Jump to content


Myths of American Armor


  • Please log in to reply
216 replies to this topic

NutrientibusMeaGallus #21 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 01:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 16986 battles
  • 4,435
  • Member since:
    10-26-2012
 Really enjoyed this one. 

Strike_Witch_Tomoko #22 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 01:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 15574 battles
  • 11,762
  • [TOGWR] TOGWR
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Jun 06 2015 - 15:41, said:

Correct. We had hoped that the recently published book on Canadian armour would shed some light on the subject and we reached out to the author. Although it is certainly the best explanation for "Wolverine", it seems also unfounded

 

got a quick question

 

Pershing, T29, T34, T30, M103, T110e5, m46, super pershing and M48  all share that 51mm rear half of side armor  (or weaker,  or have the armor under thier tracks at 40 or below)

 

but the T32 has a flat 76mm side armor with no variations at all (which M103 scared me with...so many different variations on side armor)

 

 

i see a prototype was made,  but is there a reason the T32 differed from the rest with the 76mm no variation side armor.   was there a reason this wasn't carried on to later models?  was there an issue caused by it?

 

T32 just kinda stands out as the only one of those without any armor variations on its side.. and i cant help but wonder what happened to cause this and not carry on.   or to bring about this change from previous tanks



Command0Dude #23 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 01:37

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20679 battles
  • 588
  • [ROLED] ROLED
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013

I'd love if this guy did a video on warships myths.

 

This was a great video, more of this.

 

More just "debunking" videos in general. Hate all the WWII myths.



Walter_Sobchak #24 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 01:38

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 236 battles
  • 5,140
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Jun 06 2015 - 17:41, said:

Correct. We had hoped that the recently published book on Canadian armour would shed some light on the subject and we reached out to the author. Although it is certainly the best explanation for "Wolverine", it seems also unfounded

 

Which book was that?  

SGTChucklez #25 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 01:42

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10026 battles
  • 1,784
  • Member since:
    12-13-2012
Chief, you really out-did yourself this time.  Your best work yet.  I really enjoyed it.

Carry on.  :great:

MGWent73 #26 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 01:47

    Private

  • Players
  • 20624 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011
I still don't understand how a "brit" is America's resident on armor.  I don't appreciate the fact that you down play American tankers. You are a brit, you have no place to do so. In you PowerPoint show, you have a picture of you in a (guess what, an American M1). You also fail to mention that the british used American tanks on a lend lease program because your country couldn't produce tanks that were worth anything.  You also throw tank destroyers in the mix, a different animal altogether.  I see how you play the crowd to your ends.  some of your points are valid and I accept that, but you talk a lot of crap, I'm an AMERICAN TANKER AND A MASTER GUNNER ON THE M1A1, M1A2 SEP, AND THE MGS. So if you want to butt heads, contact me.

Walter_Sobchak #27 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 01:49

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 236 battles
  • 5,140
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

View PostMGWent73, on Jun 06 2015 - 19:47, said:

I still don't understand how a "brit" is America's resident on armor.  I don't appreciate the fact that you down play American tankers. You are a brit, you have no place to do so. In you PowerPoint show, you have a picture of you in a (guess what, an American M1). You also fail to mention that the british used American tanks on a lend lease program because your country couldn't produce tanks that were worth anything.  You also throw tank destroyers in the mix, a different animal altogether.  I see how you play the crowd to your ends.  some of your points are valid and I accept that, but you talk a lot of crap, I'm an AMERICAN TANKER AND A MASTER GUNNER ON THE M1A1, M1A2 SEP, AND THE MGS. So if you want to butt heads, contact me.

 

I suggest you read this article and then edit your post into an apology.  

Edited by Walter_Sobchak, Jun 07 2015 - 01:54.


Priory_of_Sion #28 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 01:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 14866 battles
  • 6,761
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View PostMGWent73, on Jun 06 2015 - 19:47, said:

I still don't understand how a "brit" is America's resident on armor.  I don't appreciate the fact that you down play American tankers. You are a brit, you have no place to do so. In you PowerPoint show, you have a picture of you in a (guess what, an American M1). You also fail to mention that the british used American tanks on a lend lease program because your country couldn't produce tanks that were worth anything.  You also throw tank destroyers in the mix, a different animal altogether.  I see how you play the crowd to your ends.  some of your points are valid and I accept that, but you talk a lot of crap, I'm an AMERICAN TANKER AND A MASTER GUNNER ON THE M1A1, M1A2 SEP, AND THE MGS. So if you want to butt heads, contact me.
  1. Irish != British
  2. American Citizen = American
  3. Chieftain is an American Tanker, he has every right to talk about them.
  4. What about lend-lease? Does that matter in any point?
  5. You being a tanker has no relevance to his points either. 


danbuter #29 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:00

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 7568 battles
  • 1,015
  • Member since:
    04-25-2014
I watched it. Very cool presentation!

The_Chieftain #30 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:03

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 9770 battles
  • 9,506
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View PostMGWent73, on Jun 07 2015 - 00:47, said:

I still don't understand how a "brit" is America's resident on armor.  I don't appreciate the fact that you down play American tankers. You are a brit, you have no place to do so. In you PowerPoint show, you have a picture of you in a (guess what, an American M1). You also fail to mention that the british used American tanks on a lend lease program because your country couldn't produce tanks that were worth anything.  You also throw tank destroyers in the mix, a different animal altogether.  I see how you play the crowd to your ends.  some of your points are valid and I accept that, but you talk a lot of crap, I'm an AMERICAN TANKER AND A MASTER GUNNER ON THE M1A1, M1A2 SEP, AND THE MGS. So if you want to butt heads, contact me.

 

Mr Went, I have several comments in response to this.

I'll take your last comment first: I don't care. I say as much in the first two or three minutes of the talk. Unless your Mike Golf school happened to have a course of instruction on the development timeline of the T26 tank, the casualty rates of the M4, or the doctrine of US armor of 1942, which I am fairly sure it doesn't, your Army skill-set is of little relevance.

 

Secondly, I'm not a Brit. Indeed, theoretically, I'm not supposed to like Brits, if you wish to consider me Irish. Then again, I was born in the US, I have a US passport, I live in the US, I think I meet most of the technical requirements for being an American. Not that I have any particular animosity to Brits, unless it's the Six Nations.

 

Yes, I throw tank destroyers into the mix. Several reasons. Firstly, the talk was on "American armor", and tank destroyers were generally armoured. (M6 GMC the obvious exception). Secondly, as I point out several times, everything is in the mix. It's never just tank vs tank. Thirdly, part of the myth foundations are based on a misunderstanding of the role of the TD, so they have to be mentioned.

 

I do, indeed, make mention of the fact that the British used Shermans. It was in the bit where I pointed out that British Sherman crews had higher casualty rates than American Sherman crews.

 

Finally, where did I downplay American tankers?

 

You seemed a fairly reasonable chap when I met you in Benning. I am a little confused by your post.



Belesarius #31 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 7951 battles
  • 3,586
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011

View PostMGWent73, on Jun 07 2015 - 01:47, said:

I still don't understand how a "brit" is America's resident on armor.  I don't appreciate the fact that you down play American tankers. You are a brit, you have no place to do so. In you PowerPoint show, you have a picture of you in a (guess what, an American M1). You also fail to mention that the british used American tanks on a lend lease program because your country couldn't produce tanks that were worth anything.  You also throw tank destroyers in the mix, a different animal altogether.  I see how you play the crowd to your ends.  some of your points are valid and I accept that, but you talk a lot of crap, I'm an AMERICAN TANKER AND A MASTER GUNNER ON THE M1A1, M1A2 SEP, AND THE MGS. So if you want to butt heads, contact me.

 

***** Do a little reading and come back and apologize to the Chieftan.  He himself says that his service isn't all that relevent to his job.  except for knowing which end of the tank you generally point at the bad guys.  But the amount of time he has spent digging through archives makes him a pretty good authority on a lot of general tank knowledge, and he knows where to look for the rest of it.

 

*****

[content moderated - personal attacks]

~Pleuracanthus

 



HOTA_CHATON #32 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 12097 battles
  • 12,404
  • [T0TS] T0TS
  • Member since:
    09-28-2011
To those who haven't watched it, I recommend that you do. Very well done, very well.

Dominatus #33 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:10

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,793
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010

View PostWalter_Sobchak, on Jun 06 2015 - 19:38, said:

Which book was that?  

I assume Canada's Pride, by Roger Lucy. He wrote about the Ram 3" a few years back too, and talked about "Wolverine" back then as well.



EnsignExpendable #34 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
Obviously tank knowledge is like in Assassin's Creed, where only a True Blooded American is born knowing things about American tanks, and those pesky foreigners can't possibly learn anything about them.

Walter_Sobchak #35 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:18

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 236 battles
  • 5,140
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

View PostDominatus, on Jun 06 2015 - 20:10, said:

I assume Canada's Pride, by Roger Lucy. He wrote about the Ram 3" a few years back too, and talked about "Wolverine" back then as well.

 

Thanks Dominatus, I seemed to have missed that one.  At $59.95, I might have to put that one a bit further back on my rather long "want list" for books.  

collimatrix #36 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 12102 battles
  • 2,786
  • Member since:
    02-01-2011

 

This video shows that the Germans, or at least their propaganda ministry, followed the American practice and called their tanks "General."  Ditto this chart:

 



Legiondude #37 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 20134 battles
  • 22,975
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011
They also called the M6 a Dreadnought

Dominatus #38 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:26

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,793
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010

View PostWalter_Sobchak, on Jun 06 2015 - 20:18, said:

Thanks Dominatus, I seemed to have missed that one.  At $59.95, I might have to put that one a bit further back on my rather long "want list" for books.  

I have it. It's full on information that you won't find anywhere else short of going digging yourself, but the price is largely artificially inflated due to being hardcover and using thick glossy paper. It's also has a ton of minor editing errors that look like somebody used Word or HTML wrong.



Walter_Sobchak #39 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:34

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 236 battles
  • 5,140
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

View PostDominatus, on Jun 06 2015 - 20:26, said:

I have it. It's full on information that you won't find anywhere else short of going digging yourself, but the price is largely artificially inflated due to being hardcover and using thick glossy paper. It's also has a ton of minor editing errors that look like somebody used Word or HTML wrong.

 

If I ever win the lotto, my mailman is going to suffer permanent back damage from carrying all the boxes of books I intend to purchase.  

bergsteiger #40 Posted Jun 07 2015 - 02:41

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22166 battles
  • 120
  • [DHO4] DHO4
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012
This is great stuff. Thank you for posting the video, Chieftain.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users