Jump to content


The Chieftain's Random Musings Thread


  • Please log in to reply
5297 replies to this topic

Tornheart #5261 Posted Apr 13 2014 - 22:03

    Private

  • Players
  • 2132 battles
  • 9
  • [LONER] LONER
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014

{lang:macro__view_post}Kyphe, on Apr 13 2014 - 21:44, said:

The first bar crossed the tank and connected to a rocker bar, which then connected to the second torsion bar which then came back across the tank the other way and was attached to the hull,

 

Normally a torsion bar has one end that is free to rotate and one end that is fixed and the bar remains in a rigid line simply turning on a axis, this system is more of a hybrid


I understand the idea and the method of torsion bars, I just don't understand how the suspension in the Panther could work. If it was built as you describe, with a simple bar between the two torsion bars, then the twist of the first bar would lift the free end of the second bar. That isn't something you can do with a torsion bar, it would likely just snap, even if there were space in the underside of the Panther for that sort of movement. If the technical drawings of the Panther are accurate, there isn't room for that kind of movement at all.

 

The twist from one torsion bar to the other would have to be handled by a small gearbox and not a rocker arm (or bar, because as far as I know, there is no such thing as a rocker bar.) The problem is, I can't seem to find any information or images that support my little theory.



Kyphe #5262 Posted Apr 13 2014 - 22:53

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 253 battles
  • 354
  • Member since:
    01-27-2012



Tornheart #5263 Posted Apr 13 2014 - 23:02

    Private

  • Players
  • 2132 battles
  • 9
  • [LONER] LONER
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014
Well, isn't that interesting. The presenter in the second video sounds a lot like one of the historians from Operation Think Tank.

dcon930 #5264 Posted Apr 14 2014 - 01:15

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 3038 battles
  • 17
  • Member since:
    07-25-2013

{lang:macro__view_post}Kyphe, on Apr 13 2014 - 08:28, said:

 Otherwise you have to make the tank very long for balance and that makes turning worse and adds to overall weight.

 

 

 

 

 

On the plus side, long tanks are good for landwhale jokes.



ket101 #5265 Posted Apr 14 2014 - 02:02

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 14227 battles
  • 4,889
  • [214LH] 214LH
  • Member since:
    01-10-2011
So the system is to get the road wheel travel height they wanted, 20 inches of travel by the video.  Makes sense, since torsion bars can be a little stiff if you can't fit longer suspension arms on them.

shapeshifter #5266 Posted Apr 15 2014 - 23:32

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 15547 battles
  • 1,689
  • Member since:
    09-11-2010

B.I.O.S. final report No. 614

Welding design and fabrication of german tank hulls and turrets.

 

https://depositfiles...files/317on1dbz

It goes into great depth. with a ton of detail on armor interlocking etc.



Maus123 #5267 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 05:43

    Captain

  • Players
  • 3255 battles
  • 1,816
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012
I assume at this point the Char 2C is never going to be put into the game?

StrelaCarbon #5268 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 06:23

    Captain

  • Players
  • 13505 battles
  • 1,443
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011
It'll be here... soonTM

Movodor #5269 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 08:07

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 14336 battles
  • 178
  • Member since:
    09-04-2010

Soon(tm) indeed. Some time ago when the Chieftain was doing his trip to new zealand and surrounds, (remember the complaints that WG was donating to a veteran's organization?) he did an impromptu Q&A.

 

Nothing has changed in that time about the 2c and related french heavies since, that I know of.


Edited by Movodor, Apr 17 2014 - 08:08.


The_Chieftain #5270 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 09:00

    Military Specialist

  • Military Specialist
  • 4220 battles
  • 6,583
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011
The In game model exists... But then I can say that for a lot of vehicles

The_Chieftain #5271 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 21:06

    Military Specialist

  • Military Specialist
  • 4220 battles
  • 6,583
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

From time to time I have seen comparative images of tanks in the game, almost certainly from either the garage or a non-WG viewer program, which is used to demonstrate inconsistencies with real world dimensions. Not that there aren't actual inconsistencies, but I have long suspected that these renderings are not true representations of the tanks as they appear in the game files.

 

My attention was recently brought again to this image.

 

 

So I decided to waste half my morning and actually look up just how accurate the models are to the game by using our own software which have an inbuilt measuring tool. Click a point on the model, then drag to the 'floor.' (I didn't spend too much effort getting the clicks pixel-correct, but this should be good enough)

 

Left to right.

Maus fire height: 109" (about 2.77m, from Panzer Tracts). Actual in-game fire height.

 

M6A2E1 Fire height "Approx 106" (From Hunnicutt), 269cm. Actual in-game fire height.

 

Roof height: 137" (348cm) (Hunnicutt). Actual in-game roof height.

 

M6 Heavy. Fire height "Approx 97"  (From Hunnicutt, not sure where 93 came from). 2.46m. In-game fire height.

 

Roof height, 118" (3.0m) (From Hunnicutt). In-game roof height.

 

T14 Assault Tank.

Roof height 97 5/16" (Approx 247cm). (Not sure where 109" is measured to, but I've seen it elsewhere, and it's not in Hunnicutt). However, we do have a roof height from Ordnance Branch:

 

 In game roof height.

 

So, all told, we're pretty damned close. The worst offense is the T14, which is a whopping 2" low to the roof. Yes, the M6A2E1 needs a re-work, we know. But we're still not far off. More to the point, however, be cautious of comparative analysis as found around the forum. As this example shows, they are far from reliable.

 



shapeshifter #5272 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 21:27

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 15547 battles
  • 1,689
  • Member since:
    09-11-2010

Thanks chief very detailed work, the 109" on the T14 comes straight out of the T14 assault tank report from DTIC. but they don't mention if it's to the roof/cupola or perhaps an MG mount.

 

 


Edited by shapeshifter, Apr 17 2014 - 21:27.


The_Chieftain #5273 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 21:31

    Military Specialist

  • Military Specialist
  • 4220 battles
  • 6,583
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011
I have another Ordnance Branch document which says 109" (Actually, 9'1", but anyway), but it also is silent as to what it measures to.

shapeshifter #5274 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 21:34

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 15547 battles
  • 1,689
  • Member since:
    09-11-2010

Another area where they list the height. they have the tank as longer as well.

I'll skim over the file again and see if they mention where they pegged that at. (roof etc)


Edited by shapeshifter, Apr 17 2014 - 21:38.


shapeshifter #5275 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 22:36

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 15547 battles
  • 1,689
  • Member since:
    09-11-2010
Height only seems to be mentioned those two times with no indication of what they ended at.

Maus123 #5276 Posted Apr 17 2014 - 23:29

    Captain

  • Players
  • 3255 battles
  • 1,816
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012

{lang:macro__view_post}The_Chieftain, on Apr 17 2014 - 01:00, said:

The In game model exists... But then I can say that for a lot of vehicles

I remember in a Russian video from a very long time ago it was completely functional.

 

And then there is the fact that Wargaming is teasing us players with it.



Dominatus #5277 Posted Apr 18 2014 - 04:09

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 9301 battles
  • 10,921
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010
If a model is made, then it doesn't take much to make it functional. Turret pivots around here. Shells come out of there. Copy/paste movement mechanics. Retrieve gun stats from a datasheet, etc.

Kyphe #5278 Posted Apr 19 2014 - 17:06

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 253 battles
  • 354
  • Member since:
    01-27-2012

Listy may have uncovered document evidence at Kew of an entirely unheard of British heavy tank from 1946, unless it ends up being some as yet unknown alternate designation for something we already know of.

 

Very early days but fingers crossed.



Xlucine #5279 Posted Apr 19 2014 - 17:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 7032 battles
  • 5,636
  • Member since:
    03-03-2011
I can't think of any heavies that match the description

Kyphe #5280 Posted Apr 19 2014 - 17:20

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 253 battles
  • 354
  • Member since:
    01-27-2012
hence unheard of lol, I have been looking all day, not a clue




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users