By: mike currill
- 24th January 2011 at 15:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As per the lower part of the front of the modern Leopard turret. Any shot glancing off that is deflected straight onto the turret ring. Admittedly the Merkava is not without its fair share either eapecially at the rear of the turret.
By: Lincoln 7
- 29th January 2011 at 19:16Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Was it the King Panzer2 that had the flack 88 as it's weapon?.If so I beleive it was only vulnerable to our Churchil tanks AP ammo, but the Churchil had to be behind the Panzer, as there was a "Sweet spot" that the Churchils inferior AP could penitrate.
I could be wrong, and stand to be corrected.
Up in my attic I have an imaculate AP Round, as used in the Churchil, I think it would give anyone in any tank a headache even if it just bounced off.It's massive.
By: Grey Area
- 29th January 2011 at 19:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Was it the King Panzer2 that had the flack 88 as it's weapon?
Both the Tiger I and Tiger II were armed with a development of the original '88'.
If so I beleive it was only vulnerable to our Churchil tanks AP ammo, but the Churchil had to be behind the Panzer, as there was a "Sweet spot" that the Churchils inferior AP could penitrate.
The British 17 pounder towed AT gun (also turret-mounted on the Sherman 'Firefly') could defeat the armour of Tigers with APDS ammunition, including the frontal armour of the Tiger II.
By: 19kilo10
- 29th January 2011 at 22:11Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
theres something "powerful" about riding in one of those great snorting beasts.......especialy when on gunnery..........but the feeling never lasts.......cause sooner or later, you throw track. And at the end of the day, you have to clean that metal monster!
New
By: Anonymous
- 29th January 2011 at 22:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
By: Creaking Door
- 30th January 2011 at 01:31Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Was it the King Panzer2 that had the flack 88 as it's weapon?.If so I beleive it was only vulnerable to our Churchil tanks AP ammo, but the Churchil had to be behind the Panzer, as there was a "Sweet spot" that the Churchils inferior AP could penitrate.
The Tiger I preserved (in running condition) at the Bovington Tank Museum was knocked-out by the 6-pounder (57mm) gun of a Churchill tank. Technically the 6-pounder couldn't penetrate the frontal armour of a Tiger at anything but extremely short range but the Churchill crew were lucky in that their first shot was deflected off the gun-mantle down through the thin deck armour of the Tiger.
By: Distiller
- 30th January 2011 at 17:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I always found it interesting that quite a considerable number of tanks were abandoned by their crews after being hit the first time, even though no damage was taken, just because of the sound of being under fire and being hit. Still reports of that from the 1973 war. Don't know about Iraq.
Current generation fav: Challenger 2 because of its rifled gun and the ability to fire HE grenades.
Very interesting and probably trend-setting I think: Japan's Type 10. Suspension, electronics, light weight, fast. Only the wrong gun (smoothbore).
By: Lincoln 7
- 30th January 2011 at 18:12Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I always found it interesting that quite a considerable number of tanks were abandoned by their crews after being hit the first time, even though no damage was taken, just because of the sound of being under fire and being hit. Still reports of that from the 1973 war. Don't know about Iraq.
Current generation fav: Challenger 2 because of its rifled gun and the ability to fire HE grenades.
Very interesting and probably trend-setting I think: Japan's Type 10. Suspension, electronics, light weight, fast. Only the wrong gun (smoothbore).
I think I too would be out of my tank should it sustain a hit, damaged or not, the enemy has your range, and his 2nd shot could kill all the crew, best to fight and run away, and all that .
Lincoln. 7
Posts: 770
By: 19kilo10 - 23rd January 2011 at 19:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
South Africa still uses the Centurion.....they call it Oliphant. Also, the M-1 has some HORRIBLE shot traps. Especialy where the turret and hull join.
Posts: 8,505
By: mike currill - 24th January 2011 at 15:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As per the lower part of the front of the modern Leopard turret. Any shot glancing off that is deflected straight onto the turret ring. Admittedly the Merkava is not without its fair share either eapecially at the rear of the turret.
Posts: 770
By: 19kilo10 - 26th January 2011 at 03:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Allways like Merkava...........looks like the best tank to fight from a battle position. Resupplying ammo must be heaven compared to an M-1.
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 26th January 2011 at 10:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Some versions of the Merkava had a nifty solution for this shot-trap.
(Photo pinched from Jmcmtank/MilitaryPhotos.Net)
Posts: 8,306
By: Lincoln 7 - 29th January 2011 at 19:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Was it the King Panzer2 that had the flack 88 as it's weapon?.If so I beleive it was only vulnerable to our Churchil tanks AP ammo, but the Churchil had to be behind the Panzer, as there was a "Sweet spot" that the Churchils inferior AP could penitrate.
I could be wrong, and stand to be corrected.
Up in my attic I have an imaculate AP Round, as used in the Churchil, I think it would give anyone in any tank a headache even if it just bounced off.It's massive.
Lincoln. 7
Posts: 10,160
By: Grey Area - 29th January 2011 at 19:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Both the Tiger I and Tiger II were armed with a development of the original '88'.The British 17 pounder towed AT gun (also turret-mounted on the Sherman 'Firefly') could defeat the armour of Tigers with APDS ammunition, including the frontal armour of the Tiger II.
Posts: 8,306
By: Lincoln 7 - 29th January 2011 at 20:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi Grey Area. Thanks for the additional info, which I was unaware of.
Lincoln. 7
By: Anonymous - 29th January 2011 at 21:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I mentioned my son's disdain for tanks...and yet he commands one!
Just sent me this pic. The disdain is certainly showing on his face.
Posts: 770
By: 19kilo10 - 29th January 2011 at 22:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
theres something "powerful" about riding in one of those great snorting beasts.......especialy when on gunnery..........but the feeling never lasts.......cause sooner or later, you throw track. And at the end of the day, you have to clean that metal monster!
By: Anonymous - 29th January 2011 at 22:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Thats exactly how he summed it all up, too!
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 30th January 2011 at 01:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Tiger I preserved (in running condition) at the Bovington Tank Museum was knocked-out by the 6-pounder (57mm) gun of a Churchill tank. Technically the 6-pounder couldn't penetrate the frontal armour of a Tiger at anything but extremely short range but the Churchill crew were lucky in that their first shot was deflected off the gun-mantle down through the thin deck armour of the Tiger.
Posts: 8,306
By: Lincoln 7 - 30th January 2011 at 15:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Thanks CD, I keep meaning to go to Bovington museum, I have passed it once or twice, but failed to remember until too late.
Lincoln.7
:rolleyes:
Posts: 10,160
By: Grey Area - 30th January 2011 at 16:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's well worth a visit. :)
Posts: 4,674
By: Distiller - 30th January 2011 at 17:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I always found it interesting that quite a considerable number of tanks were abandoned by their crews after being hit the first time, even though no damage was taken, just because of the sound of being under fire and being hit. Still reports of that from the 1973 war. Don't know about Iraq.
Current generation fav: Challenger 2 because of its rifled gun and the ability to fire HE grenades.
Very interesting and probably trend-setting I think: Japan's Type 10. Suspension, electronics, light weight, fast. Only the wrong gun (smoothbore).
Posts: 8,306
By: Lincoln 7 - 30th January 2011 at 18:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think I too would be out of my tank should it sustain a hit, damaged or not, the enemy has your range, and his 2nd shot could kill all the crew, best to fight and run away, and all that .
Lincoln. 7
:diablo:
Posts: 765
By: PanzerJohn - 30th January 2011 at 18:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
My favourite tank...hmmmm
Posts: 8,306
By: Lincoln 7 - 30th January 2011 at 19:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=PanzerJohn;1697646]My favourite tank...hmmmm[/QUOT
A wild guess, the electric immersion tank in the airing cupboard?
Lincoln. 7
:diablo:
Posts: 10,160
By: Grey Area - 30th January 2011 at 19:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
PzKpfw VI Ausf. E, by any chance? :)
Posts: 2,820
By: BSG-75 - 30th January 2011 at 19:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
have a little faith, they're beautiful people
Great movie, "upgraded" tank, I know it's real life flaws, but I just love the speaker, "Gramophone", paint shells and drain pipe ideas!
Posts: 10,160
By: Grey Area - 30th January 2011 at 21:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I watched 'Kelly's Heroes' last night, too. ;)