“Pride of the Fatherland..”

“Pride of the Fatherland..”

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=3azxIAWJdh0
mortarinvestments.eu/products/tanks-2/t-34-35
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

"Nein, Tank battle is not at all like boxing."

Some of the scariest killing machines in history.

What kind of gay shit is this. Looks like lego tanks.

"Think of what we could do with another 1000 Tigers"

FUCKING CRUTCH TANK L2P

youtube.com/watch?v=3azxIAWJdh0
I'm assuming this isnt a company of heroes thread

Зa Poдинy! Зa Cтaлинa!

who though having a vertical armor on the front was a good idea
it's pretty good looking though

>Pride of the fatherland
>Profile has right angles
PICK ONE

Except they weren't my dude. They're numbers are confirmed to have been small, and actually battles against them occurred only a handful of times. It's the myth of the machine that permeated allied armies, so an engagement at 500m-1k where the enemy wasn't easily seen but still wrecked allied armor would be chalked up to Tigers, even though most allied loses were due to high velocity lower-caliber round penetration, where the Tigers main gun didn't so much penetrate targets but just ripped them apart.

Outta my way Tiger fucking shits

Meme tank for wehraboos.
But this gun mantlet is pure sex.

A lot of wow german engineering so good! myths were created after the war, to salvage Germany and build it up as an ally against the USSR.
Since they couldn't praise the command, they praised the scientists and engineers. Never mind that jet planes and rockets were about as effective use of money and specialists as catapulting golden bars and personnel at the enemy hoping to kill them.

>gets P-47'd
>Hanz se transmission broke

WW2 was a mistake.

>german engineering is a meme
I wouldn't say that. I mean they inventent cars and their engines, the first computer and played the most important role at the first moonlanding and so on.
And they took over Europe for a period of time which means they can't be that bad.

"Only the finest in German engineering"

Tiger 1 is where Germany heavy armour should have stopped, maybe some sort of improvement on the original design. More reliable engine/drive train etc. That is what German tanks suffered from the most, at least their later designs like the Panther, Tiger 2 and the plethora of retarded TDs. Usually stemmed from an okay concept, but a bunch of retarded like Hitler would come in and yell "It needs 20mm of armour here and here, also a bigger gun" all whilst keeping the same engine and drivetrain that was meant to power something 10-20 tons lighter. Usually this went all while the initial production phase already began so they would have to start all over again and scrap shit.

Should have kept making the pz4, stug and the smaller TDs that were usually built on older/obsolete chasis. Redesign the pz4 with some sort of sloped armour etc and put it into production. Just like what the top advisors and generals recommended at the beginning of Barbarossa, a carbon copy of the t34. One with better QC, Optics, radios and stabilizers etc.

>a carbon copy of the t34. One with better QC, Optics, radios and stabilizers etc.
So nothing like the T-34 then?

Less than 10% of armor losses in ww2 were to ground attack

pssht nothing personal kraut

Okay that was not the best wording for that statement i made but still, that was the recommendation at the beginning of Barbarossa. They should have taken the concept and actually made a tank like the Sherman or t34. A mainstay tank that could have numerous iterations but still stick to the same concept and continuously improve. They had the pz4 but it was quite an old design and it's non-sloped armour held it back quite a bit from reaching it's full potential. At the very least they should have seriously ramped up pz4 and stug production. All whilst making smart use of all the old chassis they inherited from other countries or just had to make effective TDs.

In reality it wouldn't have mattered, the German logistical system was a joke. They had no where near enough trucks and most of their vehicles required extensive field workshops.

Hint:

Germany couldnd just mass produce cheap vehicles like the soviets and usa. They had not enough resources and manpower to outproduce them.

Soviets made 80,000 T34 alone.

Germany only made 50,000 armored vehicles during the whole war. (Thats all of them)

16,409 Panzer III (wich includes the Stugs etc)
13,522 Panzer IV
6557 Panther
1138 Tiger I
569 Tiger II

vs

80,000 T34
53,000 Shermans

And please explain the picture.

>(cracks shitty armour welded together by an barely literate mother of 3 after firing a few rounds)

>150mm

lol

Its called Panther.

It was supposed to replace the Panzer IV. It was actually slightly cheaper to produce and had a much better combat performance. Yes it had some mechanical problems in its first versions but one should not forget the very short development times and basicly no testing.

*blocks your path*

>Should have kept making the pz4, stug and the smaller TD
This. Guderian was right when he bemoaned the development of the Jagdpanzer IV, it's development was a waste of time and resources when the Pz.IV and StuG III were still performing well enough.

look Alexei, a naziboo insecure about its gun caliber

Oh im sorry I thought this was a thread for GOOD SOLID TANKS not tankettes

germany was never gonna win by outproducing, they were going to win by blitzkrieg, they lost the eastern front when they couldnt take moscow, then they lost it again when one of their generals didnt outflank kursk.

The design alone was asinine

Needing to cut off and reweld the upper glacis to maintain the tranny is just waste manhours

oh look. my breakfast

>american steel

Said a guy who posted ISU-152

The Engine was one of the most reliable and best of WW2. The same engine was used on the Tiger II and it maintained similar miles per hour. And it was very durable, ESPECIALLY for a heavy tank. A stronger engine was probably too overkill at the time and would be expensive to produce and take larger space.

Take some time to actually research some statistics on how good Tiger tank engines were.

Literally the best a P-47 can dream of, or a wing of 100 can also dream of. Armor losses to aircraft in WW2 were very rare, and most of them were done by germans with innovative Ground-attack aircraft designs mounting 37mm cannons (or similar calibers).

Don't bully Ivan, he is too retarded to make good shells, so he just make the gun bigger and doesn't bother to check if moving the turret of the IS-3 will cut the loader legs.

Say that to my face fucker

This
AT guns waiting in ambush are what fucked tanks up most of the time

fucking ugly

>playan War Thunder right now
I love my Panther II so much

What game is that? One of these graviteam tactics titles?

>playing War Blunder

DONT INSULT STARSHIP CHAN

IS-3 is stylish as fuck tho, too bad it was impracticable

>IS-3
>stylish

One of the most ugliest tank Russian ever produced.

T-44-100 IS A CUTE

...

Yes, looks like the newest one.

>ywn fuck shit up with a M50 Ontos

n-no you

>88mm tiger gun
Glorious IS2 brings 122 and actually works. Feels good to be a soviboo.

Thanks, user.

>calling cancer cute
just more food for my 88

It was at least partially (a big part) a myth. Look at war propaganda from the allies, diminishing everything the germans did.
And then compare to post war propaganda, suddenly the germans were evil geniuses, not just regular screwups.

How's the reload time working out for you?

Yes, tank warfare tunisia 1943


Wait, you think that kind of thing mattered in real life, or are you some warthunder/world of shit kid?

...

>you think that kind of thing mattered in real life

It is.

How and why? Quickly explain it with sources.

>Explain me how reloading the gun matters, please use sources.
Are you for real?

Nice street ornament.

No, kid, explain me why you think firing the gun continuously was ever a viable tactic.

You used up your first chance, you have 1 more to actually come up with a source showing how tankers are instructed to engage targets.

>engage target at range
>miss
>adjust aim and try again after waiting an eternity for the loader to do his thing
>miss second shot
>adjust aim, you've got him zeroed now
>whoops the enemy just struck true and torn the loader in half because he managed to get four shots out in the same space of time

WWII tank combat didn't have laser painting, computer-aimed guns with ultra high velocity shells and gunners that don't get deployed unless they score 99% first shot hits on the range or some bollocks. People missed all the damn time, and the guy who can fire faster will get his aim right faster.

>horrible optics
>inefficient multi-stage ammo
>gun had to be depressed each time for a reload, meaning adjusting a shot was impossible
>crewed by drunk slavs

>you fire 1 shot
>reload
>finish reload
>fire another shot
>it doesn't land remotely close to target
>because your fucking sight is obscured with dust
>because you didn't give your fucking commander a chance to do fucking corrections
>because its not possible to actually do fucking corrections in mere seconds

Why do World of shit/shitthunder smear their shit over real tanks? do you know what it looks like when you're looking through a gun sight with your arms hanging around twisting cranks to get the sight on target?

not him, but don't be an idiot, please

>don't shit on my arcade game bls, its realistic :D

Babby's first understanding of history.

After the initial fights about HALF of the german army was unsuitable for offensive maneuvers. They lost instantly in the east,
Just look at their own reports on what division is ready for what kind of action, and you will see the defense in depth gave them no chance. If this attack played out 100 times, they'd lose 95+, it wasn't some bad dice.

I don't give a fuck about them, I'm not an autist to expect video GAMES to be fully realistic when they don't even to be, WoT especially and then sperg out

I'm just calling you out on your bullshit

Almost every single account of tank combat in WWII has had the gunner adjusting the aim himself if he's got line of sight to the target. The commander typically has his head stuck out the hatch with a pair of binoculars, how is he supposed to get an accurate reading of exactly where the gun needs to be pointing like that?

>because your fucking sight is obscured with dust
If you weren't a gigantic retard, you will notice the barrel has two holes at the end to minimize the dust caused by firing.

>Unbuttoned commander in combat

they were trained not to do that.

Also, no again. The commander's hatch was elevated in most tanks so he can see above the main gun's smoke, follow the tracer, see where it lands, and use his RANGEFINDING MEASURES to figure out the range.

Try again, shithunder casual.

kys

real GOAT coming through

>no skirts
lewd

If you weren't a huge turd, you would realise that does nothing about dust kick-up from the ground.

Why do turds think they know about tanks? I researched about them for years, helped advise Steel beasts patches on SimHQ, literally entire battalion-tier tank strategy/tactics were drawn up and planned around the single fact of how much dust-kick up would blind them while firing during the cold war, and some casual turd on Sup Forums thinks he knows better.

>>gun had to be depressed each time for a reload, meaning adjusting a shot was impossible
that sounds fucking awfull

>I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals

Soviet tanks were actually fucking awfull, but Slavboos won't admit it.

Yeah and some memoirs by tankers include things like jumping over a fucking river in a cromwell tank, doesn't mean it happened.

Personal accounts are not usually reliable unless independently corroborated.

If tank break, make new one
Tank break a lot, make lots of new ones, win war

Not really, many soviet tanks continued to have this into the cold war, it was an annoyance to gunners, but they passed it on the T-62 because the gunner's sight would be obscured by dust kick-up from the main gun's fire anyway for him to see anything due to how close to the ground the gun is + it wasn't a necessity for the gunner to keep track on target while the commander could + the commander could electrically cue the main gun on his own coordinates with a button + the gun had an electric stabilizer that pulled it back to the last azimuth.

It doesn't matter. They were good enough to do the job required of them, while the German tanks weren't. That's all there is to it wehraboo.

no skirts p4 is one of the most, if not the most, aesthetic ww2 tank

Turn tractor and truck factories into more tank factories, don't need because US friend giving tractors and trucks for free.

>lost argument
>pull my memebook out

>well I just missed our first shot
>never mind they did too, tovarish
>oh, good thing we can reload faster huh, Ivan?
>gets killed while fiddling with multiple part heavy shit ammo

yeah, totally negligible factor, stupid wotkiddies/war thundercucks :^)

>Not buying your own tank from slav land for less than the price of a luxury car

mortarinvestments.eu/products/tanks-2/t-34-35

>dust kick-up from the ground
Dust being kicked up varied wildly depending on the climate. The smoke from a 75mm AT gun dissipated quickly when on good ground but kicked up a storm on dry, dusty plains. I wish that games set in Africa or during the Summer operations on the eastern front took this into account.

Going into combat without buttoning up is something that's been virtually universally shared by every British, German, and US account I have ever read. You simply cannot see out of a WWII-era tank very well, even a properly designed one, especially not compared to the uninterrupted 360-degree vision + binoculars granted by the hatch.

More than one German account has attributed the Soviet tankers' tendency to be buttoned up all the time to their poor performance in combat; often Soviet tanks would apparently not see the German tanks until they started firing, and even then they could still be slow to react and identify the German positions. Meanwhile the German tanks with their commanders peeking over the rim of the hatch with their binoculars see the Soviet tanks coming (literally) miles away and almost always got the first shot because of it.

It matters, but its not as important as the IS-2 was used primarily to demolish fortifications, not to engage enemy armor. The reload time isn't as big of an issue when you are engaging static targets. Though it was capable of engaging enemy armor, it was not ideal.

i really don't care if the tank wasn't as amazing as i think it is, or if i get called wehraboo, but the tiger is pure sex

>I researched about them for years, helped advise Steel beasts patches on SimHQ
Ok Mr Expert, if reloading time is "pointless" in real life, please tell me why every nation played with the idea of autoloaders and even revolver magazines.

It's because most Soviet tanks didn't even have an effective commander you retard. The turret was 2-men, 3-man turrets with the cupola improved this. The commander Is never supposed to be unbuttoned in combat unless there's on return fire.

The Tiger was. All these Tiger Aces wouldn't have racked up their kills if not for the Tiger. You don't ever hear about a German Tank ace who primarily only drove a Panzer IV or even a tanker. Most of them all drove Tiger-Is.

>or even a tanker

I meant Panther

>They were good enough to do the job required of them

Not really, but I you can produce 20K tanks in a year it doesn't really matter

>Autoloaders
Literally slows down the reload speed of tanks to 3-4 effective shells a minute
>one crew man less
>lighter weight
>automated
>smaller tank structure
>almost exclusively soviet

>Revolver magazines

Something something never got out of blueprints, I should've stopped reading there though. Shitthunder casuals think their games are sources.

>MEANEST DAMN WAR MACHINE IN UNCLE SAM'S SERVICE, AND I MEAN IT!