7A_Woulf wrote: | ||
Argh!! Now I'm seeing red again! This "plan" was a invention by 'Monty' to justify his shortcomings during his command of the Normandy theatre, just as Operation Market Garden was a "90% success" as he said in the aftermath of that fiasco... If you look into the plans of Operation Overlord, Caen was an objective on D-Day itself and the British paras was to form the left flank of the invasion. There were never a 'plan' to tie down the German forces, it just happened to be so as the bulk of the German forces came from east and arrived at the Commonwealth sector first. : And yes, as you can guess: -I can't stand that prima donna 'Monty'! He did a good job in North Africa, but from Sicily onwards he lost it in the competition with the Americans! |
Quote: |
YES 60+ YEARS OF SCIENTIFIC ADVANCEMENT. ACTUALLY MBT ARE EXPENSIVE AND VUNERABLE TO AIR POWER/URBAN FIGHTING. |
Quote: |
YES IT IS. MIDWAR TANKS ADOPTED SOME BASIC TECHNOLOGY. AMMO WAS GENERALLY UNPROTECTED UNTIL THE 1950/60 ERA. |
Quote: |
LOOK AT KURSK AND THE BULGE. ALLIED AIRPOWER WREAKED HAVOC ON BLITZKRIEG |
Quote: |
AT KURSK HUNDREDS OF GERMAN TANKS KNOCKED OUT BY STORMBIRDS FIGHTER BOMBERS. |
Quote: |
NAZI DOCTRINE RELIED ON SUPERIOR TRAINING AND LOCAL SUPERIORITY + EXECELLENT COMMUNICATIONS. THEY SLOWLY LOST ALL OF THESE AND THEN THERE INIATIVE |
Quote: |
T34 FIGHTING UNTIL 1990S. MORE IMPORTANTLY UPGUNNED AND CHASIS USED FOR OTHER AFVS. A ROLLS ROYCE OF TRACTOR TECHNOLOGY |
Quote: |
RUBBISH !. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN. |
Quote: |
TIGER WAS DESIGNED FOR 88MM GUN AND OTHER TECHNILOGCAL IMPROVMENTS. |
Quote: |
REALLY A SUPER HEAVY TANK. THIS PHASED OUT BY THE 50S FOR THE MBT. A MEDIUM HEAVY TANK !. |
Quote: |
THEY HAD NUMBERS AND SOME OF THE BEST ARMOURED/GUNNED TANKS. SIMPLE |
Quote: |
OK THIS IS A BROAD SUBJECT. GERMANS TOOK MASSIVE KIA. STRIPPING GERMANY OF DEFENCES AND FIGHTING ON THREE FRONTS. MASSIVE PROBLEMS WITH EUIPMENT COMMONALITY AND SUPPLY. ETC ETC |
Quote: |
ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ? |
Quote: |
OK THIS IS THE LAST REPLY. WERE TAKING A VERY BROAD VIEW HERE. AND AS THIS IS NOT A HISTORICAL LESSON BUT THE CC FORUMS. I AM NOT SPENDING TIME BY CROSS REFERENCING ON INTERNET MY FACTS. |
Quote: |
HEAT ABSORBENT ARMOUR, REACTIVE ARMOUR, SPACED ARMOUR, CHOBHAM ARMOUR, HIGH GRADE ARMOUR, WELDED CONSTRUCTION ( ALSO WW2 ) INTELLIGENT' ARMOUR ( FUTURE ). SLOPED/SHAPED ARMOUR. BOLT ON ARMOUR FOR VARIOUS DUTIES ( ALSO FOR AFV ) |
Quote: |
AGAIN THAT IS INCORRECT. AMMO STOWED IN RACKS AND READY TO USE. CHARGES/PROPELLANTS VERY COMBUSTIABLE. |
Quote: |
WHAT DO YOU MEAN >MOST COMMON AT SOURCES<. |
Quote: |
WW2 ERA TANKS RANGED FROM TANKETTES TRU TO 6 TURRET ODDITIES. AT GUNS STARTED FROM 20MM TRU TO 75MM AS A RULE OF THUMB |
Quote: |
BY END OF WAR THE BAZOOKA/PANZERFAUST AND HIGH VELOCITY AT GUNS 88MM - 122MM RULED THE GAME. |
Quote: |
NO TANK IMPERVIOUS TO BOMB OR EXPLOSIVE. SEE IRAQ IN PRESENT DAY. |
Quote: |
REALLY ???/. KURSK WAS OVERCONFIDENT AND INCOMPETENT NAZI LEADERSHIP IGNORING STRATEIGIC REALITY AND RELYING ON 'FIREPOWER' AND MANOUVERE. THEY LEARNED THERE LESSON THERE. BULDGE WAS USING SUPRISE/AIR SUPREMACY ( ALLIES GROUNDED IN BAD WEATHER ). ON A RELATIVE NEARROW FRONT TO GAIN STRATEIGIC OBJECTIVES. WHICH WERE TO SEIZE ANTWERP AND SPLIT OR TURN ALLIED FORCES. BLITZKRIEG WAS NOT KJUST TANKS, BUT COMBINED ARMS AND 'ONCE AGAIN' SUPERIOR TROOP INTELLIGENCE. A BIG SUBJECT BUT LETS NOT LOSE SIGHT OF THE REALITY HERE. |
Quote: |
AT KURSK HUNDREDS OF GERMAN TANKS KNOCKED OUT BY STORMBIRDS FIGHTER BOMBERS.
sorry mate, u r completely wrong here . OMG ****. YES THEY DID.2 PANZER DIVISIONS NEVER ENTERED THE FIGHT FULLY. |
Quote: |
WHAT ABOUT NORMADY. SS PANZER DIVISION NEVER MADE THE JOURNEY TO BEACHEAD AS DESTROYED EFFECTIVELY EN ROUTE. |
Quote: |
RUSSIAN II2 BUILT AS 'FLYING TANK'. ACTUALLY RUSSIN AIRPOWER BECAME VERY EFFECTIVE ON EASTERN FRONT. VERY UNDERATED. BUT THEY ALSO SUFFERED FROM POOR DOCTRINE AND LEADERSHIP IN EARLY WAR. AND LACK OF A MODERN OR STRATEIGIC AIR ARM |
Quote: |
SURE. THEY HELD THE GROUND WHICH HAD TOO BE FOUGHT FROM THEM. MOST NAZI OFFENCES AFTER 1944 SUMMER FAILED. ON ALL FRONTS. |
Quote: |
OMG !. IT WAS UPGRADES 3-4 TIMES. FROM ENTERING UNIT SERVICE I THINK IN 1940 |
Quote: |
AFTER ALL WHOS HEARD OF GRANTS/CHURCHILL/BT7 ON ANY ARMYS WISH LIST. AND ITS PHILOSOPHY OF SPEED/PROTECTION/GUN WAS ! DEVEOPLED FURTHER. |
Quote: |
KINDA NOTHING. WAS DESIGNED TO HAVE FIREPOWER AND ARMOUR AT LOCALITY |
Quote: |
IF DESIGNED TO FIGHT 'OVERWHELMING ODDS' THEY WOULD HAVE CREWED IT WITH KAMIKAZI TANKEES ALL ARMED WITH POCKET HOWITZERS. |
Quote: |
THEY FOUGHT OVERWHELMING ODDS BECAUSE THEY WERE FORCED TOO IN INCREASINGLY POINTLESS OPERATIONS. |
Quote: |
THE PANZER IV WAS EVENTUALLY TO HEAVY DUE TO ITS UPGRADES WITH SOME WEAKNESSES NEVER REMEDIED. |
Quote: |
MOBILITY. FIRST REAL HEAVY TANK THAT COULD SPEARHEAD ASSAULTS. |
Quote: |
RUSSINA KV1A-S TO UNDERGUNNED. |
Quote: |
ELECTRIC TURRET. |
Quote: |
STOWAGE BINS FOR SHELLS. |
Quote: |
POWERFUL ( MODULAR ) ENGINE. ETC. |
Quote: |
hAVE YOU NEVER HEARD OF THE T10/CONQUERER/MAUS = AMERICAN DESIGNS |
Quote: |
TOO IMMOBILE AND VUNERABLE. ALSO COSTLY TO PRODUCE. |
Quote: |
T34 NOT FIGHTING OPERATIONALLY UNTIL 1941 IN LOCAL COUNTER ATTACKS. UNTIL COUNTER ATTACK AT MOSCOW. |
Quote: |
RUSSI ARMOUR INADEQUATE IN FINNISH WINTER WAR. |
Quote: |
YOU STICK TO THE DONUTS AND YOU GOOGLE SEARCHES FRO WW2 TANKS. IM OUTA HERE. |
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT