Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Kading

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 75
Off-Topic / Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« on: 19-01-2016, 19:01:03 »
I've been doing this and that. Foolishly neglecting the FPS world.
It is not me in the picture. I'm not nearly old enough.

Off-Topic / Re: Picture of the Day
« on: 19-01-2016, 07:01:08 »
Crew of the Japanese carrier Zuikaku give one final banzai cheer before the ship sinks. 1944

Off-Topic / Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« on: 19-01-2016, 07:01:54 »
Oh, hey guys. How's it been?

Off-Topic / Re: Picture of the Day
« on: 27-05-2014, 05:05:50 »
This is the end of this man's second World War. He got an Iron Cross in WWI.
Paris, 1944

Off-Topic / Re: Picture of the Day
« on: 18-04-2014, 18:04:43 »
And hetzer...dont forget hetzer...

The Jagdpanzer 38(t), or "Hetzer" as we have come to call it, had serious problems. It had TERRIBLE visibility for the crew, especially the commander who had no forward viewport and had to stick his head out to see anything in front of him. The loader had to reach over the recoil cage to reload the gun, and the breach lever was very difficult for him to get at. Ammunition storage was bad, too, with rounds lining the right side of the upper hull interior. Furthermore, while the gun was good enough to deal with most of the Western Allies' tanks, the Soviet IS series was presenting a problem for the Hetzer's gun. That being said, it was a good solution for a country with limited industrial capacity (compared with the United States and USSR) that could have been worked into a pretty good design.

Here's a photo of a StuG IV so this post isn't just a bunch of ugly words  ;)

Off-Topic / Re: Walkarounds thread
« on: 11-04-2014, 08:04:20 »
It will be restored after they send it to Stow, Mass. So I won't be getting photos of that, sadly.

Muddy, I'll double check this Saturday if the optics are still in place.

Off-Topic / Re: Walkarounds thread
« on: 10-04-2014, 09:04:04 »
Unrestored, dug out of the Golan Heights where it was being used as a bunker.
Driver's position

Bow Gunner from driver's perspective (hatch was jammed)

Gunner's position

Turret interior

Steering brake

Off-Topic / Re: Picture of the Day
« on: 04-04-2014, 23:04:11 »
@Dukat, why are the Panthers turrets facing this direction?
Because on the standard position the turret blocks parts of the engine compartment.


This is actually a pretty common feature on tanks. I can think of countless turrets that have to be turned to gain access to the engine.

Off-Topic / Re: Questions about tanks
« on: 04-04-2014, 00:04:04 »
Aberdeen has been halaled. Good riddance I say. Ok, so now my question is how good were the Soviet made tanks in the hull down position?

Assuming you are talking about Second World War tanks, pretty much as good as any other tank as the point of the hull down position is to minimize the profile of the tank from the perspective of those shooting at you. I'm a bit confused by your question, to be honest. Are you asking how well most Soviet tanks' turret armor would be compared to their counterparts in other armies? Or is this a height question? Or are you asking about turret size/armor slope?

That starts to change after the war with the introduction of the IS-3. Now, despite being an unreliable, underpowered, poorly manufactured vehicle with terrible side armor, optics, and gun depression, the turret front had outstanding armor for its time. The same can be said of the turret armor of the T-54 and T-55 when they were first introduced. But the turret is generally the most heavily armored part of the tank, so that would go without saying for most countries' tanks.

Off-Topic / Re: Walkarounds thread
« on: 02-04-2014, 08:04:57 »
Hi Kading, if it wouldn't be too much of a hassle, could you please do a walk-around of the Panzer IV G's interior, I think I saw you have one in the museum on the website. Particularly the driver's and radio operator's positions , but if you have the time a shot of the turret interior would be awesome!  ;D

I think it's a J, actually. Also it is un-restored so it may be underwhelming. I'll get a few photos of it, though.

Off-Topic / Re: Picture of the Day
« on: 02-04-2014, 08:04:42 »
Look! A cast hull M3 Medium

Off-Topic / Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« on: 02-04-2014, 00:04:15 »
Good thing these didn't go to war.

Off-Topic / Re: Walkarounds thread
« on: 26-02-2014, 04:02:03 »
No luck getting the photo, doesn't look like it will happen any time soon and my camera can't focus on the lines in the secondary gunsight.
Here are the gunner's position of the StuG III, FV-214 Conqueror, and T-72M to make up for my failure.



Off-Topic / Re: Picture of the Day
« on: 07-02-2014, 04:02:41 »
Reviving a set from WAAAY long ago.

The explosion just before:

Then the long walk to make sure

Off-Topic / Re: Questions about tanks
« on: 21-12-2013, 20:12:34 »
This, I believe, is one of the reasons that the Panther is such a bulky tank (though about the same height as the M4 Sherman). So as to allow for a more roomy interior while still having sloped armor. And, to be clear, Panthers are pretty roomy inside for a tank.

Same goes for Sherman. But T-34 need to maintain their low profile, while sacrificing interior space and ammo capacity, judging from how long most of them will last in the battlefield.

Their ammo capacity had little if anything to do with how little they (especially in the early years) lasted. When they were first introduced, a LOT of the crews had a painful lack of training, it got to a point where some crews were getting 7 hours or less on a tank before being put into combat. In addition, when T-34s first hit the front line, a LOT of them didn't have radios.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 75