Quote: |
if u had any experience with industry u'd know that to steal and copy is possible
(i say again possible) only with v simple things.APCR isn't simple thing. So if u want to copy that u'll need to adjust everything according to your production possibilities and experience with it. And that means develop yer own thing. |
Quote: |
Also no war with Russia was a big factor too. |
Quote: |
yes of coz lol. |
Quote: |
Then follow the natural progression for the ammo to be introduced
to the 5cm pak. |
Quote: |
what year? 1940? |
Quote: |
and i will give u another tip.
Production of 3,7cm-Pzgr40 in 1000 shells: 1940 - 286,6 1941 - 885,2. |
Quote: |
so how does it correspond with: Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. (c)Anzac_Lor4war? |
Quote: |
good, u start to learn how to have civilized argues.
Tho u still substitute lack of knowledges by speculations and insults. |
Quote: |
Now let me tell u the facts:
during 18 monthes of Soviet-German trade agreement, Germany received 500 tons of tungsten. Does it tell u anything? |
Quote: |
Russia being Germanys primary Tungsten supplier |
Quote: |
at least put "imho" in such lame statements. |
Quote: |
I don't even tell u why did the soviets supply tungsten to germans. Maby u can try to make a guess? |
Quote: |
well, u know enough is v subjective word. f.e. for u 1000$ is enuf and for me 10000$ is not enuf or vice versa.
objective thing is that they supplied to germans 1100tons per month in 1944. Now try to compare with the Soviet supplies in 39-40 and mining capabilities of tungsten of USSR or USA (or just world mining capabilites). |
Quote: |
well yes, take Pupchen into account... |
Quote: |
same for Pupchen.... reason - tungsten shortage?
Pupchen and sPzB.41 r like twin borthers in terms of employment. |
Quote: |
what do u mean by that then: i guess the 41 gives away when they were made,(c)Anzac_Lord4war ? |
Quote: |
huh ho, so SdKfz 221 with sPzB.41 appeared in 1940?Thats another historical breakthough! |
Quote: |
Anyway, to fill the gaps in yer knowledges i will tell u that operation of mounting/dismounting
of the sPzB on SdKfz 221 or SdKfz 250 or SdKfz 251 could be pretty fast made by field repair units. |
Quote: |
maybe would better for u to start to study subject? |
Quote: |
Tips for u:
1)Try to get information in what role was sPzB41 used in SS-PzD after reorganization in 1943 i.e. which units inside the division had them. 2)If u speak about 21.Pz, just get some good book about it, start with J-P Peregault's. |
Quote: |
it was irony on yer statement |
Quote: |
sure, and maybe Napoleon was great and Charles XII and many other.... |
Quote: |
ohh, those genious generals could do everything...if not stupid Hitler/general Frost/T-34/human waves/etc lol |
Quote: |
of coz i will enlight u - ask more.
Thing with MG.34, FlaK.37, leIG.18, KwK.36 etc is that they were not made the year that their index says. That was told just to point that: i guess the 41 gives away when they were made(c)Anzac_Lord4war - often is not correct. |
Quote: |
Tip:
Pak.41 even with AP shot with steel insert could penetrate more than Pak.40 with APCBC. |
Quote: |
Thing with PaK.42 is same as with Pak.41. Try to guess what is it. |
Quote: |
well, again, why do u try to insult if u want good debate? |
Quote: |
PaK42 was v effective ATG as well but somehowe production was ceased. Reason - tungsten shortage? |
Quote: |
ever tried to make logical conclusions from what u read/hear?
well i will try to give some tips: 1)Who had the most armored AVF in 1940 according to germans? 2)When and why did the germans decide to make the tank that will be named PzVI in 1942? |
Quote: |
yes that would be extremely difficult to copy something when u have an example of it.lol such development. |
Quote: |
another 2 questions u dont know,u say ur a ww2 historian,but dont know what the /1 means on a KwK39. |
Quote: |
and that proves that the tungsten ammo kept the 3.7cm atg on the front line a year onger. |
Quote: |
as well as eating into there ever dropping tungsten stocks,which started to fall from 1941. |
Quote: |
thats right u quoted pak 3.7 figures(which they only started to use Tungsten ammo in 1940)
hoping they would represent overall picture. |
Quote: |
have u any idea how many 20mm ammo was in use,or even how many 20mm guns there was at time,let me tell you! |
Quote: |
they dwarf the pak 3.7 figures. |
Quote: |
well obnoxious, im not asking you for a thank you or anything
i dont mind telling u which tanks had which guns if my knowledge is greater than your knowledges.lol |
Quote: |
u just recently learnt about the kwk39/1 for the Puma |
Quote: |
its free info for you to copy,steal,develop,invent |
Quote: |
just to show no hard feelings i give u 1 tip for TRSM v94 PzIVG does not use the same gun as PzIVH! |
Quote: |
thanks for verifying it after insisting i put imho in such lame statements,such manners.is
that a fact or facts? |
Quote: |
its really not necessary,as i did not ask you,i told you about it. |
Quote: |
once again i asked u to provide evidence of it(in the form of some type of documentation).not to type some figures in forum,in an attempt to obfuscate the matter,i really would like to see the documentation,coz if u can find that it will probly say which industries it was delivered too and for what! |
Quote: |
p.s $1000 is way too much for me(feel better now?),id think i was rich.but i guess them dollar amounts r just like ur mining figures.lol |
Quote: |
why? u comparing it to a 2.8cm sPzB 41 which was designed a few years earlier and also for a total different ammo used. |
Quote: |
usually twins r born within an hour of each other.not half a war apart. |
Quote: |
the same date of standardization—1941 this is german naming not mine.i.e:like Hitler renaming MP43 to Stg44. |
Quote: |
how come you dont know this? |
Quote: |
ahhh silly i said sPzB 41 got rolled out in 1940 |
Quote: |
Geez u mean the sPzB 41 was easily mountable,such extrodinary knowledge,who would of ever thought that from a 120kg 2manned gun,that troops carried up mountains? |
Quote: |
did they do it to the Pak42 too?lol dont stop ur running hot. |
Quote: |
ur knowledges know no knowledge,lol |
Quote: |
i always am and will continue to do so regardless of ur advice,its enjoyable for me. |
Quote: |
just becoz u think u know all and have stopped. |
Quote: |
thanks im sure they are great books,but im mainly concerned with mid 1944.and am aware of how fast things change in a war, and of the need to be constantly adaptable to the situation around you. And in 1944, A major problem resulted from a lack of clarity in the panzer command structure. The newly formed 47th Panzer Corps was still in process of taking over command of 21st, 116th and 2nd Panzer Divisions, whilst administrative and supply matters remained under Panzer Group West, with both responsible to Rommel's Army Group B. To complicate matters further, Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt, Commander in Chief West, was powerless to commit the strategic reserve without the authority of OKW, meaning in effect Hitler. |
Quote: |
and i will keep telling u that tungsten and not irony is the subject. |
Quote: |
ok the generals didnt want to retreat when they knew they had to do so for survival. |
Quote: |
Hitler ordered them to retreat,and the german generals said no we will stay here without supply and fight to the last man and do it for the fatherland. |
Quote: |
is that easier for you to believe?I thought so! |
Quote: |
funny part is i didnt say it,u did.lol MG34 is in ur head. |
Quote: |
but at least u now know that it is the case with these 3 weaponswhich i was talking about,,which primary use was anti tank gun. |
Quote: |
k98 hmmmm,they got a bit ahead of themselves there.lmao according to your logic. |
Quote: |
what does that have to do with the price of fish/tungsten? |
Quote: |
i already know,and offered you the debate.(see image below) |
Quote: |
it was an honest question to you,there was 2 answers for you to pick from,which u could not pick one (kinda lame). |
Quote: |
are you too scared to say its ur opinion?like u might get trapped?or is it a dickhead throwaway statement? |
Quote: |
and here is pak42 production figures and why i offered u them 2 choices of answers. most people wouldnt hesitate to back themselves and say that was their opinion/or IMHO,but u have! lol |
Quote: |
anything to obfuscate the subject at hand,hey dima. |
Quote: |
First of all it would be as the example u have was made on different machines by different ppl using different tools.
Second im not familiar with the history that germans copied someone's APCR. At least no country had APCRs in production in 1940 |
Quote: |
1)I never pretended/told that iam historian.
2)I can't understand what u mean by dont know what the /1 means on a KwK39. I mean how did u come to that conclusion or how it corressponds with our topic? |
Quote: |
Anzac_Lord4war - often is not correct. |
Quote: |
Also no war with Russia was a big factor too.(c)Anzac_Lor4war - explain this statement plz. |
Quote: |
Then follow the natural progression for the ammo to be introduced(c)
so u know that 5cm PzGr.40 wasn't introduced in 1940 ?! Cool! |
Quote: |
Now how then yer statements corressponds with:Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. |
Quote: |
wow cool conclusion! |
Quote: |
i didn't get it...
how the higher production of 3.7cm PzGr.40 shells in 1941 supports the statement: Germans were at the peak of using APCRs during 1940 invasion of France. |
Quote: |
seems u have problems with logics...
I showed u rite direction by tips, but u just can't get it. Second try: When did 3.7cm PzGr.40 were put in production i.e. month? |
Quote: |
have an idea of how many 2cm PzGr.40 were in production in 1940 - will be close to....ZERO.
|
Quote: |
u told me why USSR supplied tungsten to Germany? when? |
Quote: |
anyway, u know what is logical? |
Quote: |
1)i give u numbers as there were not any given by u.
2)u try to counter them with sources and it is u who's not agree with them. 3)i show u my sources. |
Quote: |
it's yer own problems - can't help u with them |
Quote: |
becoz Pupchen production was ceased for same reason as 2.8cm sPzB.41.
now i c it - u do have problems with logic. employment was the key word . |
Quote: |
I believe anyone can clearly c that u told SdKfz 221 in 1940. |
Quote: |
actually it has crew of 3. |
Quote: |
it does say only that Pak41 with PzGr.40(W) could penetrate more than Pak40 with APCBC at same distances vs soviet tanx |
Quote: |
Was tungsten used in manufacturing of Pak41, sPzB41 or lePak41? |
Quote: |
If Pak.41 with PzGr.41(W) had better penetration stats that Pak.40 with APCBC -
why should we remove it from production? |
Quote: |
So yer statement:keep in mind they also ceased being made that year,
for u guessed it no other reason than tungsten shortages.- is at least very doubtful. |
Quote: |
3)Regarding the issue of PzGr.40...
3.7cm PzGr,40 were issued in 1940 (late summer - fall) for first time. 3)before that it was majority 2cm kwk and flaks who had the stocks of it. (c)Lord4war - totally wrong statement as 2-cm PzGr.40 shells were put in production in 1941. 2cm PzGr.40 were issued in 1941. 5cm PzGr.40 were issued in 1941. 7.5cm PzGr.40 were issued in 1942. 8.8cm PzGr.40 were issued in 1943. |
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT