a bit of metal.

[Giganaut]

here's the further development of the tanks. took reference form the E90 Tiger III L, also revised and resized the tanks from the previous version.


here's the Ausf A


Ausf B is an IS-3 copy (as if the war went on and they decided to copy the Russian heavy tank after they captured a few.)


rear side of the tank


your choice, which is better looking? and anymore ideas?

[Giganaut]

Finished the whole tank... might add more thing to it (like IR sights, extra tracks for armor)

FRONTAL


REAR

[Mow_Mow]

The exhaust pipes look awfully thin... is there a particular reason why there are four? Might want to stick with two large ones instead. Also, you might want to try to slope the bottom plate a bit more, it looks a bit flat.

The boxyness of the turret front looks a bit odd to me but I think it's okay. Otherwise, you should go ahead and finish up the missing side skirt plate for completeness and have the corner skirts match them in length. ^^; You might want to try your hand at those  night vision scopes which appear on some late war vehicles, as well.

[Giganaut]

Mow_Mow, on Jun 01 2011 - 16:31, said:

The exhaust pipes look awfully thin... is there a particular reason why there are four? Might want to stick with two large ones instead. Also, you might want to try to slope the bottom plate a bit more, it looks a bit flat.

The boxyness of the turret front looks a bit odd to me but I think it's okay. Otherwise, you should go ahead and finish up the missing side skirt plate for completeness and have the corner skirts match them in length. ^^; You might want to try your hand at those  night vision scopes which appear on some late war vehicles, as well.

on it and 4 exhaust ports? = 2 engines XD

[Giganaut]

well this will prolly not be the last of em. here's the weapons selection for the tank. just like the World of tanks preview tank in render only mode


the weapons list:

130mm high velocity gun (Stock gun)
7 barrel 50mm Rotary cannon (cant have no spam gun have we?)
105mm super high velocity gun (snipey snipey!)
and a 210 mortar (derp gun)


all made in sketchup

now i think to myself... WHY DIDNT I THOUGHT OF MAKING THIS EARLIER WHEN THEY HAD THAT DESIGN YOUR TANK CONTEST

[Dinbatu]

Why you need 50mm gatling gun in a tank XD ? to tear up low tier tanks to bits ?  

[Giganaut]

Dinbatu, on Jun 02 2011 - 12:19, said:

Why you need 50mm gatling gun in a tank XD ? to tear up low tier tanks to bits ?  

to be blunt. yes, to make them into swiss cheese and to annoy tier 8 above to hell with it's 7 round burst shots of HE or AP XD

i call that 210mm derp as the Poot gun

[Giganaut]

Dinbatu, on Jun 02 2011 - 12:19, said:

Why you need 50mm gatling gun in a tank XD ? to tear up low tier tanks to bits ?  

and also. imagine... a 210mm derped you right IN THE FACE with HE. AP would just leave your tank with a huge dent or just plain huge crater on the tank with the shell on it leaving it inoperable

[SgtShidner59]

Dude! Mad mad skills! what program did you use??

[Giganaut]

SgtShidner59, on Jun 03 2011 - 17:03, said:

Dude! Mad mad skills! what program did you use??

google sketchup free version

[Giganaut]

warehouse scene and new modeled tracks!

http://d.facdn.net/a...t_warehouse.jpg

[Datpony]

Realistically, a 50mm Gatling gun would be absolutely useless against another heavy tank. Heck, all i see is a rapid-fire bounce machine lol. Or a rapid fire "Critical hit! But no damage done" machine in the case of HE.

I'd use it though. Post more on that Gatling gun. I MUST KNOW MOAR!

[Giganaut]

Datpony, on Jun 06 2011 - 12:47, said:

Realistically, a 50mm Gatling gun would be absolutely useless against another heavy tank. Heck, all i see is a rapid-fire bounce machine lol. Or a rapid fire "Critical hit! But no damage done" machine in the case of HE.

I'd use it though. Post more on that Gatling gun. I MUST KNOW MOAR!

well... if i did prgressed the development of a gatling version, i'd be developing a towed ammo truck, plus if did follow with size requirements within only the tank. it'll be the same concept of a double action 7 shot Automatic revolver

[Giganaut]

BEHOLD! the E-89B armed with the 210MM POOT GUN


in the far corner of the room are the shells for the gun

[Giganaut]

1st WIP of the US heavy prototype, decided to name it the T38... or any other designation name that would sound appropriate.





ANY IDEAS ON WHAT TO ADD?