2009-04-25, 12:28 | Link #21 |
Catholic = Cat addiction?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: MURICA!!
|
As Father Hentai provided, the Edelweiss, imo is most likely a direct imitation of the German prototype E-50 series tank that never debuted in the war. However, it has all the physical resemblances of the Edelweiss, including the turret design that we have been fussing over in the last couple posts. The E-50 includes a short barrel 8.8 cm KwK 42, with 800 horse power and weighs around 50 tons (which is pretty light for a heavy tank). All in all, specifications of the E-50 and the physical appearance is the best match I have found yet that resembles the Edelweiss.
Spoiler for Edelweiss:
- Tak
__________________
|
2009-04-25, 13:23 | Link #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Munich, Germany
|
I guess the page won't allow direct image links. But I found a picture on another site:
Spoiler for Off topic comparision leo 2, merkava, abrams:
Btw. to the issue about tanks and submerge. This is how a leo would look like: Spoiler for Leo 2 submerge:
__________________
|
2009-04-25, 15:15 | Link #23 | ||
Truth Martyr
Author
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doing Anzu's paperwork.
Age: 38
|
Quote:
Quote:
Also, the Abrams doesn't use an autoloader but a human loader. The US Army did tests once and found that human loaders were actually faster than autoloader mechanisms. As for all this MBT faggotry, it's all pointless. No MBTs have fought with each other so predicting who wins and loses is part guesswork, part prediction, and part nerd rage. But the Abrams has one thing in it's favor: it appears to take friendly fire quite well; even point blank silver bullet hits can't kill it. And that pic of the Leo 2's tower is nothing new. Almost every single modern MBT has that facility.
__________________
|
||
2009-04-25, 15:38 | Link #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Munich, Germany
|
One advantage of a gunner loader is you can order him to bring you a beer
Tank Commander > Corporal in this part As you mention your friend is an abrams crewman. I served a few years under the 10th german tank division. although only staff sergeant in signal command we had basic training in anti-tank and I also have some contact with tank crewmens (mostly ended in drinking contest). But to be honest with that comparison: it's from a military forum.
__________________
|
2009-04-25, 17:58 | Link #27 | |||||||||||||||||
Loveable Jerk
|
Quote:
Quote:
On that note I also don't buy the legends about M1A1s one shoting two T-72s either since going at over 1500 meters per second a sabot round would more or less flash vaporize to plasma on impact. What comes out the far side of those armor plates on penetration isn't so intact dart it's a spray of molten metal and white hot gas. Quote:
That said rate of fire is often of dubious value on a tank as the instances where one would be presented with multiple targets that could be engaged within a second of each other are quite rare. Since you should only need one good hit (assuming a decent gun) to kill the target rapid fire isn't nearly as vital as stopping power and range. Ammo is also a concern even with older lighter weapons shell count rarely reached even a hundred rounds in the vehicle modern tanks can have as few as 40 shells available. Quote:
Learned the hard way life isn't a video game when an "inferior" Firefly blew the ass off his Tiger. Quote:
Even then the resembles is rather weak the road wheels look nothing alike in fact they're completely different, the turret shape isn't even vaugely simliar being angular and fairly flat much like a later Panther turret (unsuprisngly) but having nothing like the smoothly sloping Edelwiess turret it's also much smaller compared to the vehicles total size, the hull form bears little in common either with the forward being sharply sloped (the Edel is near vertical frontally) and it appearing to be fairly low and squat all around while the Edel resembles nothing so much as a brick shithouse on treads. Actually looking at the two I struggle to find ANY common features beyond some supposed engine and speed commonality (Laughable since the E-50 was never actually built, fitted with an engine, or put through speed tests) and a vaugely similar gun which is hardly shocking since many tanks of the same era had very similar weapons in the 85 to 90mm range. Quote:
Quote:
It's use in combat is rather debatable, but it's possible. Quote:
Though exceptional crew training for the M1 in very similar terrain (many of the US armies biggest tank ranges are out in the middle of South Western Deserts) only compounded the issue. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The M26 Pershing was a 45 ton heavy tank. Spoiler for M26:
Quote:
Quote:
Also the leo 2 and the abrams are most "brothers" because on the leo 2 construction american engineers were involved and later went with the invention of the abrams. Quote:
Israel has more experience with large scale armored warfare in the post World War II era then more or less any country on earth and it shows. There tanks have always been simple but effective and crewed by superb troops and led by battle hardened veterans. I don't see it. Quote:
Quote:
Newer designs are about as good and possibly better then human loaders, but that said the human loader does have one advantage that’s not always discussed: he’s an extra pair of hands. Even simple maintenance on a tank is a very labor intensive process and I’ve heard many tankers express some reticence at the prospect of losing a forth of their manpower for the task whatever the technical advantages of an autoloader might happen to be. There's also the fact that a human loader doesn't break down or require mechcanical upkeep you feed him MRE and he'll keep feeding the gun shells. The Auto-loader seems to be in vogue though and will probably continue to take over and in the end replace the loader. Quote:
The thing is though that between most modern MBTs the differences are pretty small and any slight edge in one area tends to be countered by a slight weakness in another. So for instance while I say I’d favor the Merk over an Abrams that margin is small and the biggest thing that tips me to the Merk is that it’s rapidly gaining active defense systems. If the US Army sucked up its pride and started fitting Trophy to M1 tanks and bought some of the newer main gun rounds tomorrow I’d seriously reconsider by view. Both are good tanks and if they fought each other it would be a crap shot as to which might win, but I'd give the Merk a slight edge overall in terms of its total capabilities which is what's most important when considering a tank. Anti-tank ability IS important, but it's not the sole factor to consider.
__________________
|
|||||||||||||||||
2009-04-25, 18:36 | Link #28 | ||||||
Catholic = Cat addiction?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: MURICA!!
|
Quote:
Quote:
A Firefly is built to kill Tigers. There may be few, but it has enough firepower to cap a cat. Never mind the fact that his one battalion was ambushed and surrounded by at least half a dozen battle groups, many of which bore a vendetta against him specifically. Quote:
Quote:
No. Just exactly what the hell did you think we have been doing? Speculating! (no shit). We are speculating which tank resemble the Edelweiss the most. One was a prototype that was never mass produced, the other also a fictional prototype that was never mass produced, neither went through road or combat tests, but have very similar specs on paper, sure makes plenty of sense to me. Quote:
You obviously missed that picture. That one has a rather short gun. As for the wheels, we've already discussed plenty on that subject alone. Kindly use the search function. Lastly, please note that German tank designs in general are an inspiration to the Edelweiss, not a blueprint. Likewise, the Panzer IV acted as an inspiration to the Shamrock, with the latter sporting many configuration differences. Quote:
- Tak
__________________
Last edited by Tak; 2009-04-25 at 19:15. |
||||||
2009-04-25, 18:51 | Link #29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere at Earth
|
Quote:
M24 Pershing Spoiler for image size:
Spoiler for Pershing tank:
That's a light tank Chaffee. The difference is the frontal armor, large turret, drive sprocket at the rear, long barrel w/ a muzzle. The records says it took out 3 PzIV and a Pz VI with just a single Pershing tank. |
|
2009-04-25, 18:57 | Link #30 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Munich, Germany
|
What speaks against the M26 pershing are the following technical data:
- Mobility - Motor: V8-Zylinder-Ottomotor Ford GAF 4 500/450 PS (373/336 kW) - max Speed ca. 40 km/h (street) ca. 18,5 km/h (compound) - it was not a prototype - it' s not an European tank Tak already mentioned most of the specifications of the E50/E75 Series. But what makes them ideal for the Edelweiss is that these tanks are prototype and are in development in Europe. A thing what the speaks against all tank designs out of Europe. Btw. seen a Leo Drifting? Need to scroll a bit further to minute 1:00. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx7KxNMHwHs Btw. Tak. The M26 Pershing had a 90 mm main cannon but well does not make it more equate to the Edelweiss from my view. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Last edited by Father Hentai; 2009-04-25 at 19:11. |
||
2009-04-25, 19:11 | Link #31 | |
Catholic = Cat addiction?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: MURICA!!
|
Quote:
The funny thing about this is that they all supposedly have bigger guns. Yet, even with the IS-2/3s later in the war, sporting their gigantic 122mm, they were still out-ranged by the Panther and outgunned by its 75mm high velocity. - Tak
__________________
|
|
2009-04-25, 19:16 | Link #32 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Munich, Germany
|
Quote:
As far as I remember my military studies it was already possible in WW II.
__________________
|
|
2009-04-25, 19:24 | Link #33 |
Catholic = Cat addiction?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: MURICA!!
|
Yeah, even after it has pretty much been established that Gallia adheres to German military hardware standards (with all the specifically German terms & details floating about, what more proof do they want?) while the Empire adheres to Russian military hardware standards.
- Tak
__________________
Last edited by Tak; 2009-04-25 at 19:47. |
2009-04-25, 19:31 | Link #34 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Munich, Germany
|
Quote:
__________________
Last edited by Father Hentai; 2009-04-25 at 19:42. |
|
2009-04-25, 19:47 | Link #35 |
snow is fluffy
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Canada
Age: 33
|
Oh goodie finally back on topic, I feared this thread was rapidly degrading into the typical youtube rants of shermans vs. tigers or the superiority of the modern [insert country] forces -.-
And I for one like the water cooling jackets xD. VC is somewhat steam punk, especially with the imperials. However not being able to selective upgrade is a letdown, but it didn't bother me that much-Aisha w/ fully upped dmg smg/assualt rifle which names escapes me looks awesome! xD And I'm surprised no ones mentioned the strong similarities between Uniforms and other equipment/apparel of Gallia |
2009-04-25, 19:57 | Link #37 |
snow is fluffy
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Canada
Age: 33
|
Haha yea, I guess "identical" would be a better word with exception to some peripherals...I don't like how they changed the headset/mic&headphones and removed many parts of the uniform but I guess few things were spared due to budget...
So how's everyone think about the original gallian rifle design? i see enfield barrel, k/g-43 action/receiver and stock Last edited by shcfyd; 2009-04-25 at 20:16. Reason: forgot the stocks were basically the same >.< |
2009-04-25, 20:04 | Link #38 | |
Catholic = Cat addiction?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: MURICA!!
|
Quote:
- Tak (And once again, its not meant to be a direct replica)
__________________
|
|
2009-04-26, 00:37 | Link #39 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere at Earth
|
Quote:
Just a Quote from Wikipedia: Quote:
http://www.3ad.com/history/wwll/feat...pershing.1.htm |
||
2009-04-26, 01:21 | Link #40 | ||||
Truth Martyr
Author
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doing Anzu's paperwork.
Age: 38
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Secondly, as regards a naval gun, I refer you to the Bofors L70 40mm gun which is both used as a naval gun and on the CV90 AFV. It can do 4-round burst. (Slight OT, but just wanted to point out 4-round burst). Also, Tak, be advised: the navy doesn't call them cannon - it's gun. It could be 16 inches and it's still called a gun. As for the rifles, I'm actually surprised they have semiauto battle rifles. I was expecting them to still start out with bolt-action. The Lee-Enfield and Kar98k were good bolt action rifles of the time...
__________________
|
||||
|
|