New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Feel free to discuss anything and everything to do with tanking here!
User avatar
Woz
Warrant Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 1306
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 12:06 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by Woz »

Dietrich wrote:Hi Guys,
Sorry but this has become a long long post.........

The Centurian in WW2 ?? !!.......I have never heard of that ......as far as I knew it was too late to fight....

I didn't say the Centurion saw combat only that it was made before WWII ended. The war in Europe ended in May 1945 but the war in Asia only ended in August 1945 which the end of WWII.

As you said in your post six cent's arrived in Belgium less then a month after the end of the war in Europe - but over two months before the end of WWII in August.
User avatar
Dietrich
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 973
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:29 am
Location: England and Aquitaine,France

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by Dietrich »

hi mustclime,
KV85... :haha: ....GOOD LUCK..you are going to need it !!!...You quite rightly stepped into your flame suit....and it will also need 'advanced starship shielding technology' because you are going to need it if you are going to live, on this battlefield !.......To Quote you "the kv85 was a really good tank" :haha: :thumbup: ....... also perhaps more accurately described as ....
.
.....A stopgap upgrade to the KV series was the short-lived KV-85 or Objekt 239. This was a KV-1S with a new turret designed for the IS-85, mounting the same 85 mm D-5T gun as the SU-85 and early versions of the T-34-85.
It is further described in 'Glowing Terms' as having :- serious flaws: it was difficult to steer, the transmission (which was a twenty year old Caterpillar design) was unreliable (and was known to have to be shifted with a hammer), and the ergonomics were poor, with limited visibility and no turret basket. ( BUT it was REAR SPROCKET drive :clap: )

As far as I can see it is a KV1 hull with an upgraded turret and gun.... Therefore the hull armour is' Obsolete' by the standards of its day..
Weight 46 tons
Crew 4
Weapons 85mm L51,5 M43 gun with 71 rounds, 2 DT-type MG with 3267 rounds
Armor hull 30-70mm (nose 70mm, sloped plate 60mm, front 70mm, sides and rear 60mm, top and bottom 30mm); turret 35-110mm (front 110mm, sides and rear 100mm, top 30mm)

You criticise, the the Tiger 1 for being 'Obsolete' with side armour of only 80mm at 90 degrees and then promptly get into a tank whose side armour is 60mm at 90 degrees !!!...........
Good choice.....and you further proove the quality of your choice in the 85mm gun....It can only penetrate the 'Obsolete' Tiger 1 front at 200 to 500m.....so you, in your KV85, are killed by an 'Obsolete' design at probably the same range as the churchill which is 1100 to 1700m or at best lets say 1000m ( Which is twice the distance that you can penetrate a Tiger At !)

Gun and armour performance
From a 30 degree angle the 'Obsolete' Tiger 1's 88mm gun was capable of penetrating the front glacis plate of an American M4 Sherman between 1,800 and 2,100 m the British Churchill IV between 1,100 and 1,700 m , the Soviet T-34 between 800 and 1,400 m ,
The T34-85's 85 mm gun could penetrate the front of a Tiger between 200 and 500 m

My choice :- The Tiger 1, simply because it is, and always has been, my favourite tank.It can take enormous punishment and still function and It was also used by my boyhood war-hero ( Hence my avatar) Who I found in a book called 'Panzer. The Armoured Force of The Third Reich' Published in 1979...long before he became as famous as he now is !
Never Forget......
   The Propaganda of the Victors....... becomes the History of the Vanquished
User avatar
Dietrich
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 973
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:29 am
Location: England and Aquitaine,France

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by Dietrich »

Hi Woz,
Ok Sorry I thought that the tank actually had to have made it to the battlefield. It arrived too late in Europe and was not sent to the Far East, campaign at all, until the Korean war. But yes 6 did get sent to Europe, after the German surrender.
In my defence I will Quote Saxondogs original question......Given the choice of 10 to 1 odds on any WWII Battlefield which tank would you choose to command??
I interpreted that as tanks that were available to fight.....so does that mean that your battlefield choice is therfore reduced to the Far East jungles ? Although against the Japanese tanks I think that you have very little to fear in any way ,shape or form :thumbup: and could probably manage larger odds with complete impunity :haha:
Alb.
Never Forget......
   The Propaganda of the Victors....... becomes the History of the Vanquished
User avatar
Saxondog
Captain
Posts: 4293
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:06 pm
Location: Tennessee-U.S.A.

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by Saxondog »

kARL,your post is perfect,if you chose the Tiger for the look more power to you,that is a very honest statement,and is fine for this thread as the heading states "which tank would you chose and why" Just perfect.

Now if you had said the Sherman for the same reason,or the T34/85 for the same reason still perfect answer and the best so far,you sir win the debate. Other wise it's what we call here the Chevy / Ford debate,it has lasted as long as the Auto-mobile has been made,and the end all reason given for one or the other is "I like the way it looks" brilliant answer!
Urban dictionary-SAXONDOG-derogatory term for anglosaxon people
User avatar
mustclime
Sergeant
Posts: 560
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 3:17 am

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by mustclime »

I love how people tiger always, always go on and on about how the tiger could beat up on all the medium tanks of the day....and a 5.0 leter mustang will crush a stock honda civic in the 1/4 mile, theres some news....after 43, the only real medium tank( with a turret) that germany made was the panzer 4( don't bother calling the 45 ton panther a medium tank). The t34/85 and the 76mm shermans were a fair match for the panzer 4. If you are going to go on about what the tiger compairs to, well the only things out there were the kv1's and later the IS1's and 2's and in 45 there was the m26's. As for the reliability of the kv1's??? All the german heavies with the exception of the maybe panther g's were over stressing thier drivetrains. Even the panthers had to limits their top speed or they would tear up their final drives. Sure the kv1's had a rep for being unrelable...for a soviet tank and that was a lot more reliable than the german tanks. Btw, one of the reasons I posted those armor "blue prints" and the soviet gun chart was so you could see the soviet 85mm could defeat 100mm of armor at 1000 yards, not 200.....also remember slopped armor does mean something. the kv85 also had a 5 man crew like the t34/85.
User avatar
Saxondog
Captain
Posts: 4293
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:06 pm
Location: Tennessee-U.S.A.

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by Saxondog »

I started this debate and it has served the purpose very well,No one got MAD or Angry at each other,Loads of information has been offered on many tanks,so anyone reading this thread will learn about German and Allied tanks,pro's and cons, Guns,Armor,Engines,all aspects of many tanks and all has been alot of FUN!

THANKS to everyone for joining in,taking the time to point out your reason's and your point of views in a respectful manner and with just enough opinion to make it interesting,yet enough restaint to prevent open warfare. :thumbup: :thumbup:

What comes next?
Urban dictionary-SAXONDOG-derogatory term for anglosaxon people
User avatar
Dietrich
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 973
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:29 am
Location: England and Aquitaine,France

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by Dietrich »

Hi mustclime,
You just cannot help your self can you ??? ...ALWAYS, attacking German armour for...Too High, Front Sprocket Drive, Obsolete Armour..unreliable drivetrains..and anything else that is to come. :/ !!!
You are continually insisting that you are right ( Pershing tanks height and reliable rear sprocket drive train for instance )
..........Simply posting diagrams of the armour of the KV 1 and KV85 does not make it any thicker or better, and neither does it make the Tigers and Panthers any Thinner or any worse !!!
.
You knock the Tiger 1 for 80mm of armour at 90 degrees and then have the effrontery to say ....... "the kv85 was a really good tank" with side armour that is 20m less at 60mm at 90 degrees.
If you did your research a little better you would have seen that the KV1 has a crew of 5 but the KV 85 only has a crew of 4 ...bigger gun = less space ....Simples !!

Type: Heavy Tank
Crew: 4
http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/1-V ... /KV-85.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Armaments: x1 85mm Main Gun x3 7.62mm MG
Armour: 30 - 110mm steel
Crew: 4
http://www.tanknutdave.com/component/co ... rticle/749" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Specifications (KV-85 version)
Crew: 4
http://www.soviet-empire.com/ussr/viewtopic.php?t=28919" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

KV 1 crew 5........KV85 crew 4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KV-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"All the german heavies with the exception of the maybe panther g's were over stressing their drivetrains"....yes we ALL know that BUT if they were driven with care, amd skill they performed well !
I have NEVER read however than they were as bad as the KV85s drive train, having to be 'Shifted with a hammer' To repeat the full quote....It also had serious flaws: it was difficult to steer, the transmission (which was a twenty year old Caterpillar design) was unreliable (and was known to have to be shifted with a hammer), and the ergonomics were poor, with limited visibility and no turret basket
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KV-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Against German armour the 85mm gun of the KV85, which was that same as the t34 / 85s gun performed as per this quote against armour at 30 degree slope
The T34-85's 85 mm gun could penetrate the front of a Tiger between 200 and 500 m.
The KV 85 from your own drawing had the lower hull front and the drivers / machine gun armour sloped at 30 degrees with only the glassis at 63 degree....but only 60 mm thick. The sides were vertical at 90 degrees
From a 30 degree angle the Tiger's 88mm gun was capable of penetrating the front glacis plate of an American M4 Sherman between 1,800 and 2,100 m ,the British Churchill IV between 1,100 and 1,700 m , the Soviet T-34 between 800 and 1,400 m , .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_I#Combat_history" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
.
Interestingly enough, you use the site below to obtain the drawings of the Tiger armour.............BUT ................' Carefully' omit the gun performance comparison table between the commie 85mm and the German 88mm !!!

Penetration Table 03:

................................... Tiger I vs. T-34/85 ............................T-34/85 vs. Tiger I................Tiger I vs. JS-122
Front: Turret ........................... 1400 m .......................................500 m .......................... 100 m
Mantlet ..................................400 m ......................................0 m ................................100 m
DFP*.................................. ....100 m .....................................300 m ................................100 m
Nose ....................................100 m ........................................200 m ...............................300 m
Side: Turret ............................2200 m ......................................1600 m ............................1000 m
Superstructure ......................... 2100 m.....................................1600 m ..............................1000 m
Hull ......................................3500 m .....................................2900 m .............................1500 m
Rear: Turret ........................... 3200 m ......................................1600 m ............................100 m
Hull ......................................2100 m ......................................1500 m ............................300 m
* DFP = Drivers Front Plate
Source : JENTZ, Thomas L.; Germany's TIGER Tanks - Tiger I and II:
Combat Tactics; ISBN 0-7643-0225-6
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
.
Now you have choosen your tank and explained why............but please stop CONSTANTLY CRITICISING the German tanks .....you are IMHO becoming repetative, predictable, irritating and boring. :wtf:
.
The topic was "Given the choice of 10 to 1 odds on any WWII Battlefield which tank would you choose to command??" .....SO....What on Earth have these quotes got to do with the choice and the topic.....''I love how people tiger always, always go on and on about how the tiger could beat up on all the medium tanks of the day".."after 43, the only real medium tank( with a turret) that germany made was the panzer 4( don't bother calling the 45 ton panther a medium tank)" " 5 Litre Mustang crush Honda civic in 1/4 mile"........
My Research indicates that you have chosen badly, VERY BADLY........ but of course you are free to make an alternative choice especially since your first choice is such a very poor tank....My research also indicates that you are WRONG about the number of crew in a KV85, it IS only 4 ......Unless of course the 5th crewman was hanging onto the outside of the tank with a large hammer to 'Adjust' the 'REAR SPROCKET drive train' :D

Now PLEASE mustclime,QUIT THE CONSTANT AND CONTINUAL CRITICISM of the German Tanks..........This is a friendly forum with a tremendous amount of knowledge and skill, packed with members who are more than happy to help out ANYONE from a complete 'Newbie' to a Seasoned Pro...It is NOT a ' Tank Bashing Arena'.....if you want to do that then just choose to post the 'Bashings' on another forum.Once you have 'Got that out of your system' then please feel free to post help or advice, rare information and photographs and to generally help out other members. You could even post a build thread....on something constructive...
Alb..........( Who had nothing better to do at this time, as his 3 year old is sick and asleep , and the Mother-in -law who fell over and badly hurt her ankle and foot is also asleep )
Never Forget......
   The Propaganda of the Victors....... becomes the History of the Vanquished
User avatar
mustclime
Sergeant
Posts: 560
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 3:17 am

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by mustclime »

ok, so CRITICISM of german tank designes = unfriendly.....got it.....Kinda strange, but as you wish.
User avatar
Woz
Warrant Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 1306
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 12:06 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by Woz »

Dietrich wrote:Hi Woz,
Ok Sorry I thought that the tank actually had to have made it to the battlefield. It arrived too late in Europe and was not sent to the Far East, campaign at all, until the Korean war. But yes 6 did get sent to Europe, after the German surrender.
In my defence I will Quote Saxondogs original question......Given the choice of 10 to 1 odds on any WWII Battlefield which tank would you choose to command??
I interpreted that as tanks that were available to fight.....so does that mean that your battlefield choice is therfore reduced to the Far East jungles ? Although against the Japanese tanks I think that you have very little to fear in any way ,shape or form :thumbup: and could probably manage larger odds with complete impunity :haha:
Alb.

The question didn't say that the tanks had to have met each other in combat so I just took it he meant tanks that were avaliable during WWII (the first Centurions would've been buit before the the war in Europe ended but it'd take time to train the crews etc).

Centurion vs 10 PzI Ausf A's

If I had the use tanks that did see combat together in WWII (or in theory could have) then-

IS2 vs 10 (WWI) MkV's*

Or

Tiger II vs 10 M5 Stuarts in a large open space.

Or

M26 Pershing vs 10 PzIII's

As I have no experience as a tank commader then I wouldn''t want to go up against anything that I thought could hurt me ...... I mean injury my crew.

*Wiki-
"In 1945, at least two Mk V tank leftovers were used by German garrison in defense of Berlin. It's unknown whom the tanks were captured from. Both tanks were destroyed in the subsequent battle in Berlin.[19]"
User avatar
Saxondog
Captain
Posts: 4293
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:06 pm
Location: Tennessee-U.S.A.

Re: New debate on the issue of your choice in battle

Post by Saxondog »

It's all Good fellows, The amount of information posted in this thread could fill a book,lots of valuable links and points of view.

The question was one of chance anyway,the other elements once considered would have changed any battle,aircraft,anti-tank weapons and Logistics of fuel and ammo supply. But from where I'm sitting it has just been great!

Thanks everyone for contributing so much information and taking time to enjoy and have some fun. I certainly have learned a few things,and I would like to say the British Armor so long desired may well be in the works! As I receive information I will post it in Hobby news.
Urban dictionary-SAXONDOG-derogatory term for anglosaxon people
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”