Jump to content


Account of the Tiger penetrated frontally in combat?

Tiger I Tiger II Penetration

  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

Nikolai_Mikoyan #21 Posted Oct 25 2016 - 04:07

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6448 battles
  • 542
  • Member since:
    12-06-2011

View PostZinegata, on Oct 20 2016 - 06:45, said:

 

Why does penetration even matter to begin with? Non-penetrations also mission-kill tanks if they cause injuries to the crew or damage key equipment. The idea that high-velocity projectiles bearing the kinetic energy of a small Sedan crashing into a wall at 30 kilometers per hour deal no damage because they didn't penetrate is a longstanding myth. If you punch a steel wall with sufficient force, it's going to leave a dent and possibly cause spalling/damage on the other side even if it doesn't punch through. Only video games and wargames stuck in the 70s still worship the cult of gun penetration vs armor thickness school.

 

I know, right? Having seen all those test results, I could figure a fist-sized dent should be enough to kill some crucial parts or crews inside the tank. But then again, I wasn't the one who come up with this stupid challenge. I just need a good reference to shut that wehraboo down for good.

 

View PostGrossDeutchland1943, on Oct 20 2016 - 06:51, said:

In Tiger Aces Hans Bolter was in an engagement where the front plate was penned and cracked after a battle and they limped the Tiger I hame to be repaired

 

Has Bolter himself, or someone else, recorded this event? If so, I'd like to see the record and keep as reference. 

 

View PostLucid_Donald_Trump, on Oct 20 2016 - 19:24, said:

 

In your picture it's likely that the shell struck the far more vertical lower glacis plate near the weld and tore off part of the horizontal plate as it contined into the tank.

 

Yes, this is likely too. But the thing is, I'm just not sure if this is post-edited (as some other pictures there are accused of), so I can't commit this one just yet. Personally speaking, though, I still believe this picture is real as the penetration hole there seems to look inconsistent to the other pictures that were accused of being post-edited.

 

View Postmelzi_73, on Oct 20 2016 - 20:45, said:

 

Hi, Nikolai, this claim is related to Tiger II, not to Tiger I, and more specifically, to it´s frontal upper hull plate.

 

 

Nah, the guy whom I had an argument with didn't specify the precise model, so any is fine, I suppose.



Zinegata #22 Posted Oct 25 2016 - 04:42

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9558 battles
  • 5,380
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

Block Quote

 

I know, right? Having seen all those test results, I could figure a fist-sized dent should be enough to kill some crucial parts or crews inside the tank. But then again, I wasn't the one who come up with this stupid challenge. I just need a good reference to shut that wehraboo down for good.

 

 

In my view, penetration myths are best addressed by reminding people that a cannon shell striking a tank is not a neat mathematical equation. It is not merely comparison of the shell's penetration value compared to the armor's thickness.

 

Rather, the event is physical in nature - more specifically it is a high-energy collision. And a high-energy collision, like say two cars crashing into each other head-on, is bound to do a lot of damage to both parties.

 

In the specific case of cannon shells vs tanks, your standard 75mm shell has about as much kinetic energy as a sedan travelling at around 30 kilometers per hour. Even if the Sedan gets smashed and crumpled crashing into a 60 ton chunk of steel, it does not mean that the 60 ton wall is going to come out unscathe. Indeed, given that a tank is not a single solid object but a collection of parts, it is entirely possible that the kinetic energy of the shell - a rather small object in relation to the tank - could expend the majority of its force towards a specific component. If the component is particularly vital, like say the wheels, then it could immobilize or even disable the tank outright.

 

Indeed, I'm beginning to feel that all of these armor penetration values have served to mask the reality of tank combat hit mechanics. It is not a binary matter of "penetrate or bounce". Instead, each hit is an exercise in energy transfer. Some hits will transfer so much energy to such a limited area that part of the tank will break or the shell will punch through the armor. Some hits will bounce, but that will still transfer energy to the plate that did the bouncing and leave damage. This means that cumulative damage in fact is very much the norm rather than the exception; as evidenced by how the US Army was in fact able to disable (unmanned) Tigers in one instance by shooting up the engine compartment with .50 cal AA ammo until some finally punched through.

 

Rather, penetration values are in fact merely indicators of the relative kinetic energy that the shell is carrying when it strikes the tank; and how this kinetic energy is transferred to the target is what matters. This is why there are in fact cases of Shermans being penetrated by high-velocity 75mm guns and yet were still able to keep fighting (and not lose any crew) because the shells themselves didn't carry enough mass to physically damage the tank and most of the power went into punching neat holes into the armor (essentially, much of the energy was wasted in keeping the shell moving); whereas there are instances of Soviet IS-2s using their big HE rounds to basically batter Tiger IIs into submission even if penetrations were not achieved - because all of the shell's weight and most of the explosive power was transferred directly into the tank and turning the people inside into mush.



Tjtod #23 Posted Oct 26 2016 - 05:15

    Captain

  • Players
  • 6540 battles
  • 1,330
  • Member since:
    04-01-2013
Really good examples of the kind of damage that can be done on non penetrating hits can be found by looking at naval combat during the age of sail

Donward #24 Posted Oct 26 2016 - 14:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 39633 battles
  • 7,067
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-29-2011

View PostNikolai_Mikoyan, on Oct 19 2016 - 20:00, said:

Hey guys, I'm back,

 

After haven't posted here for like, 2 years, I'm back here again, with questions, of course.

 

The claim started with "The Tiger was never penetrated frontally" Now this one is very easily debunked, there are tons of photographic evidences to simply ditch that claim, so I provided the wehraboo-in-question the photos from the test (that one with the 85mm shell penned the lower glacis and the one with the 122mm shell dislocated the Tiger's turret). That wehraboo, with its tinfoil hat, raised its demand, saying it want a picture of the Tiger that got penned IN COMBAT.

 

Now things got a bit more stiff, all the account I had with the Tiger getting penned frontally, especially the epic and undeniable ones were all from the tests.

 

The only one frontal penetration in combat I had so far is this, from Lake Balaton

 

Sure that's a penetration on the highly sloped plate. This could have knocked out the transmission and perhaps blew the legs off the driver.

 

The problem is, some of the photos from Lake Balaton were accused of being post-edited. (I don't personally believe that this specific photo above was post-edited, though)

 

So, before having to commit to this photo, I think I should steer clear of any accusation and find some other photos that hasn't been accused first. Do we happen to have the photo of the Tiger gotten penned frontally in combat lying around here somewhere?

 

PS. Also, there is an account of the King Tiger got penned in the manlet, but it was still under discussion whether it is a penetration of an actual tank or an abandoned tank, so I think I'm not gonna commit to that for now.

 

Well you see, in the two years you've been gone, literally no one of value posts here anymore. 

 

 



Tolos #25 Posted Oct 26 2016 - 15:57

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 25997 battles
  • 17,198
  • [GDF] GDF
  • Member since:
    09-22-2010

View PostDonward, on Oct 26 2016 - 13:56, said:

 

Well you see, in the two years you've been gone, literally no one of value posts here anymore. 

 

 

 

Oh the delicious irony.

Zinegata #26 Posted Oct 27 2016 - 00:43

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9558 battles
  • 5,380
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View PostTolos, on Oct 26 2016 - 22:57, said:

 

Oh the delicious irony.

 

Yeah, Don's still jelly. Sad thing is HAV stopped caring a lot time ago, but Don's still trying to rewrite history in his head and pretend he was ever somebody of importance here.

Donward #27 Posted Oct 27 2016 - 01:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 39633 battles
  • 7,067
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-29-2011

View PostTolos, on Oct 26 2016 - 06:57, said:

 

Oh the delicious irony.

Oh I'm sorry. I guess debunking the Ronson myth isn't good enough for you.

 

http://forum.worldof...61#entry8902161

 

Which begat this. 

 

https://tankandafvne...-time/#comments

 

See. We used to discuss interesting historical items on the HAV before the mods closed the place down. Now go running off to the General Discussion cesspool little troll.

 

View PostZinegata, on Oct 26 2016 - 15:43, said:

 

Yeah, Don's still jelly. Sad thing is HAV stopped caring a lot time ago, but Don's still trying to rewrite history in his head and pretend he was ever somebody of importance here.

 

Sounds like someone is just a LITTLE bitter that he has been shunned for being an obnoxious git. But hey. Do go on trying to rewrite history and pretend like YOU were ever someone of importance here. Or anywhere. Other than your imagination.

 

It is kind of sad though how you stop by SH in order to see if anyone is talking about you.

 

Guess what? 

 

We're not.



Zinegata #28 Posted Oct 27 2016 - 04:31

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9558 battles
  • 5,380
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View PostDonward, on Oct 27 2016 - 08:10, said:

Oh I'm sorry. I guess debunking the Ronson myth isn't good enough for you.

 

http://forum.worldof...61#entry8902161

 

Which begat this. 

 

https://tankandafvne...-time/#comments

 

See. We used to discuss interesting historical items on the HAV before the mods closed the place down. Now go running off to the General Discussion cesspool little troll.

 

 

Sounds like someone is just a LITTLE bitter that he has been shunned for being an obnoxious git. But hey. Do go on trying to rewrite history and pretend like YOU were ever someone of importance here. Or anywhere. Other than your imagination.

 

It is kind of sad though how you stop by SH in order to see if anyone is talking about you.

 

Guess what? 

 

We're not.

 

And here, folks, is a prime example of somebody who is still claiming he could've been a contender. Don't be like him.

 

Nobody even cares about the Ronson article anymore. I mean seriously, that you are still clinging to that little piece of trivia as some kind of proof that you ever mattered just goes to demonstrate how utterly insignificant your contributions were. People already knew that the "lights up the first time, every time" tagline wasn't used much during the war even before you did your "research"; and your constant and tiresome attempts to take credit for this is a disservice to the real pioneers - like the folks in Axis History Forums - who've been "debunking Wehraboos" long before World of Tanks was even a thing.

 

And really, the only reason why you have an "article" to your name is because you were friends with the tank and AFV news guy. I'd like to think I'm friends with him too, but I never went to him to have an article posted for the purpose of self-aggrandizement and have no intention of doing so. I don't need to brag about the stuff that I researched or the fact that people are now essentially quoting stuff that I had already talked about back in '11 or '12; and neither do I need to rehash an article about armored combat to post in tank and AFV news when Zaloga's pretty much already saying what I want to be said. 

 

The reality of HAV's situation was a lot simpler. Your little clique just treated HAV like your own private little clubhouse, got mad when the T110 thread took off and where all the cool kids went (which is why you kept picking fights with them and accuse them of being Nazis), and when the bans came you ran away and setup your own forums because you couldn't hack losing a simple popularity contest. Some of the smart military-minded people followed initially because they were friends with you, but really that forum has been reduced to just reposting the same old news articles over and over for lack of something new and concrete to really talk about. 

 

And by the way- that's the reason why I drop by SH - to see if somebody on the military-minded side actually posted something interesting for once. The thing is, there hasn't been any good content aside from xthetenth's North Carolina article (which I would note was largely ignored, because aside from two other people it's rather clear you and most of your clique didn't understand it). Most of the folks who have actual, smart things to say have either left or are keeping their mouths shut; because they know damn well that you and Sturgeon have devolved into believing that Brietbart is a credible news source - a consequence of living in an echo chamber where you get to silence anyone you want.

 

Funnily, despite having an Echo Chamber where you can be shielded from reality, you still keep trying to rewrite history and pretend that you were some awesome writer (instead of a failed one), that HAV died with you (it didn't), or that I was shunned (I wasn't) whenever you leave your safe zone. Gee, I wonder who here still had a grudge based on crippling self-worth issues to the point he has to spam the forum with the same old "HAV died with me" drivel over and over in the first place?

 

What happened was much simpler: I left, because your clique had devolved into a pitiful cycle of self-aggrandizement. You had to self-rationalize that you "shunned" me, because otherwise you had to acknowledge the harsher reality that I never needed you. I could stand on my own - just as I did before I met you - and you hated me for that. Because I could already stand based on my own self-worth while you're still struggling with yours; when everything in your twisted world view says this should not be possible.

 

That's why you're still stuck whining "HAV died with me!", without realizing HAV was simply tired of your crippling and atrocious self-validation issues and the only one who still pities your condition is me - and rather than realize that you're still trying to claw at me to make yourself feel bigger.

 

Really, your condition is that sad and pathetic. And when I stop responding to your post, it's not because I "moved on" or stopped being bitter as your desperate attempts at self-validation indicate. It's because I've finally stopped pitying you; and you're finally truly without an audience to hold up your pitiful level of self-worth.


Edited by Zinegata, Oct 28 2016 - 02:47.


ChickenMcFuggits #29 Posted Oct 27 2016 - 10:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 32822 battles
  • 2,921
  • Member since:
    02-12-2012

View PostNikolai_Mikoyan, on Oct 19 2016 - 23:00, said:

 

Wonder if he blamed that one on arty



Nikolai_Mikoyan #30 Posted Oct 28 2016 - 08:16

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6448 battles
  • 542
  • Member since:
    12-06-2011

View PostComplete_Idiot, on Oct 27 2016 - 10:00, said:

 

 

I remember he blamed a lot on Arty too. To the extent that he will most likely dislodge any photographic evidence I provide for "being the work of an arty"

Btw. Thank Zine for clarification. Although I kinda doubt that guy would understand basic physics.

 

Man, I really can't keep up with things around here.



Donward #31 Posted Oct 31 2016 - 14:48

    Major

  • Players
  • 39633 battles
  • 7,067
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-29-2011

View PostZinegata, on Oct 26 2016 - 19:31, said:

 

And here, folks, is a prime example of somebody who is still claiming he could've been a contender. Don't be like him.

 

Nobody even cares about the Ronson article anymore. I mean seriously, that you are still clinging to that little piece of trivia as some kind of proof that you ever mattered just goes to demonstrate how utterly insignificant your contributions were. People already knew that the "lights up the first time, every time" tagline wasn't used much during the war even before you did your "research"; and your constant and tiresome attempts to take credit for this is a disservice to the real pioneers - like the folks in Axis History Forums - who've been "debunking Wehraboos" long before World of Tanks was even a thing.

 

And really, the only reason why you have an "article" to your name is because you were friends with the tank and AFV news guy. I'd like to think I'm friends with him too, but I never went to him to have an article posted for the purpose of self-aggrandizement and have no intention of doing so. I don't need to brag about the stuff that I researched or the fact that people are now essentially quoting stuff that I had already talked about back in '11 or '12; and neither do I need to rehash an article about armored combat to post in tank and AFV news when Zaloga's pretty much already saying what I want to be said. 

 

The reality of HAV's situation was a lot simpler. Your little clique just treated HAV like your own private little clubhouse, got mad when the T110 thread took off and where all the cool kids went (which is why you kept picking fights with them and accuse them of being Nazis), and when the bans came you ran away and setup your own forums because you couldn't hack losing a simple popularity contest. Some of the smart military-minded people followed initially because they were friends with you, but really that forum has been reduced to just reposting the same old news articles over and over for lack of something new and concrete to really talk about. 

 

And by the way- that's the reason why I drop by SH - to see if somebody on the military-minded side actually posted something interesting for once. The thing is, there hasn't been any good content aside from xthetenth's North Carolina article (which I would note was largely ignored, because aside from two other people it's rather clear you and most of your clique didn't understand it). Most of the folks who have actual, smart things to say have either left or are keeping their mouths shut; because they know damn well that you and Sturgeon have devolved into believing that Brietbart is a credible news source - a consequence of living in an echo chamber where you get to silence anyone you want.

 

Funnily, despite having an Echo Chamber where you can be shielded from reality, you still keep trying to rewrite history and pretend that you were some awesome writer (instead of a failed one), that HAV died with you (it didn't), or that I was shunned (I wasn't) whenever you leave your safe zone. Gee, I wonder who here still had a grudge based on crippling self-worth issues to the point he has to spam the forum with the same old "HAV died with me" drivel over and over in the first place?

 

What happened was much simpler: I left, because your clique had devolved into a pitiful cycle of self-aggrandizement. You had to self-rationalize that you "shunned" me, because otherwise you had to acknowledge the harsher reality that I never needed you. I could stand on my own - just as I did before I met you - and you hated me for that. Because I could already stand based on my own self-worth while you're still struggling with yours; when everything in your twisted world view says this should not be possible.

 

That's why you're still stuck whining "HAV died with me!", without realizing HAV was simply tired of your crippling and atrocious self-validation issues and the only one who still pities your condition is me - and rather than realize that you're still trying to claw at me to make yourself feel bigger.

 

Really, your condition is that sad and pathetic. And when I stop responding to your post, it's not because I "moved on" or stopped being bitter as your desperate attempts at self-validation indicate. It's because I've finally stopped pitying you; and you're finally truly without an audience to hold up your pitiful level of self-worth.

Oh. You posted something?

Yeah. Literally no one cares. Heck. Your screed wasn't even worth reading as I only got to sentence two.

Now run along to some other forum where everyone despises you too.

 



Zinegata #32 Posted Nov 02 2016 - 07:32

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9558 battles
  • 5,380
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View PostDonward, on Oct 31 2016 - 21:48, said:

Oh. You posted something?

Yeah. Literally no one cares. Heck. Your screed wasn't even worth reading as I only got to sentence two.

Now run along to some other forum where everyone despises you too.

 

 

Hey, Don, one thing I didn't mention in the post you supposedly didn't read - I knew you were going to mention the old Ronson article long before you even mentioned it. Your desperate need for validation as a "historian" and a "writer" - which are things you are most assuredly not good at - are pretty much that obvious and predictable.

 

And sure, pretend that everyone despises me when I'm the one who's continually surprised by how I'm known outside of this forum (in a very positive way) without prodding. The real tragedy is how I don't need your validation, and yet you're still pitifully trying to pretend that you are the only one who can grant it. 

 

But to give you an inch - which I did when your clique started falling apart - was a mistake and one that I would never repeat. People like you who rely on denigrating the value of others to boost up their self-worth shouldn't be given an inch. Because your world view is dependent on denying other people who have greater intelligence and honesty, because to do otherwise is to admit to your own intellectual and moral failings.

 

As is often the case with Americans of the demographic that's easy prey for Brietbart propaganda, you're too busy telling yourself that you're a great person and it's the mean Zinegata/Establishment/Whomever who unfairly denied you greatness; when the real issue is that you never did the actual work to make yourself great. 

 

This is why your recent attempts to validate your "worth" to the WoT forums is pretty much ending in failure; and why you've gone from saying "HAV is gone!" to telling me to go away (because despite your claims you did read my whole post and it hurt). You're still too busy posting with your "I could have been a contender" mindset, which is unfortunately little more than pretense to those who know your history here, or worse is just outright uninformative and boring for everyone else.


Edited by Zinegata, Nov 02 2016 - 08:55.


Donward #33 Posted Nov 05 2016 - 22:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 39633 battles
  • 7,067
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-29-2011

View PostZinegata, on Nov 01 2016 - 22:32, said:

 

Hey, Don, one thing I didn't mention in the post you supposedly didn't read - I knew you were going to mention the old Ronson article long before you even mentioned it. Your desperate need for validation as a "historian" and a "writer" - which are things you are most assuredly not good at - are pretty much that obvious and predictable.

 

And sure, pretend that everyone despises me when I'm the one who's continually surprised by how I'm known outside of this forum (in a very positive way) without prodding. The real tragedy is how I don't need your validation, and yet you're still pitifully trying to pretend that you are the only one who can grant it. 

 

But to give you an inch - which I did when your clique started falling apart - was a mistake and one that I would never repeat. People like you who rely on denigrating the value of others to boost up their self-worth shouldn't be given an inch. Because your world view is dependent on denying other people who have greater intelligence and honesty, because to do otherwise is to admit to your own intellectual and moral failings.

 

As is often the case with Americans of the demographic that's easy prey for Brietbart propaganda, you're too busy telling yourself that you're a great person and it's the mean Zinegata/Establishment/Whomever who unfairly denied you greatness; when the real issue is that you never did the actual work to make yourself great. 

 

This is why your recent attempts to validate your "worth" to the WoT forums is pretty much ending in failure; and why you've gone from saying "HAV is gone!" to telling me to go away (because despite your claims you did read my whole post and it hurt). You're still too busy posting with your "I could have been a contender" mindset, which is unfortunately little more than pretense to those who know your history here, or worse is just outright uninformative and boring for everyone else.

 

Sorry studly. There's one difference between you and me.

 

I've been paid for my writings. And you haven't.

 

And that just eats you alive, doesn't it?

 

But then again, you're the one whose entire self worth is based on being "somebody" on a free-to-play video game forum which is only inhabited by purple-font spewing trolls. But do go on. It's hilarious watching your beat your chest.

 

Almost as funny as seeing you pathetically hang out at SH desperately hoping that you'll be mentioned. Guess what. You're not. Nobody cares.


Edited by Donward, Nov 05 2016 - 22:06.


AquaShrimp #34 Posted Nov 06 2016 - 23:06

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 5318 battles
  • 29
  • Member since:
    12-24-2010

Regular steel is also known as carbon steel, due the small amount of carbon added to it (usually around .35% max).  Carbon steel has a transition temperature at which it switches from deforming plastically (being able to absorb energy by bending, if you will) to fracturing with little to no plastic deformation.  So it takes much more energy to break steel when it behaves plastically.  There is a test for this, known as the Charpy V-notch test.  The Titanic didn't sink because it was lacking a particular element in its metal, the extremely cold water simply cooled the metal below its transition temperature.  So instead of bending and yielding, it fractured and cracked. 

 

I wonder what the transition temperature for the steel of the Tiger and Tiger II were?  Fighting in the bitter cold of Russia or the Western Front during winter would surely produce easier penetrations than fighting in the Summer.



Zinegata #35 Posted Nov 08 2016 - 05:04

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9558 battles
  • 5,380
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View PostDonward, on Nov 06 2016 - 05:00, said:

 

Sorry studly. There's one difference between you and me.

 

I've been paid for my writings. And you haven't.

 

And that just eats you alive, doesn't it?

 

But then again, you're the one whose entire self worth is based on being "somebody" on a free-to-play video game forum which is only inhabited by purple-font spewing trolls. But do go on. It's hilarious watching your beat your chest.

 

Almost as funny as seeing you pathetically hang out at SH desperately hoping that you'll be mentioned. Guess what. You're not. Nobody cares.

 

First, thanks for confirming that you do in fact read my posts and it burns you.

 

Second, it's really sad that you think that getting paid for writing means anything. I keep reminding you - but I do have an actual job, which pays a very good amount of money (to the point I rarely have to worry about it) because it involves mass communication to literally millions of customers. 

 

So why would I need to be jealous of someone who wants to turn his writing into a source of income and into a business? That just means you're falling into the age-old trap of being a paid hack.

 

Meanwhile, going to the WoT forums and writing about tanks for me is very simply a hobby combined with occasional public service. So really, who is the jealous party here? The guy who keeps citing a very old Ronson article to try and monetize it for personal gain, or the guy who sees posting in the WoT forum as a hobby because he already earned plenty of money in his real job?

 

We in fact have plenty of differences. Chief among them is I don't need to brag about my real job to make myself feel bigger; whereas you're too busy telling yourself that I can't possibly have a decent and well-paying job that allows me to treat WoT and Tankery as a hobby. But you're too busy trying to make everyone stoop to your (very low) level rather than examining your own issues.

 

And yeah, yeah, keep telling yourself I drop by SH in the hopes to get mentioned rather than to chuckle at how you and Sturgeon keep trying to pretend you aren't Alt-right and Trump supporters to avoid turning off the rest of the forums. It's really sad and obvious when two grown men don't have the courage to be honest about their beliefs because they're too scared of peer pressure; rather than realizing that they are being very foolish to begin with and everyone around them is just tip-toeing their words to avoid the grumpy old grampas getting offended. 

 

Finally, again I don't need your validation. That your post still reeks of "ONLY I, DONWARD, CAN VALIDATE YOU" really goes to show who doesn't have a life here. You're still the one who needs me. That's why you're bringing up the Gasai posts where your obnoxious clique is just up-voting each other while other posters actually read and respond to what I write about the peculiar psychology of German fanboys. Your entire life is based on disenfranchising others to boost up your own ego; and your attempts to deny my value-add to the forum is again simply your twisted psychology at work again. 


Edited by Zinegata, Nov 08 2016 - 05:56.


mattwong #36 Posted Nov 08 2016 - 05:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 30341 battles
  • 17,166
  • Member since:
    03-03-2012

View PostDoomslinger, on Oct 19 2016 - 23:49, said:

If the Tigers were produced later in the war, there were deficiencies in the steel because of a lack of raw materials that were needed to produce high grade steel. The allies bombing campaigns were greatly affecting the supply of the minerals needed to produce high quality steel for the tanks. Some of the steel would crack when hit with an anti-tank round.

 

That's the popular story, but it's been debunked.  German steel was of poor quality even before they started having these raw material shortages.  The more likely conclusion is that German metallurgy simply wasn't very good.



mattwong #37 Posted Nov 08 2016 - 05:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 30341 battles
  • 17,166
  • Member since:
    03-03-2012

View PostDonward, on Nov 05 2016 - 16:00, said:

I've been paid for my writings. And you haven't.

 

And Paris Hilton's book "Confessions of an Heiress" made the New York Times best-seller list.  Your point?



AitoKurittaja95 #38 Posted Nov 08 2016 - 07:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 56523 battles
  • 9,838
  • [2-ND] 2-ND
  • Member since:
    08-23-2011

View PostDemonic_Angel_of_Death, on Oct 20 2016 - 04:09, said:

TL : DR - The Tiger, and all tanks like it were [edited] and the german high command lost the war because they had a little man complex... 

 

You really don't understand why Germans wanted to make their tanks large do you?

And the facts remain that their machinery were superior to every single of those multiple enemies they were facing.

 

Shame that QUALITY over QUANTITY was not able to win in the end.

 

Too many hordes of enemies.



SergeantMatt #39 Posted Nov 08 2016 - 08:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 18576 battles
  • 2,527
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2011

View PostGasai__Yuno, on Nov 08 2016 - 01:29, said:

And the facts remain that their machinery were superior to every single of those multiple enemies they were facing.

 

Kindly explain how and provide your sources.

Demonic_Angel_of_Death #40 Posted Nov 08 2016 - 09:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 2142 battles
  • 3,952
  • [DEMON] DEMON
  • Member since:
    09-29-2012

View PostGasai__Yuno, on Nov 08 2016 - 01:29, said:

 

You really don't understand why Germans wanted to make their tanks large do you?

And the facts remain that their machinery were superior to every single of those multiple enemies they were facing.

 

Shame that QUALITY over QUANTITY was not able to win in the end.

 

Too many hordes of enemies.

 

Because rushing the Panther into production before even half of its issues were solved was a superior idea...

 

on another note... Pershing was being developed around 1942, but it didn't make it to Europe till early 45... because throwing a tank into the fight while its beyond "Teething" is

not a smart idea...

 

the point is, Germany had 2 valid options:

 

A) Initiate "E-Series" Production (Yay for you)

B) Make more Pz III's and Pz IV's... Arguably the best tanks they made were the StuG's... the chassis was reliable, and the StuG's could be made for a variety of roles 

at a cheaper cost... 

 

And they chose neither, thus they lost the ground fight...


Edited by Demonic_Angel_of_Death, Nov 08 2016 - 09:28.






Also tagged with Tiger I, Tiger II, Penetration

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users