Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation Mk X

[Fordorsia]

RIP brave servicemen of the panzerleid

[Neo Balka]

RIP brave servicemen of the panzerleid

RIP.

[Purpelia]

Ford is just an unapologetic WW2 germany fanboy....

[Fordorsia]

May they never be forgotten

[Purpelia]

Alright than ford. Let's play this. This question is for everyone:

If you had to pick one WW2 German vehicle designed and operated by Germany (so stuff like the Pz-38t don't count) which would be your favorite and why?

[Neo Balka]

Ford is just an unapologetic WW2 germany fanboy....

Wtf i love the allies now.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

T-34 had a turret bearing diameter of 1.45 meters or 57". I don't know what AMX-13 was specifically, but M4 Sherman was 69" and I know that AMX-13 wasn't 69" bearing diameter. Adapters had to be made to fit the AMX-13 turret to the Sherman IIRC.

Provided AMX-13 has a narrower diameter than 57", it would be relatively simple. You'd make an adapter ring for the bearing to fit into the T-34 hull. Otherwise, it gets complicated.

Thanks.

Well, I'm aware of the M24 chaffee/AMX-13 hybrids, and the M24 had a nominal ring diameter of 60".
The M41, M551, M8 and Stingray had turret-tings of about 76".

So a scratch-built or simply visually-similar turret would certainly fit.

Plus I'm getting some sources stating turret ring of T-34/85 was 62" or 1.6m and T-34/100 was 1.7m.
-Issues maintaining the Christie suspension can be remedied with a turret-notch.

Edit: FOUND IT
AMX-13 raceway diameter: 1475mm
T-34/76 was 1425mm

Additionally, the Valentine tank had a ring of 1450mm.

Super-Valentine tonk /w 105mm Y/y?

[Fordorsia]

Alright than ford. Let's play this. This question is for everyone:

If you had to pick one WW2 German vehicle designed and operated by Germany (so stuff like the Pz-38t don't count) which would be your favorite and why?

Jagdpanther. As far as I know they performed very well (when they had fuel). But more importantly, it's one of the sexiest AFVs in history, and that's a FACT.

[Laritaia]

it had all the issues the regular panther had

[Fordorsia]

it had all the issues the regular panther had

The Jagdpanther was put into service after most of the panther's worst mechanical problems had been fixed. It also got a better transmission than the Panther, and had better combat readiness.

Wouldn't be surprised if it accounted for more kills than the Panther. There are a number of accounts of two or three of them taking out a dozen tanks in one battle.

[Neo Balka]

it had all the issues the regular panther had

The Jagdpanther was put into service after most of the panther's worst mechanical problems had been fixed. It also got a better transmission than the Panther, and had better combat readiness.

Tfw favorite Panzer was Hetzer.

Guess ill go with the STUG.

[Austrasien]

The Tiger. It was a good tank.

The balance of firepower and armour turned out to be exceptionally good and it was not really outmatched until the IS-2 and T-34-85 began to appear in significant numbers in mid-1944. It was exceptionally reliable for a German tank. Crew survivability was good and the designers seemed to have stumbled upon the value of placing ammunition below the turret ring by accident. It doesn't seem to have suffered from the worst industrial problems that plagued later German tank designs.

[Purpelia]

Wouldn't be surprised if it accounted for more kills than the Panther. There are a number of accounts of two or three of them taking out a dozen tanks in one battle.

Just for the record ford. You really, really need to look up that website I linked to. It goes to great pains to examine such "accounts" and compare them to Soviet battle reports of what was actually in the area at the time. And quite often you will end up with things like this.

Mind you. I am not saying that the Germans were the only ones doing that. The americans, british, Soviets and probably even the French were surely doing it as well. They just weren't this egregious about it.

[Fordorsia]

The balance of firepower and armour turned out to be exceptionally good and it was not really outmatched until the IS-2 and T-34-85 began to appear in significant numbers in mid-1944.

Tigers were being taken out left and right long before the arrival of purpose built Tiger killing guns.

It was exceptionally reliable for a German tank.

It was only exceptionally reliable when most of them had already been lost.

Crew survivability was good

Need a source for this. Not doubting it was worse than Russian tanks though. M4 crew survivability is excellent, so a tank's hatches and layout have to be really good to be considered good in comparison.

and the designers seemed to have stumbled upon the value of placing ammunition below the turret ring by accident.

Its ready shells were in the floor. Most of the shells were nice and exposed in the sponsons.

It doesn't seem to have suffered from the worst industrial problems that plagued later German tank designs.

It suffered horribly. They cost too much, used up too much fuel, and were too heavy to recover for the most part before the Allies advanced.

[Austrasien]

1. How did you reach this conclusion? Because it's wrong.
2. No. Also wrong.
3. Archive Awareness naturally. There is a nice chart of average numbers of crew casualties per penetration somewhere on there for different tanks.
4. That you do not understand hit distribution is obvious enough from your own work. Sponsons are not an unreasonable place to store ammunition at all. Especially when the sponson has 80mm of armour.
5. If you replace one Tiger with two Panzer IVs you already burn more fuel, use the same amount of steel, need twice the crew and so on. If you replace it with the same "value" of Panzer IVs you use exponentially more of everything. Labour, not raw materials, were mostly responsible for the cost difference. Germany was short on materials but not on labour. The essence of this wikipedia-tier argument, that Germany should have poured more scarce resources into simpler tanks to save labour and manpower, doesn't hold water.

[Gallan Systems]

Archive Awareness is the HQ of inverse Wehrabooism.

What is this "inverse Wehraboo"? A "correct" "person"?

[Neo Balka]

Archive Awareness is the HQ of inverse Wehrabooism.

What is this "inverse Wehraboo"? A "correct" "person"?

someone who likes the Bundeswehr obv.

[Austrasien]

No, someone who refuses to compare sources. Just in the other direction.

[Federated Kingdom of Prussia]

The T-34 was neither an exceptionally fantastic tank nor a horrible death trap. In the beginning it suffered from huge issues that any new tank faces excaberated by the fact that the USSR had been invaded. The Soviets took a good long look at what they had to work with and played their cards very well. The Germans made a lot of mistakes with what they had to work with, which went from okay to very bad after 1942-43.

Archive Awareness is the HQ of inverse Wehrabooism.

What is this "inverse Wehraboo"? A "correct" "person"?

I personally trust Moran and Zaloga over most other sources. They don't seem to have an agenda. The guy who runs Archive Awareness is obviously very smart but every article reads like 'every German AFV was an absolute piss-poor death trap and any Soviet AFV was literally a gift from God'. I too want to fight back against the massive Soviet hordes misconception but I try to take a balanced approach with all sources and all viewpoints.

[Theodosiya]

Alright than ford. Let's play this. This question is for everyone:

If you had to pick one WW2 German vehicle designed and operated by Germany (so stuff like the Pz-38t don't count) which would be your favorite and why?

Konigstiger. Panther sloped armor + buffed up Tiger armor = Deathly. When the machine don't break down.

[Western Pacific Territories]

Alright than ford. Let's play this. This question is for everyone:

If you had to pick one WW2 German vehicle designed and operated by Germany (so stuff like the Pz-38t don't count) which would be your favorite and why?

Panzer III. Maximum a e s t h e t i c and plenty of company, what with a crew of 5.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Alright than ford. Let's play this. This question is for everyone:

If you had to pick one WW2 German vehicle designed and operated by Germany (so stuff like the Pz-38t don't count) which would be your favorite and why?

Wespe und Hummel.

God of artillery and anti-tank.

[Iltica]

Panzer IV/70 (V)

Because you get the Panther's gun and a good amount of its armor in a sleek package that's barely taller than you and weighs almost 20 tonnes less... and it looks cool.

[Purpelia]

The guy who runs Archive Awareness is obviously very smart but every article reads like 'every German AFV was an absolute piss-poor death trap and any Soviet AFV was literally a gift from God'. I too want to fight back against the massive Soviet hordes misconception but I try to take a balanced approach with all sources and all viewpoints.

I think thats just the impression you get because a lot of his articles are aimed directly at debunking inflated German kill counts. And that makes Soviet AFV look like a gift from God compared to what you are used to them being described as. But it's merely a perspective thing. He newer goes out of his way to wank out Soviet tanks.

[Federated Kingdom of Prussia]

For a while it was pretty normal to be what we'd call a wehraboo, grossly misrepresenting how good German vehicles were and how bad allied vehicles were. Now, it seems to be shifting in the opposite direction which is just as annoying. Maybe in some more time there will be a balanced view. For example, things like the Sherman, T-34, and Pz. IV were roughly all on par with each other - the Sherman was probably the best with all factors combined but they were all able to reliably kill each other at range. And the while the reliability differences could very much impact the ability to have massed armored offensives over great distance, I don't think high-level commanders generally concerned themselves with things like whether the Sherman had the 75 or 76mm, or how effective and efficient a panzer's side skirts are.