Comments on: Design your own Ultimate WW2 Tank that the Allies could’ve used? http://usedtrackloaders.com/blog/design-your-own-ultimate-ww2-tank-that-the-allies-couldve-used/ Great Info on Used Track Loaders Fri, 23 Apr 2010 04:32:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: ammianus http://usedtrackloaders.com/blog/design-your-own-ultimate-ww2-tank-that-the-allies-couldve-used/comment-page-1/#comment-89 ammianus Tue, 09 Feb 2010 13:14:48 +0000 #comment-89 A King Tiger with a bigger,better engine. The German Tiger II 'King Tiger' had a gun/armour combination that wouldn't be out of place on a battlefield today.However, it was seriously underpowered, so it would need bigger better engines. Rolls-Royce could possibly help here.Just keep everything else the same. A King Tiger with a bigger,better engine.
The German Tiger II ‘King Tiger’ had a gun/armour combination that wouldn’t be out of place on a battlefield today.However, it was seriously underpowered, so it would need bigger better engines. Rolls-Royce could possibly help here.Just keep everything else the same.

]]> By: steven_deadalus http://usedtrackloaders.com/blog/design-your-own-ultimate-ww2-tank-that-the-allies-couldve-used/comment-page-1/#comment-88 steven_deadalus Tue, 09 Feb 2010 13:09:24 +0000 #comment-88 That's a great tank you have there. It'd only cost, oh, about half a million (1942) dollars to build, and it would be invincible until it rolled over a fifty dollar mine. At which point your five man crew become badly trained light infantry. You've obviously studied the technical details extensively, but you've equally obviously neglected the practical aspects of mechanized warfare. I served in the AF, not a groundpounder, but the essence of it is similar - you have to be able to keep the machines flying/running for them to fight, and you have to be able to produce enough of them, at an affordable price, to get the job done. Cheers That’s a great tank you have there. It’d only cost, oh, about half a million (1942) dollars to build, and it would be invincible until it rolled over a fifty dollar mine. At which point your five man crew become badly trained light infantry. You’ve obviously studied the technical details extensively, but you’ve equally obviously neglected the practical aspects of mechanized warfare. I served in the AF, not a groundpounder, but the essence of it is similar – you have to be able to keep the machines flying/running for them to fight, and you have to be able to produce enough of them, at an affordable price, to get the job done.

Cheers

]]> By: icabod http://usedtrackloaders.com/blog/design-your-own-ultimate-ww2-tank-that-the-allies-couldve-used/comment-page-1/#comment-87 icabod Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:15:29 +0000 #comment-87 Tanks are a mix of armor, firepower and speed. You can emphasize one aspect but it comes at a cost. Some German tanks were simply to heavy to use on the roads and bridges. The American Sherman worked as it was a mix of the three and could be quickly produced. The T-34 also wasn't the greatest tank but could be quickly produced and maintained. What's better, a super tank tank with limited production and service life or a bunch of cheaply built tanks? Tanks are a mix of armor, firepower and speed. You can emphasize one aspect but it comes at a cost. Some German tanks were simply to heavy to use on the roads and bridges.

The American Sherman worked as it was a mix of the three and could be quickly produced. The T-34 also wasn’t the greatest tank but could be quickly produced and maintained.

What’s better, a super tank tank with limited production and service life or a bunch of cheaply built tanks?

]]> By: Big D http://usedtrackloaders.com/blog/design-your-own-ultimate-ww2-tank-that-the-allies-couldve-used/comment-page-1/#comment-86 Big D Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:04:11 +0000 #comment-86 That's all fine and dandy, but your tank sounds like a mechanics nightmare. Germans made some awesome tanks. However, they were also a mechanics worse machines. Whereas an American Tank was made to be rebuilt right there in the field. Russian did that too. That's why we won we could build twenty to their one. Production of the Tiger I began in August 1942, and 1,355 were built by August 1944 when production ceased. The M4 Sherman's basic chassis further undertook all the sundry roles of a modern, mechanized force, totaling roughly 50,000 Sherman tanks That’s all fine and dandy, but your tank sounds like a mechanics nightmare. Germans made some awesome tanks. However, they were also a mechanics worse machines. Whereas an American Tank was made to be rebuilt right there in the field. Russian did that too. That’s why we won we could build twenty to their one.
Production of the Tiger I began in August 1942, and 1,355 were built by August 1944 when production ceased.
The M4 Sherman’s basic chassis further undertook all the sundry roles of a modern, mechanized force, totaling roughly 50,000 Sherman tanks

]]>