|
Re on the tank transmissions: the reason pointed that tanks grew bigger than anticipated (pzIV started as 16 ton medium at 1936 and was 28 tons by 1944) is just a part of the equation. The other part is HOW big they grew. A 55-ton tank with 560 hp engine (Tiger I) was a gigantic problem engineering-wise- you cant just upscale a pz4 and hope it works. This led to solutions that were complex and there just because it was the only possible option for the tech of the day- like tigers’ track work that consisted of THREE intertwining rows of road wheels per track. It ”worked” but hasnt been used since because as a solution its retarded. Germans and soviets got the short end of the stick here because the constant land war in eastern front meant for them all stops were off. Also Soviet transmissions were hardly better than germans. KV series were plagued by poor transmission their entire life with drivers using a hammer to change gears. a tank from end of thirties weighing at 45 tons this was very much foreseeable. T-34s had transmission problems all the way into T35-85’s at Late 1943. You have to realize that western allies moved slowly from 15-tonners of 1930s to twenty-tonners at 1940-1942 and capped at 25-35 ton medium tanks at 1944 onwards. (Pershing nonwithstanding) Eastern front? Soviets put KV1 (45 tons) to table at the end of winter war, 1940 february. T-34 (30+ tons) 1941. IS2, ISU 152, 44+ tons, 1944. And for germans it was even more retarded jump from pzIV F2, at 24 tons, to PZ VI (Tiger) at 55 tons. And then they upped to the retardation with PZVII (kingtigger) at 68 tons- which I may add is heavier than all other CURRENT MBTs in service aside from Merkava IV and Abrams. You can claim ”teutonic engineering” and KRUPPSTEEL all day long but the reality is they just took on a challenge that the engineering of the day was hardly ready for. (Not trying to wehraboo just noting the massive difference on scale between german / Soviet heavy programs and western allies) And when asked about tanks vs heavy industrial equipment you have to remember that excavators dont speed across uneven terrain 20-30 kilometers an hour. The strain a tank puts on the engine, track and transmission is totally different profilewise than a slow-moving industrial workhorse. Industrial heavy duty needs torque to push stuff/pull stuff, But doesnt have to go fast. Tank needs torque AND to go fast, often at the same time.
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 08:46 |
|
|
Rockopolis posted:those poor Congolese can't even point. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:24
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Also on how big of a difference soviets had on their tank design philosophy on 1930s is found on Guderians memoirs. Guderian was one of the people responsible for tank design when Germany was rearming on 1930s. The Soviet-German pact gave germans a training ground on Kazan, USSR, to train tank crews and design Tanks in secret. in exchange soviets had full access to review all german tank designs. Guderian notes on his diary of this time that soviets were on multiple occasions trying to accuse him of hiding german heavy tank plans when he (truthfully) showed them the then-prototype PZ4 that weighted around 16 tons, claiming it as the german heavy infantry support tank. Soviet military attaches would not take his word and claimed he was lying. Why? Because the soviet heavy tanks on testing at the time were 30-40 tons or bigger (T28 which weighed, you guessed it, 28 tons, had been put to Soviet service in 1933)
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:The other thing to remember is that the costs were not always born by those who reaped the profits. I'm not even talking about how hosed the colonized peoples got in all this. If you add up the administrative and military expenses for a lot of colonies they exceed the profits from extraction, but those costs go to the state (and ultimately the tax payer) while the profits frequently went into the pockets of rich investors. Rich investors who, frequently, sat in parliament because that's what rich people do with their pare time, so they could pressure the government to keep supporting the colonial ventures oh so vital to Yeah and I suspect the act of taking many colony had a lot of rewards and glory for the officers and politicians responsible, even if owning them wasn't particularly useful. The cheapest, most neglected colonly was probably The territory of New Guinea under British/Australian administration. In 1920 the area former comprising German New Guinea had only 97 Europeans in the entire territory, mostly private missionaries, administering an area of roughly 231,420 km2. Back to the Belgian Congo, I was recently reading about decolonization there after watching a movie related to the subject and drat, the Belgians really couldn't stop loving up their colony. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congo_Crisis wikipedia posted:Lieutenant-General Émile Janssens, the Belgian commander of the Force Publique, refused to see Congolese independence as marking a change in the nature of command.[37] The day after the independence festivities, he gathered the black non-commissioned officers of his Léopoldville garrison and told them that things under his command would stay the same, summarising the point by writing "Before Independence = After Independence" on a blackboard. This message was hugely unpopular among the rank and file—many of the men had expected rapid promotions and increases in pay to accompany independence.[37] On 5 July 1960, several units mutinied against their white officers at Camp Hardy near Thysville. The insurrection spread to Léopoldville the next day and later to garrisons across the country.[38] This then spiraled into a bloody civil war that killed tens of thousands.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:there totally are people who try to, for instance, ascribe all deaths to illness to capitalism I have to keep you honest here: That statement is factually correct. The divide between capital owners and wage takers have grown to the point where more or less any economic system would kill less people through preventable diseases, malnutrition and pollution than capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
13th KRRC War Diary, 16-19th October 1918 posted:Training and preparation for future operations. 13th KRRC War Diary, 20th October 1918 posted:Divine Service was held during the morning.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 00:09
|
|
|
Tias posted:I have to keep you honest here: That statement is factually correct. The divide between capital owners and wage takers have grown to the point where more or less any economic system would kill less people through preventable diseases, malnutrition and pollution than capitalism. Bring back the palace economy imo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
Tias posted:I have to keep you honest here: That statement is factually correct. The divide between capital owners and wage takers have grown to the point where more or less any economic system would kill less people through preventable diseases, malnutrition and pollution than capitalism. No it isn't, because that assertion you just made is fairly fundamentally unprovable and would require any other economic system having produced equivalent wealth and output to actually be comparable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:who the gently caress was the first person to realize that eating a small amount of semtex would get you high You study soldiers! I would have thought you'd assume someone would try just because it existed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
are we just tacitly agreeing to ignore the great leap forward
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
Nice new video by Matt Easton about everyone's favorite, zweihanders. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpYe75Gkr0k
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
Tias posted:I have to keep you honest here: That statement is factually correct. The divide between capital owners and wage takers have grown to the point where more or less any economic system would kill less people through preventable diseases, malnutrition and pollution than capitalism. Gonna keep it real with you here, communists were absolutely nasty with the pollution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 01:13
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Gonna keep it real with you here, communists were absolutely nasty with the pollution. I feel like any rapidly industrailizing society is going to be super lovely on a number of metrics.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:The other thing to remember is that the costs were not always born by those who reaped the profits. I'm not even talking about how hosed the colonized peoples got in all this. If you add up the administrative and military expenses for a lot of colonies they exceed the profits from extraction, but those costs go to the state (and ultimately the tax payer) while the profits frequently went into the pockets of rich investors. Rich investors who, frequently, sat in parliament because that's what rich people do with their pare time, so they could pressure the government to keep supporting the colonial ventures oh so vital to
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 01:55
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:The second Marine issued one after the first one discovered he couldn't gently caress it. Are you sure? Because that's not what I heard.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 01:58
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:The second Marine issued one after the first one discovered he couldn't gently caress it. You act like it wasnt the same marine doing both.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:50
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Gonna keep it real with you here, communists were absolutely nasty with the pollution. 19th and early 20th century Britain was renowned for its cleanliness
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
Bit off topic from the discussion but last page's "Big Titty Waifu Himmler" would be a great username. Do we really not know much about hand to hand tactics from like the 1500s and earlier? Weapon manuals seem to talk about some styles, but with debate on how phalanxes would fight I'm assuming we don't really know how most clashes happened on a lines-coming-together scale other than "they probably stabbed a lot"?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
Valtonen posted:Also on how big of a difference soviets had on their tank design philosophy on 1930s is found on Guderians memoirs. Guderian was one of the people responsible for tank design when Germany was rearming on 1930s. The Soviet-German pact gave germans a training ground on Kazan, USSR, to train tank crews and design Tanks in secret. in exchange soviets had full access to review all german tank designs. And the T-26 weighed 26 tons, right?  The T-28 weighed 21.5 tons when it was accepted into service in 1933. By comparison, the heaviest German tank the Soviets would have been aware of at that point was the Grosstraktor, coming in at 19 tons, hardly a huge leap away from the Soviet medium tank.You're conflating this story with what the Soviets purchased several samples of German equipment in 1940, including a PzIII Ausf. G tank. This was among the last variants of the PzIII to have a 37 mm gun and still had 30 mm of armour, which compared to what the Soviets had at the time (the T-34 and KV) was definitely lacking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 06:21
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:I would just like to point out that there are excellent reasons to be worried about Battlefield 5's Germans, namely that Battlefield 1 had a campaign which I will never get bored of reminding people was outright Fascist propaganda from just about the first word Did the Blackshirts have anything to say about Mussolini promoting Luigi Cadorna to field marshal years later?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 06:30
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:And the T-26 weighed 26 tons, right? Nah, T26 was a Soviet copy of a vickers 6-ton, but just highlights how fast the size increase was- when soviets lost their fleet of t-26s and T28s at operation barbarossa their replacement was a T-34. (They continued producing light tanks as t-60/70 but on much smaller numbers compared to mediums than pre-war). On the other side after british lost their tank fleet after dunkirk their cruiser program would sit at around 17-23 tons until 1944 and Cromwell. This is is also a doctrinal issue for them, since british designs were constrained by their rail-loading policies which limited the max width of a tank.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 07:53
|
|
|
Arbite posted:Did the Blackshirts have anything to say about Mussolini promoting Luigi Cadorna to field marshal years later? Oh wow, now so much about the WWII-performance of Italy starts making so much more sense 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 08:22
|
|
|
Reiterpallasch posted:are we just tacitly agreeing to ignore the great leap forward
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 11:31
|
|
|
GotLag posted:19th and early 20th century Britain was renowned for its cleanliness why o why was environmentalism a central part of east german dissidence in the 1970s and 80s? we just don't know HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 11:40 on Oct 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 11:34
|
|
|
This thread needs to take a break. Most of you are extremely stupid, and almost all of these arguments are being made in bad faith which I don't have time for. Those of you that tried to bring it back to the extremely thoroughly tread (lol) subject of tanks get a gold star.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 12:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 08:46 |
|
|
New thread, please post better tia: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3872282
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:31
|
|
