T-34 not the best tank?
Select messages from
 # through # Forum FAQ
[/[Print]\]
Goto page Previous  1, 2  :| |:
Close Combat Series -> The Mess
#21: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:36 pm
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
FYI
America's output of AFV according to Wikipedia was around 122,000

god bless Wiki! Wink
Now try to find the total production of armored vehicles for the USA.
#22: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:48 pm
    —
You sited no sources. None at all. You just spout off bull crap. You are funny!!!! Really funny and boring...    Surprised

SITE SOURCES!!!!!!!! Please!  :)

No facts, Out produce America...  LOL  How, Where? Anything? Come on. Just this one fact.
Please!!!!
#23: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:57 pm
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
You sited no sources. None at all. You just spout off bull crap. You are funny!!!! Really funny and boring...    Surprised
SITE SOURCES!!!!!!!! Please!  Smile
No facts, Out produce America...  LOL  How, Where? Anything? Come on. Just this one fact.
Please!!!!

again, I made statements, you said they are bull crap, so it's up to you to disprove my statements - that's a simple logic Wink.
if you don't have sources to disprove my statement then you should fuck off or make an excuse for your shitty statement and ask for answers - that's a simple logic Wink
#24: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 6:26 pm
    —
Sources!!!  Site them!!!  Please!!!!
#25: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Pzt_Crackwise, Location: Switzerland PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:53 pm
    —
Yeah, I also would be very interested to see sources cited during arguments (overall) Smile

Apart from strengthening the discussing people's cases, it also makes it much more interesting to follow the discussion since other people can also learn some stuff from these sources.
#26: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:02 pm
    —
Pzt_Crackwise wrote (View Post):
Yeah, I also would be very interested to see sources cited during arguments (overall) Smile
Apart from strengthening the discussing people's cases, it also makes it much more interesting to follow the discussion since other people can also learn some stuff from these sources.

I can answer and explain but first the guy needs to excuse for his words or disprove my words.
#27: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: jakebullet70, Location: Washington State / Kherson Ukraine PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:20 pm
    —
CITE SOURCES!!! You never did.
At least I used Wikipedia, you used nothing. Nothing at all.

I am done. Thread closed for me. Waste of time.
#28: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:54 pm
    —
jakebullet70 wrote (View Post):
CITE SOURCES!!! You never did.
At least I used Wikipedia, you used nothing. Nothing at all.
I am done. Thread closed for me. Waste of time.

fuck off, bye.
#29: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: vobbnobb,  PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:37 pm
    —
I would say in WW2 soviet tanks on average were out armored but not out gunned. They had an easier time fighting German armor than the US & British did, mostly due to their high calibre main guns. They knew this. They most likely used poor visibility and the snow to hinder their advance of being seen when assaulting if you can't hit the armor in a snow storm or at night it wouldn't matter how many inches the tank had on it.
#30: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: dj,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 4:05 am
    —
No...T-34 really is the best all around tank in WW2 due to production rate, innovative sloped armour (Germans copied later) and good balance of speed/protection.  Yes later in war, the Tigers and Panthers were superior...however by the time they arrived it was already too late.  The Germans had been routed in Stalingrad and it was the T-34 that broke the backs of the Axis forces.
#31: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: russ109,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:18 pm
    —
The writing was on the wall for the Germans in the fall of 1941. The Army was over streched, poor logistics, not nearly enough fuel, ammunition, limited tanks, vehicles and never enough soldiers to replace the losses.

The Tiger and Panther good defensive tanks as they were, were over engineered, costly to produce and required a skilled work force to assemble, specially in the case of the Tiger, hence why only a limited number were built.

The T34 was designed to be mass produced by a semi / unskilled work force in large numbers. It couldn't have been that bad as one of the manufacturers who was competing for the Panther contract produced a prototype near identical to the Russian tank.
#32: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:35 pm
    —
Quote:
No...T-34 really is the best all around tank in WW2 due to production rate, innovative sloped armour (Germans copied later) and good balance of speed/protection.

T-34 sloped armor was based on S-35 armor shape.
due to lack of AP shells the main AT ammo for T-34 76mm gun was HE or cannister set on impact till like mid 1942 so they couldn't really fight the German tanks unless in ambush.

Quote:
Yes later in war, the Tigers and Panthers were superior...however by the time they arrived it was already too late.

again, PzIVG was already a pure T-34 killer.

Quote:
The Germans had been routed in Stalingrad and it was the T-34 that broke the backs of the Axis forces.

in Stalingrad around 50% of the RA tanks were T-60/70.
#33: Re: T-34 not the best tank? Author: Dima,  PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:45 pm
    —
Quote:
The writing was on the wall for the Germans in the fall of 1941. The Army was over streched, poor logistics, not nearly enough fuel, ammunition, limited tanks, vehicles and never enough soldiers to replace the losses.

ha! both Germans and Soviets  thought differently till like spring 1943 Wink.
example: half of the USSR population remained on the occupied territories by late 1942.

Quote:
The Tiger and Panther good defensive tanks as they were, were over engineered, costly to produce and required a skilled work force to assemble, specially in the case of the Tiger, hence why only a limited number were built.

Tiger wasn't a defence tank, Panther was.

Quote:
The T34 was designed to be mass produced by a semi / unskilled work force in large numbers. It couldn't have been that bad as one of the manufacturers who was competing for the Panther contract produced a prototype near identical to the Russian tank.

not correct, T-34 was a high tech for the Soviet industry and it was very hard to produce it.
but VK3001(db) was never accepted Wink. and somehow very few captured T-34 were pressed to service and before they were upgraded to suit the German demands...
Close Combat Series -> The Mess


output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Goto page Previous  1, 2  :| |:
Page 2 of 2