RC Tank Warfare community hobby forum

frankie wrote:Thanks for the education as I said I'll bow out and leave this discussion to the experts...

frankie wrote:Just a hobbyist myself..just don't like seeing people getting their facts wrong but convincing everyone they're right because they can write an essay about it...lol
...anyway not getting baited any more..

frankie wrote:I actually first posted when Corp only mentioned m4 hybrids and welded (hull extended) then said Firefly's were bases on full cast hulls, which he's since edited..you then jumped in not only redefining the whole Firefly classification with an Engish lesson and finding a photo of full cast hull Sherman's (something that every Firefly website says did not exist.)..

ALPHA wrote:

43rdRecceReg wrote: Personally, I'm not keen on the Sherman. It had a high centre of gravity, affecting stability, and a high profile relative to overall size in the Landscape (like its predecessor, the M3 Lee), making aiming an almost leisurely pursuit for german 88s, whether from an anti-tank position, or from tiger turret. I can already hear the howls of protest and rage from Sherman fans...but it's also a fairly ugly tank! Pity the War office couldn't get more Comets out there earlier!
However, since my Dad and my Uncle were both in armoured units during the war, they would have been familiar with the Firefly...and the bog standard Sherman. If I had a model, though, it would have to be the to Vc Firefly to reflect their experience

Thing is..........The Sherman was easily deployed...Fast Fast Fast...Reliable ...with Parts a plenty...IMO and I don't care what is said about it being a firebox....for the time...It was the perfect solution to other concepts that were being produced by other countries

Oh....I'm gonna overlook that Ugly Statement


cause a Tank really shouldn't be Pretty....the Sherman is what it is intended to be...a "Work Horse" of a vehicle...it still looks good...but not as sexy as a
Chaffee

ALPHA

43rdRecceReg wrote:

OK, well in the interests of Mechanical Correctness- a new variant on the odious 'Political' version, I shall amend 'Ugly' to 'Aesthetically challenged'. Also, I'm forced to admit that you posted one really fetching picture of an "Aesthetically challenged' tank there. I'm almost drawn to it, and beguiled by its allure...like the infamous 50s and 60s 'Blue woman behind a tree' picture...