The Armored Vehicle Thread

Something interesting to note is this program is from the Electric Gun Tech Program. Which also was working on rail gun tech.

Now to take this new gun and mount it on a Sherman.

You and your silly Shermans. Make a new design!

M48?

On the armor tech front Improved RHA armor.

edited 20th Dec '14 4:27:44 PM by TuefelHundenIV

^^ I was more thinking an M60. Drag em out of storage, modernize em, kit em up with the new shit and put em forward.

An audit of the UK’s existing vehicle fleet — Focusing on Armoured Vehicles.

And of course the only tank in our armed forces will naturally get mentioned.

I was surprised when I saw the difference between a Sherman and a Patton.

The Sherman was tiny as far as tanks go, but the Patton is as tall as my house.

Different times, different wars. The Sherman's relatively small silhouette was an advantage in the bocage. Interestingly, the Sherman is the same height as the Panther (which, if you ever get to see one, is huuuuuge) and a foot taller than the T-34. Something to bear in mind about all US tanks is that they will have to cross thousands of miles of ocean to get at any likely enemy, unlike Russia, which can simply move tanks by rail.

—

Sherman minutia website.

—

I'm working on a big Xmas effortpost present for y'all.

edited 26th Dec '14 11:39:01 AM by Achaemenid

In the spirit of the season have a Christmas-y drawn Type 95 Ha-Go.

Merry Christmas everyone - hope it's been good for y'all. Here's Achaemenid's present to the Armored Vehicle Thread.

—

Public Service Post – Armored Vehicle Resources

Operation Think Tank 2012

In 2012 Wargaming brought together six experts in all things tanks, to take questions from the public and enthusiasts on all things tank-related, at the late, lamented MVTF in Portola Valley CA:

• Steven Zaloga, an analyst with the Teal Group and expert on just about all things war. Author of an insane amount of books, his best three are Armored Thunderbolt, Armored Victory, and Armored Attack. He also serves on the board of the Journal of Slavic Military Studies, which is a high recommendation.
• Harry Yeide, a foreign-affairs analyst from DC. He is the author of Fighting Patton, Steel Victory, and The Tank Killers.
• Hilary Doyle. The surviving third of the "Spielberger-Jentz-Doyle cartel", and the definitive authority on German Armor. Author, joint or sole, of just about every German tank book worth having
• David Fletcher, of Bovington Tank Museum. His seminal works are a two-part history of British WWII armor: The Great Tank Scandal and Universal Tank.
• Rob Griffin, formerly of the British Army. He is the author of Conqueror and Chieftain.
• Kenneth Estes, formerly of the USMC, US Naval Institute, and various academic posts. He is the author of Marines Under Armor, M103 Heavy Tank, Into the Breach at Pusan, and USMC Tank Crewman 1941-45.

The discussion was chaired by Wargaming NA's in-house tanker, military specialist, and researcher, Nicholas "The Chieftain" Moran, a US Army tank crewman and researcher, It's split into 11 videos, which I'm gonna link here, with timestamps by topic.

Part 1

• 0:00-1:00 Titles
• 1:00 - 2:31 Introductions
• 2:31 - 4:27 "Why are tanks called 'tanks'" - Fletcher answers. Nobody knows for sure, he gives the funniest story.
• 4:27 - 7:40 The Development of the Tank: "Was the development of the tank inhibited by the lack of motive power - did we need WWI for the tank or could we have had steam-powered tanks?" Zaloga answers, discusses armored trains and cars, strengths and limitations of both - mobility restrictions etc. The Boirault device and then the agricultural tech of tractors being applied to the battlefield.
• 7:40 - 15:00 Tank Strategy: "How much input did Basil Liddel-Hart and Heinz Guderian have on the development of armored warfare?" Doyle and Fletcher dismiss both - Zaloga mentions lesser-known pioneers such as General Estienne, Tukhachevsky and the massive Russian tank programs in the interbellum and discusses how we came to elevate BLH and Guderian. Doyle discusses Guderian's boss, Lutz, who was purged, as well as the Weimar-Russian cooperation at Kazan. Harry Yeide mentions Patton's tanks in WWI and the doctrines he had to write and its effects. Zaloga mentions Eisenhower and Patton's neighbourhood at Fort Meade. Ken Estes talks about the effect of Versailles and Hans von Seekt's "fast troops" idea - an attempt to create a force that could defend Germany on two frontiers with only 100,000 regular soldiers.
• 15:00 - 18:13 US WWII Procurement: "Belton Cooper, Patton, and the Sherman"'. Moran invites the panel to refute the claim, put forward by Belton Cooper in his book Death Traps, that the reason US forces did not have the M26 Pershing for the invasion of Europe was because George S. Patton didn't like it. Yeide and Zaloga give a single-word assessment of this idea, with Zaloga going on to discuss how much influence field generals actually had with the Ordnance branch, ie not much, as well as Patton's awful ideas for tank upgrades.
• 18:13 - end. Steve Zaloga personal interview. Personal story. Tells an amusing story about how his local NG tank unit.

Part 2

• 0:13 – 3:11 French tanks; "How did excellent vehicles produce mediocre results?" Zaloga answers: explains many misconceptions surround French tank force. French were not trained on their new tanks and lack of operational experience. Also unreliable when introduced.
• 3:11 – 14:17 ''Tank Procurement – The differences that each country had for tank development; "Did requirements drive doctrine or the other way round?" Doyle answers for Germany, explains pre-1942 situation then corrosive influence of industrialists and politicians. Fletcher answers for Britain, explains downright comedic British procurement, and the way companies just changed the specs on the fly. Zaloga answers for USA, Rock Island, Ordnance, massive expansion. Harry Yeide comments on deal with govt and industrialists. Estes describes rather silly Marine plan and the requirement that all Marine tanks had to be landed from ships' boats and the influence of these ideas through to M103.
• 14:17 – 17:12 ''Export tanks; Vickers vs Marmon-Herrington. Zaloga explains the excellence of the Vickers and its multinational buyers and producers, Fletcher explains why the British, despite selling fantastic vehicles, did not buy them for themselve. Doyle explains the influence of the Vickers tankettes on the Panzer I.
• 17:12 – end: ''Hilary Doyle personal interview. Personal story, apparently got into tanks by playing wargames in school.

Part 3

• 0:13 - 1:28 The Big Cats: "Was there a doctrinal need for the Tiger or was it a political project?" Doyle answers - Tiger I arose from prewar requirement for a breakthrough tank. Fletcher boasts about Bovington's running one.
• 1:28 – 2:49 Wittman. Doyle mentions the dismissive Heer view of Wittman and the influence of Himmler on his career and the mediocrity of the Waffen-SS generally.
• 2:51 - 13:21 EEK!: "Tank panics and tank crises!" Fletcher describes the first appearance of tanks in 1916 to their "coming-of-age" in the 1918 battles that broke the German Army. Griffin discusses the 1945 IS-3 panic, which lead to the British developing Conqueror, and Estes describes the development of the M103 and the effect of the Korean War on US tank development. Zaloga describes the development and the problems with IS-3 and how its reputation was somewhat overestimated compared to the superior IS-4. Doyle describes the German panic of 1941 vs the T-34 and how the panic influenced subsequent German development.
• 13:21 - 17:46 Guns & Ammo: "Why did the US never build anything like Firefly?". Zaloga answers - US commanders did not identify the required "battle need" for a bigger gun upgrade program until summer 1944 because they did not realize that Panther was intended as a general issue tank rather than a corps-level specialist vehicle like Tiger. Almost as soon as the crisis appears, moreover, it goes away after the giant American advances in the Falaise Gap etc.
• 17:46 - 21:52 Tank Strategy: The US Tank Destroyer doctrine. Yeide discusses the origins of the much-maligned "tank destroyer doctrine" and how it grew out of the American response to the blitzkrieg phenomenon: "how do we stop a giant armored attack". Flawed because it was defensive and kept highly effective vehicles in reserve for far too long, and mentioned how the TDs became impromptu tanks and SPGs.
• 21:52 - end. Yeide stands on a Hellcat and chats a bit about its record.

Part 4

• 0:12 – 3:05 The Hellcat: "Did the whopping speed of the M18 TD make a difference in combat?" Yeide answers; not really, though it did let it keep up with the armored cavalry. Estes mentions ammunition supply issues. Zaloga mentions the complicated ammo train of+- the US Army.
• 3:05 – 8:18 Airborne!: Unusual ways of transporting tanks. Zaloga mentions Russian attempts at air-dropping tanks and the problems with that. Fletcher mentions the British glider tanks such as the Harry Hopkins and the Locust, as well as a rather nasty experiment of J. Walter Christie's.
• 8:18 – 12:26 Tank fires: "Is there any evidence that transmission oil was a fire hazard?" Doyle and Zaloga dismiss this. Zaloga points out that the absolute number one risk of tank fire is ammunition propellant. Moran asks about diesel vs petrol; Estes dismisses the idea that petrol was more flammable and why the USMC went for diesel. Fletcher explains why Germans used petrol and tells an anecdote.
• 12:26 – 14:31 Fletcher personal interview. Fletcher explains how he got his job at Bovington and his official qualifications (or lack thereof).
• 14:31 – 17:25 The Big Cats: "Why did the Panther not live up to its design promise?" Doyle explains poor crew quality and SS panzerdivisions taking kit. Zaloga mentions influence of airpower on German fuel production and the way this stopped training.
• 17:25 – 19:20 The Strategic Bombing Campaign – "Did the bombing stop tank production?" Doyle and Zaloga answer: No. However, it did hammer German logistics. Doyle mentions that it did put the Maus out of production by bombing out Krupp in Essen.
• 19:20 – end. The Big Cats – Panther. Yeide discusses why tank on tank comparisons are rare and gives an excellent analysis of the tank campaign in the West.

Part 5

• 0:12 – 3:28 Winter: How do you stay warm in a tank? Rob Griffin discusses the heaters in Centurion and Challenger, and the MoD "absolutely stunning idea" of heating Chieftain crews: a heated onesies.
• 3:28 – 4:26 Intermezzo. Griffin and another Brit climb on a Chieftain and reminisce about their tanking days and the various field improvisations required to make British military gear "work".
• 4:26 – 10:24 Winter cont'd. Griffin, Zaloga, discuss Russia 1941. Zaloga spares a thought for the infantry who have it worse. Yeide mentions the way US engine design turned tanks into refrigerators in the cold. The panel discuss tanker uniforms.
• 10:24 – end Yeide personal interview. Got into WWII history because his wife tracks down looted Nazi art!

Part 6

• 0:11 – 1:31 Tank Weapons: "What was the thinking behind the externally mounted .50 cals at the back of US tank turrets?" Yeide answers – for AA defense of tanks, designed by people with no idea of how to defend tanks from aircraft. Doyle describes Ferdinand Porsche's interesting plan for defending the Maus from aircraft.
• 1:30 – 8:20 Night Fighting in WWII. Doyle describes the German nightfighting kit, Estes describes the US methods, and Griffin talks about how the British didn't get a real night-fighting capability until Challenger I. Fletcher, Zaloga, and Yeide discuss the Canal Defence Light program.
• 8:20 – end. Tank Weapons – Close support howitzers. Fletcher discusses the archaic British loadouts of mainly smoke shells. Yeide and Zaloga discuss the development and use of the American M8 tanks. Doyle discusses the use of the Pz IV, the StuG units, and the fitting of the short 75mm L/24 to halftracks, then the horrible impracticality of the Sturmtiger.

Part 7

• 0:11 - 13:50 Tank Names: "Who came up with names for tanks in WWII?" Fletcher, Zaloga, and Yeide answer, mentions Churchill's decision to name tanks after Civil War generals and the letter "C". Griffin tells a story about how Challenger was renamed.
• 13:50 – 15:58 Intermezzo. Griffin and Estes talk about the Conqueror.
• 15:58 – 19:09 The Rotatrailer. Fletcher explains possibly the worst tank accessory ever.
• 19:09 – end The Valiant. Fletcher explains possibly the worst tank design ever.

Part 8

• 0:11 – 9:08 Spaced Armor – how effective? Doyle answers, explains origins of the 5.5mm plates on German tanks – protection from Soviet AT rifles. The panel generally discuss improvised armor and it's effects, both psychological and practical.
• 9:08 – 12:03 HEAT – it's origins and development. Zaloga explains WWII HEAT rounds and their limitations. Estes discusses the invention of HEAT in Switzerland and Germany.
• 12:03 – 16:38 Kenneth Estes personal interview. Back in his day the USMC armor officer's course got by with just three training tanks which the cadets had to maintain themselves.
• 16:38 – 19:28 How do you change a track in the field? Griffin and Moran give personal groaning recollections. Yeide tells some stories from his WWII research.
• 19:28 – end. German gun stabilizers. Doyle describes the German latewar projects, such as autoloaders, stabilizers, and other such silliness. Griffin mentions the Centurion's stabilizer and Conqueror. Estes discusses the various "ahead of their time" projects of the Americans.

Part 09

• 0:11 – 2:46 WWII Artillery – "How effective was indirect artillery fire in defeating tanks?" Yeide for the Americans: very''. Discusses Africa, Italy, and Germany.
• 2:46 – 5:09 HE – any use against other tanks? Yeide – US tankers generally kept an HE round in the tube at all times, and used it to rattle or range enemy tanks. One Tiger crew killed by concussion from thirty HE rounds, and in the Pacific HE was great fun. Doyle mentions halftracks with the drillingsflak, which had tremendous psychological effect.
• 5:09 – 10:40 Sloped Armor? Fletcher answers – sloped surface has long history in warfare. Is however an advantage to vertical armor sometimes. Zaloga notes advantages but also that Russians reduced their use of sloped armor except on the frontal glacis as the war went on. Doyle discusses the German rejection of the concept.
• 10:40 – 12:50 Oscillating Turrets – why the problem with them? Estes and Fletcher answer. Finicky, problems with oscillating turrets, and difficulty of gas and water sealing. Zaloga discusses the new concept of the externally mounted gun.
• 12:50 - end. Flame tanks? Zaloga answers for the Americans – armor force did not want them, but changed mind quickly and also the fear of Panzerfausts. Fletcher and Doyle discuss the concept generally, and Estes discusses the USMC, who loved them.

Part 10

• 0:11 – 4:50 Christie suspension: what's the big deal? Zaloga answers and explains the operation of it, as well as the Soviet plans to replace it with torsion bars on the T-34 in 1941. Doyle discusses the German use of torsion bars. Griffin discusses the weird and wonderful world of British suspensions: Horstmann and hydropneumatic, and how to change a torsion bar.
• 4:50 – 5:12 Intermezzo. More Conqueror chat with Griffin and Estes.
• 5:12 – 7:38 Construction – "How did man-hour construction times vary between tanks?" Zaloga contrasts T-34 and Pz IV. Doyle discusses Panther and Tiger being, effectively, hand-built.
• 7:38 – 8:21 Gun tests – "are there any sets of test data of all nations' guns made in the same place and under the same conditions thus allowing a direct comparison?" Panel answers "no".
• 8:21 – 10:38 APDS – why did the US adopt sabot rounds so long after the British? Estes replies that HVAP was already adequate in 1944, and the US was suspicious of the early sabot rounds' inaccuracy and ricocheting against sloped armor.
• 10:38 – 12:09 StuG E-100 Crocodile – "would it have worked?" Zaloga and Doyle reply "no, because it was invented by a modeller and Trumpeter made a kit for it.
• 12:09 - 14:12 "Who is most deserving of having a tank named after them but never got the honor?" Zaloga replies "James Gavin". Zaloga discusses orphaned names, such as the plan to call a Bradley variant the "Devers" and the M8 Buford.
• 14:12 – 15:20 Tank production – "how much of a tank is built in one location?" Doyle answers for Germany: very little.
• 15:20 – 16:38 Ergonomics? "Was any serious study done to incorporate ergonomics into tank design?" Zaloga answers: yes, gives example of small hatches being made bigger for Americans.
• 16:38 – 21:04 APCR – how common was it, who used it? Zaloga discusses shell layout, no definitive answer. Mentions the rarity of actual tank-to-tank combat. Yeide mentions canister in the Pacific.
• 21:04 – 21:35 Tank designs: "What else should be emphasized besides the holy trinity of mobility, firepower, and armor?"
• 21:35 – end. What was the first MBT? Zaloga suggests Panther, Estes tells a story about the switch in names.

Part 11

• 0:11 – 4:19 The Sherman – any good? Zaloga describes the the Sherman and why the US Army did not update the Sherman for the threats it might face in winter 1944. Doyle mentions another maligned tank, the Ferdinand.
• 4:19 – 6:27 Throwbacks to WWI? - TOG and ARL 44. Fletcher discusses TOG, Zaloga the ARL 44.
• 6:27 – 11:59 Most important thing in the tank engagement. Zaloga mentions the operation research, which suggests situational awareness. Moran concurs and offers his own commentary. Discussion of autoloaders and StuGs in this context follows
• 11:59 – 14:43 British machine guns – why all the weird calibres? Fletcher answers, mentions field usage of BESA etc + usual British weirdness/stupidity.
• 14:43 – 21:58 Were amphibious tanks any good? Yeide answers: important to distinguish between the purpose-built amphibian tanks and converted land tanks. Estes also offers some background commentary.
• 21:58 – First tank to have a boiling vessel? Griffin answers and gives the history: Centurion and Conqueror.

Part 12

• 0:11 – 3:58 Most significant innovation on Conqueror? Griffin describes the Mullins ejection gear and the separate cupola-turret.
• 3:58 – 8:40 Rob Griffin personal interview. Griffin tells us about his army days and his interest in tanks.
• 8:40 – 9:24 First tank with a turret? Zaloga answers: the Renault FT.
• 9:24 – 11:12 Which WWII tank deserves more publicity. The panel answers.
• 11:12 – 12:03 Who benefitted most from Lend-Lease? Fletcher answers.
• 12:03 – 14:35 Were heavy tanks a success? Zaloga discusses Russian heavies, ie the KV and IS tank families. Estes and Doyle comment.
• 14:35 – 19:08 Airpower – how effectives were fight-bombers and flakpanzers? Doyle answers. Zaloga discusses "virtual attrition", whilst Yeide mentions the effect on logistical trains.
• 19:08 – end. Thanks.

Inside the Chieftain's Hatch

The complete set of videos by Wargaming NA's in-house tanker. Generally speaking, the early part(s) deal with the exterior of the vehicle, whilst later part(s) deal with the interior, with a small conclusion at the end. Arranged in order of release. A link to the vehicle's wikipedia article is followed by links to the Hatches on YT.

• M26 Pershing - Part 1; Part 2.
• M37 Howitzer Motor Carriage - Part 1; Part 2.
• Heavy Tank M103 - Part 1; Part 2; Part 3. With Kenneth Estes, former M103 commander.
• A34 Comet - Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; Part 4.
• FV214 Conqueror - Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; Part 4.
• M24 Chaffee - Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; Part 4.
• Pz VIII Maus - Part 1 of 1. This is because the Kubinka Maus is an empty shell.
• Object 416 - Part 1 of 1.
• IS-4 - Part 1; Part 2
• Jagdpanzer 38(t) "Hetzer" - Part 1; Part 2.
• Object 704 - Part 1; Part 2
• Mk II Infantry Tank "Matilda" - Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; Part 4.
• BT-7 - Part 1; Part 2.
• 2S1 Gvozdika - Snapshot.
• M60A2 "Starship" - Snapshot.
• AMX 13 105 - Snapshot.
• ZSU-23-4 Shilka - Snapshot.
• M41 Walker Bulldog - Snapshot.
• Leopard 1 - Snapshot
• LP2 gun carrier - Snapshot.
• Stridsvagn m/42 - Snapshot.
• FV4201 Chieftain - Snapshot.
• T34-85 - Part 1; Part 2.
• ISU-152 - Part 1; Part 2.
• SU-100 - Part 1; Part 2.
• 12.8 cm Selbstfahrlafette auf VK30.01(H) "Sturer Emil" - Snapshot.
• Object 268 - Part 1; Part 2.
• IS-7 - Part 1; Part 2

Other Resources

• Stefan Czarniecki Armored Vehicle Museum virtual tour.
• Archive Awareness. Blogger who translates Soviet documents into English.
• Sherman minutia. A website about all things M4.
• The Chieftain's Hatch. Articles by Wargaming NA's researcher.
• Combined Arms Research Digital Library.
• WWII Free Archive.
• Surviving Panzers.
• Axis History.
• Commando Supremo: Italy at War. Be careful here; I'm not entirely convinced of their political bona fides, but they are about the only dedicated English-language online forum for Italy's WWII.
• Of IS-7s and Other Things. Blog on Russian tanks.
• For the Record. A blog that mainly deals with the World of Tanks video game, it is worth trawling from time to time for some weird and wonderful historical articles.
• ZxHistory. Infrequently updated, but quite good when it is.
• The Tanks and AFV Blog. Again, infrequently updated.
• Kfz. der Wehrmacht.
• Battlefield.ru. All about the Russian battlefield in history. Can be rather nationalistic, sometimes to the point of denialism, but an excellent technical resource.
• Beutepanzer.ru. Resource on captured Russian tanks used in the Axis armies.
• Tanks in WWII.
• The US Army in WWII. The US Army's official history of WWII, available to download in .pdf form for free.
• US Army Center of Military History Online Bookshelves. A stunning amount of free stuff.
• Field Manual 17-10. 1942 Field Manual for the US Armored Force.
• Field Manual 18-5. 1942 Field Manual for the US Tank Destroyer Force.
• Lone Sentry, a WWII blog focusing on the Americans.
• Engines of the Red Army in WWII, and its sister blog, Engines of the Wehrmacht. Both excellent resources.
• Operation Barbarossa.

—

Jesus lord almighty. That is a lot to dig into. I am tempted to ask for a copy paste into a document so we can drop that bad boy in the OP as suggested reading with credits to Achae for assembling it all.

I've watched the first two of the 11-part panel discussion. Interesting stuff.

I like how efficiently they demolish the notion I've seen too much of, that front-line generals had much to do with how tanks were specified or delivered. Fighting generals go to war with what they have. The decisions of what that will be were generally made years ago.

I would note that Lone Sentry is not solely focused on the Americans. In fact it has a very large selection of information on enemy kit sometimes with assessments made by the allies or the US specifically.

Oh my god, I think I love you. Now I have a choice between watching movies or that panel discussion, and it's the panel discussion that wins hands down. (Partly because I can read some of the other links while reading to the audio!)

So, uh, in lieu of a contribution like that one, have a GIF.◊ (Wargame Red Dragon if you're wondering.)

edited 26th Dec '14 8:23:38 PM by SabresEdge

Lots of T-34s and some newer Russian tanks on a Thunder Run, I take it? Looks gnarly, I think that's the word.

If I may correct you, that's actually Wargame: Airland Battle. The housing style is more Scandinavian than Asian.

So they're doing a thunder run in Finland?

Excuse me, Scandinavia is Sweden, Norway and Denmark.

But Russian tanks would have to go through Finland to reach there by land. And Finland is trying to be more Scandinavian than Russian. Are you really telling me Finland has already fallen to the Soviet Red Army?

edited 27th Dec '14 7:14:10 AM by MajorTom

But what about Norway?

What about it?

Arguably the best custom design I have made. Take note also that it's a "near future tech" MBT, not a "contemporary" one.

^ The MG on top needs more CROWS.