@ALIS @ALIS
See, pocket battleships do have a couple of difference with Fast battleships and battlecruisers. I’ll dig up my old notebooks and maybe talk to my father (he was in a Navy, became part of the merchant one, and essentially has spend his life on the sea, finding out how to best built and maintain boats), but it essentially can be summed up as: it’s a battle-cruiser with a battleship’s armament.
Do note, however, if armoured vehicles designations are more of an art than a science, warship designations are fucking modern art.
@ALIS
“And today, after an impressive earthquake which shook all of Europe, scientist have confirmed has detached from Europe and is currently sinking. The fault has been given to the massive, twenty story tank they send to invade that immediately unstabilized the country. Wherever this ends the war remains to be seen, but rescue boats have already been seen leaving British ports.”
On a more serious note, classifications are quite a big hassle ( pocket battleships? Because I them and think it has to be the stupidest logical classification ever) mainly because you can engineering in-betweeners whose only job is fuck up the filing cabinets.
In this case, however, do keep in mind the STuG use in front-line combat was less of a wilful decision and more of a result of tanks being very difficult and expensive to built, they weren’t really designed for it, and if placed in a situation where they had to face a tank face to face as another tank where quickly destroyed.
Under the broadest terminology a StuG meets the same description but it is an Assault Gun… Even though the majority of them were built with Anti Tank Guns. Classifications make my head spin.
@SeraphimDawn
An elephant, if I’m not mistaken, with the awesome title of Panzerjäger.
@ALIS
You can’t even begin to imagine how much I’m laughing right now. Mostly because they are right that the broadest tank terminology accepts it, and because it looks fucking sweet.
Then again, they got themselves a turret one because adjusting your suspension to shoot has to be up there with the rocket airplane as “ideas that sound awesome in paper and fulfill all tests, but actually using them in combat might not be the best idea”.
Yes. The hulls were originally a competing design for the Tiger. They made the first 100 hulls but it failed. Rather then let them go to waste they quickly strapped a cannon on top.
The German translation for this type of vehicle is hunting tank.
But no one with any sort of even normal knowledge of the military would call it a tank.
Neither they would, for example, this:
Whom you ask will limit what is a tank or not, but if you were to go to just about anyone in a military, there are two elements which make up a tank: they are armored; they are used in front-line combat.
Everything else? The threads, the turret, the main gun, etc.? Essentially optional, but with current technology and limitations, having a turret and threads is just a result of it being the best practice.
So, no, that on top is clearly not meant for front-line combat, and therefore not a tank.
Объект 261 крутая арта.
@ALIS
See, pocket battleships do have a couple of difference with Fast battleships and battlecruisers. I’ll dig up my old notebooks and maybe talk to my father (he was in a Navy, became part of the merchant one, and essentially has spend his life on the sea, finding out how to best built and maintain boats), but it essentially can be summed up as: it’s a battle-cruiser with a battleship’s armament.
Do note, however, if armoured vehicles designations are more of an art than a science, warship designations are fucking modern art.
It does bug me however when people add them to ’s Battleship count. That and the debate on whether the twins were Fast Battleships or Battlecruisers.
From what I heard it was a foreign name designed to make everyone fear German rearmament. Thank goodness they were way off there huh…
Sort of like how we call German subs the dreaded U-Boats… Not good guy Submarines.
“And today, after an impressive earthquake which shook all of Europe, scientist have confirmed has detached from Europe and is currently sinking. The fault has been given to the massive, twenty story tank they send to invade that immediately unstabilized the country. Wherever this ends the war remains to be seen, but rescue boats have already been seen leaving British ports.”
On a more serious note, classifications are quite a big hassle ( pocket battleships? Because I them and think it has to be the stupidest logical classification ever) mainly because you can engineering in-betweeners whose only job is fuck up the filing cabinets.
In this case, however, do keep in mind the STuG use in front-line combat was less of a wilful decision and more of a result of tanks being very difficult and expensive to built, they weren’t really designed for it, and if placed in a situation where they had to face a tank face to face as another tank where quickly destroyed.
Under the broadest terminology a StuG meets the same description but it is an Assault Gun… Even though the majority of them were built with Anti Tank Guns. Classifications make my head spin.
@SeraphimDawn
It is a good thing Bob Semple was on the Allied side. If the Germans got their hands on those who know what would have happened.
I think I’ve seen those in a bunch of my dad’s military technologies magazines.
Or the New Zealanders
An elephant, if I’m not mistaken, with the awesome title of Panzerjäger.
@ALIS
You can’t even begin to imagine how much I’m laughing right now. Mostly because they are right that the broadest tank terminology accepts it, and because it looks fucking sweet.
Then again, they got themselves a turret one because adjusting your suspension to shoot has to be up there with the rocket airplane as “ideas that sound awesome in paper and fulfill all tests, but actually using them in combat might not be the best idea”.
Called an Elefant BTW.
Yes. The hulls were originally a competing design for the Tiger. They made the first 100 hulls but it failed. Rather then let them go to waste they quickly strapped a cannon on top.
The German translation for this type of vehicle is hunting tank.
No one tell that to the Swedish…
They are quite insistent that this is really a tank.
I see…
Is that second picture a tank destroyer?
Not… quite.
For example, this fulfills your description:
But no one with any sort of even normal knowledge of the military would call it a tank.
Neither they would, for example, this:
Whom you ask will limit what is a tank or not, but if you were to go to just about anyone in a military, there are two elements which make up a tank: they are armored; they are used in front-line combat.
Everything else? The threads, the turret, the main gun, etc.? Essentially optional, but with current technology and limitations, having a turret and threads is just a result of it being the best practice.
So, no, that on top is clearly not meant for front-line combat, and therefore not a tank.
If it has tracks and armor, then it’s classified as a tank.
Mostly, i think the ears are there so its tiara doesn’t fall off from the recoil.
Be quite…
It can hear you.
I’ll be back here.