Jump to content


The Sturmtiger !


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

_Gungrave_ #41 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 35256 battles
  • 8,784
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View Post_Schneller_Heinz_, on Aug 09 2017 - 23:04, said:

There was a number of proposals on super heavy tanks.

But it did not mount to nothing.

 

 

 

When it comes to superheavy tanks I do wonder why the Japanese even bothered with the superheavy concept or even large tanks like the ChiRi for that matter as the type of war they fought with the US wasn't exactly one to favor the use of tanks anyway given the terrain that the pacific theater was fought on.

 

Oh and by the way it was recently discovered that the ChiRi's fate was that it got scrapped for resources...such a shame.


Edited by _Gungrave_, Aug 09 2017 - 23:10.


_Schneller_Heinz_ #42 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:12

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1931 battles
  • 650
  • Member since:
    02-05-2015

View Post_Gungrave_, on Aug 09 2017 - 23:09, said:

 

When it comes to superheavy tanks I do wonder why the Japanese even bothered with the superheavy concept or even large tanks like the ChiRi for that matter as the type of war they fought with the US wasn't exactly one to favor the use of tanks anyway given the terrain that the pacific theater was fought on.

 

Good point.

On the island hopping warfare in the Pacific theater in WW II, smaller more agile tanks are a lot more feasible.



BrassFire #43 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:43

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 1932 battles
  • 1,205
  • [1_DIV] 1_DIV
  • Member since:
    10-28-2016

View Post_Schneller_Heinz_, on Aug 09 2017 - 23:04, said:

There was a number of proposals on super heavy tanks.

But it did not mount to nothing.

 

 

 

Thank you for the 100 ton O-I pic!

BillT #44 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:45

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 23299 battles
  • 1,058
  • [FADES] FADES
  • Member since:
    08-13-2010
[removed by author]

Edited by BillT, Aug 09 2017 - 23:47.


BrassFire #45 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:46

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 1932 battles
  • 1,205
  • [1_DIV] 1_DIV
  • Member since:
    10-28-2016

View Post_Gungrave_, on Aug 09 2017 - 23:09, said:

 

When it comes to superheavy tanks I do wonder why the Japanese even bothered with the superheavy concept or even large tanks like the ChiRi for that matter as the type of war they fought with the US wasn't exactly one to favor the use of tanks anyway given the terrain that the pacific theater was fought on.

 

Oh and by the way it was recently discovered that the ChiRi's fate was that it got scrapped for resources...such a shame.

 

Well, the O-I was meant to be used in China as a kind of mobile bunker. At the time the Chinese had early M4s and Hellcats, which... Okay, would make the O-I a clanking nightmare to fight due to its extremely thick armor. It was meant to have the 150mm it has in game, with the exact same penetration values- 121mm of AP pen, 150mm of HEAT pen, and 85mm or so of HE pen. However, it was found to be far too heavy and the fate of the single construction steel prototype is ultimately unknown.

 

Seriously though, imagine having to fight an O-I from the front in a short 75 Sherman. That's the stuff of night terrors.


Edited by BrassFire, Aug 09 2017 - 23:47.


BillT #46 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:49

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 23299 battles
  • 1,058
  • [FADES] FADES
  • Member since:
    08-13-2010

View Post_Gungrave_, on Aug 09 2017 - 05:46, said:

 

Most of em actually had a crane hoist mounted on top of them as shown in some old photographs and yes thats the actual size of the shell this thing used.

 

 

But to be clear, that's only for loading the shells into the tank from a supply vehicle.  Once the shells are inside, on the ammo racks, you didn't need a crane to move them into the gun tube.  That could all be done from inside the tank.

 



_Gungrave_ #47 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 35256 battles
  • 8,784
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostBrassFire, on Aug 09 2017 - 23:46, said:

 

Well, the O-I was meant to be used in China as a kind of mobile bunker. At the time the Chinese had early M4s and Hellcats, which... Okay, would make the O-I a clanking nightmare to fight due to its extremely thick armor. It was meant to have the 150mm it has in game, with the exact same penetration values- 121mm of AP pen, 150mm of HEAT pen, and 85mm or so of HE pen. However, it was found to be far too heavy and the fate of the single construction steel prototype is ultimately unknown.

 

Seriously though, imagine having to fight an O-I from the front in a short 75 Sherman. That's the stuff of night terrors.

 

Most likely the OI got scrapped for steel resources seeing as Japanese high command always put more value in building a strong navy since they're an island nation.



BillT #48 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:55

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 23299 battles
  • 1,058
  • [FADES] FADES
  • Member since:
    08-13-2010

View Posttanopasman62, on Aug 09 2017 - 12:07, said:

 

Being arty, it would only have a very long reload/aim time and that's it, such an inaccurate gun with slow shell velocity wouldn't be able to hit you unless you stay there for long periods of time.

 

As a point of reference, Germany deployed seven Sturmtigers to destroy the Remagen bridge.   They couldn't hit it.

 

It's a BIG bridge.



BrassFire #49 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:56

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 1932 battles
  • 1,205
  • [1_DIV] 1_DIV
  • Member since:
    10-28-2016

View Post_Gungrave_, on Aug 09 2017 - 23:54, said:

 

Most likely the OI got scrapped for steel resources seeing as Japanese high command always put more value in building a strong navy since they're an island nation.

 

That's possible, though it doesn't explain why they left a random track link behind.

 

 

Seriously, the logic behind this is something I will never be able to grasp. Then again, I'm happy it exists.



BillT #50 Posted Aug 09 2017 - 23:58

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 23299 battles
  • 1,058
  • [FADES] FADES
  • Member since:
    08-13-2010

View Post_Gungrave_, on Aug 09 2017 - 16:40, said:

View PostWileyCat, on Aug 09 2017 - 14:16, said:

 

get a life old man

 

Sorry but your stupidity is really showing right now and FYI I'm 28 so I don't even qualify to be an old many yet.

Then get a life, you young punk.

 

:teethhappy:  Sorry, just couldn't resist that.



_Gungrave_ #51 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 00:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 35256 battles
  • 8,784
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostBrassFire, on Aug 09 2017 - 23:56, said:

 

That's possible, though it doesn't explain why they left a random track link behind.

 

 

Seriously, the logic behind this is something I will never be able to grasp. Then again, I'm happy it exists.

 

Probably just someone wanted to preserve a piece of the tank for posterity. Knowing how strict the Japanese military was with orders it was likely an officer who made an order to preserve that track link because I just don't see some random soldier or civilian keeping this massive track link.

Mainerd #52 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 01:11

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16097 battles
  • 264
  • [DRB] DRB
  • Member since:
    09-04-2014

View Postpilgrim2223, on Aug 09 2017 - 04:33, said:

 

Oh look that vehicle has a chimney. I knew Germany had oil problems but a wood-burning vehicle.  :teethhappy:

Edited by Mainerd, Aug 10 2017 - 01:11.


BrassFire #53 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 01:19

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 1932 battles
  • 1,205
  • [1_DIV] 1_DIV
  • Member since:
    10-28-2016

View Post_Gungrave_, on Aug 10 2017 - 00:22, said:

 

Probably just someone wanted to preserve a piece of the tank for posterity. Knowing how strict the Japanese military was with orders it was likely an officer who made an order to preserve that track link because I just don't see some random soldier or civilian keeping this massive track link.

 

Good point.

Mercer_Keel #54 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 03:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 35999 battles
  • 2,612
  • [LTD] LTD
  • Member since:
    02-12-2013

View Post_Schneller_Heinz_, on Aug 09 2017 - 06:19, said:

 

Rumors about the Sturmtiger in WoT are up since 9.1

I was in super test and this is as far as it went.

 

really you where in super tester?  

_Schneller_Heinz_ #55 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 03:03

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1931 battles
  • 650
  • Member since:
    02-05-2015

View PostMercer_Keel, on Aug 10 2017 - 03:00, said:

 

really you where in super tester?  

 

To answer your question yes. I am playing on the EU server since 6th of March 2011.

Edited by _Schneller_Heinz_, Aug 10 2017 - 03:03.


Mercer_Keel #56 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 03:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 35999 battles
  • 2,612
  • [LTD] LTD
  • Member since:
    02-12-2013

View Post_Schneller_Heinz_, on Aug 09 2017 - 18:03, said:

 

To answer your question yes. I am playing on the EU server since 6th of March 2011.

 

Sorry  but i have a hard time taking your word on this. 

_Schneller_Heinz_ #57 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 03:30

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1931 battles
  • 650
  • Member since:
    02-05-2015

View PostMercer_Keel, on Aug 10 2017 - 03:06, said:

 

Sorry  but i have a hard time taking your word on this. 

I really don't care if you do or don't.


Edited by _Schneller_Heinz_, Aug 10 2017 - 03:30.


Capt_Binkley #58 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 03:33

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 8551 battles
  • 136
  • Member since:
    04-22-2015
Derp is always good to share.  The more derp the better.

ket101 #59 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 04:28

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18267 battles
  • 8,579
  • [N-O-M] N-O-M
  • Member since:
    01-10-2011

View PostMainerd, on Aug 10 2017 - 10:11, said:

 

Oh look that vehicle has a chimney. I knew Germany had oil problems but a wood-burning vehicle.  :teethhappy:

 

Wood burning conversions were actually pretty common in wartime Germany, though I think it was the gas that was used rather than the actual wood being burnt.  I remember seeing pictures of these big water heater style tanks mounted on the back of cars and trucks, anyway.  Sometimes a balloon sort of thing, too.  Getting old, memory's going.

Burning_Haggis #60 Posted Aug 10 2017 - 04:33

    Captain

  • Players
  • 39273 battles
  • 1,133
  • [-BTU-] -BTU-
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View PostRivertheRoyal, on Aug 09 2017 - 04:30, said:

If I recall correctly, the shells used by this monstrosity were too large and heavy to propel strictly through conventional gunpowder means. So the Germans made it partially rocket propelled.

 :trollface:

 

They had no conventional propellant, the rockets were originally part of a coastal ASW battery.   All those holes around the tube are to divert the backblast forward. (forwardblast?)   An almost 800 pound rocket with a 275 pound shaped charge, yep, that would make light tanks vanish... if you could hit them with a <100meter/sec round.   It would be fun to try

 






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users