Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Battlefront.com

      Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips   12/27/2016

      Hi all! Now that Upgrade 4 is out and about in large quantities we have now discovered a few SNAFUs that happen out in the scary, real world that is home computing.  Fortunately the rate of problems is extremely small and so far most are easily worked around.  We've identified a few issues that have similar causes which we have clear instructions for work arounds here they are: 1.  CMRT Windows customers need to re-license their original key.  This is a result of improvements to the licensing system which CMBN, CMBS, and CMFB are already using.  To do this launch CMRT with the Upgrade and the first time enter your Engine 4 key.  Exit and then use the "Activate New Products" shortcut in your CMRT folder, then enter your Engine 3 license key.  That should do the trick. 2.  CMRT and CMBN MacOS customers have a similar situation as #2, however the "Activate New Products" is inside the Documents folder in their respective CM folders.  For CMBN you have to go through the process described above for each of your license keys.  There is no special order to follow. 3.  For CMBS and CMFB customers, you need to use the Activate New Products shortcut and enter your Upgrade 4 key.  If you launch the game and see a screen that says "LICENSE FAILURE: Base Game 4.0 is required." that is an indication you haven't yet gone through that procedure.  Provided you had a properly functioning copy before installing the Upgrade, that should be all you need to do.  If in the future you have to install from scratch on a new system you'll need to do the same procedure for both your original license key and your Upgrade 4.0 key. 4.  There's always a weird one and here it is.  A few Windows users are not getting "Activate New Products" shortcuts created during installation.  Apparently anti-virus software is preventing the installer from doing its job.  This might not be a problem right now, but it will prove to be an issue at some point in the future.  The solution is to create your own shortcut using the following steps: Disable your anti-virus software before you do anything. Go to your Desktop, right click on the Desktop itself, select NEW->SHORTCUT, use BROWSE to locate the CM EXE that you are trying to fix. The location is then written out. After it type in a single space and then paste this:

      -showui

      Click NEXT and give your new Shortcut a name (doesn't matter what). Confirm that and you're done. Double click on the new Shortcut and you should be prompted to license whatever it is you need to license. At this time we have not identified any issues that have not been worked around.  Let's hope it stays that way Steve
    • Battlefront.com

      Forum Reorganization   10/12/2017

      We've reorganized our Combat Mission Forums to reflect the fact that most of you are now running Engine 4 and that means you're all using the same basic code.  Because of that, there's no good reason to have the discussion about Combat Mission spread out over 5 separate sets of Forums.  There is now one General Discussion area with Tech Support and Scenario/Mod Tips sub forums.  The Family specific Tech Support Forums have been moved to a new CM2 Archives area and frozen in place. You might also notice we dropped the "x" from distinguishing between the first generation of CM games and the second.  The "x" was reluctantly adopted back in 2005 or so because at the time we had the original three CM games on European store shelves entitled CM1, CM2, and CM3 (CMBO, CMBB, and CMAK).  We didn't want to cause confusion so we added the "x".  Time has moved on and we have to, so the "x" is now gone from our public vocabulary as it has been from our private vocabulary for quite a while already.  Side note, Charles *NEVER* used the "x" so now we're all speaking the same language as him.  Which is important since he is the one programming them
Sign in to follow this  
Venjra ICQ 2126434

T-34 Tank

Recommended Posts

That tank was what the Sherman wished it was. and technicaly should have been an American tank. the Christie suspension was designed by none other than Christie, an american.

The americans would not buy his designs so he sold them to the russians. i beleive he had a hand in the sloped armor idea as well, but i am only going from memory, so i would check that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats absolutely right Iron. Christie took his tanks to England and Germany too (the PzKw III had a torsion bar suspension).

If you look at the Russian BT line up to the T-34, you see the evolution from Christie's tank. However, despite Christie's genius and Patton's salesmanship, Congress was downright hostile to new military equipment and the military. As a result, we had to rush to get the Sherman functional when we should have been moving toward the Pershing from the beginning.

Had Christie kept his tank in America, I firmly think America and Britian would have swept the field, and Russia would have lost unless their KV-1 was produced in T-34 numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was'nt aware he tried selling the design to Gemrany as well. thats interesting, were there any reasons why they deemed the design unfit for their military? Even the British i would think would have shown an interest in the tank desgin considering on who their new neighbor was in 1933.

With the tanks we had in the 30's, you would have thought that we would be all over that design. Well at least we had enough sense to go forward with the B-17 project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Christie had any say in the sloped armor. In fact, everything but the suspension was original Russian engineering.

It's funny how sometimes genius advances in war technology are ignored by the home countries and find a new home elsewhere? Christie and the T-34 suspension, Sikorski and the helicopter, Einstein and the A-bomb (well sort of)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, how many percent of a T-34 is actually made up by direct Christie designs? You guys make it sound like the T-34 was such a logical conclusion that it pretty much designed itself after Christie worked his wonder on the suspension smile.gif

Did Christy in fact invent the torsion bar suspension as such? And was the design of the Pz. III suspension significantly influenced by Christies designs?

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The Commissar:

I don't think Christie had any say in the sloped armor. In fact, everything but the suspension was original Russian engineering.

<hr></blockquote>

Christie didn't have a say in the armor or the gun, both of which were the aspects of the tank most feared by the Germans. The Russians also didn't make use of one (supposed) selling point of Christie's suspension -- the ability to operate the tank, on roads, only on its roadwheels, without using tracks. (The BTs could do this, though). It was also a Russian innovation to use extra wide tracks on the T-34, based on problems that they had during the winter war.

I don't want to take too much away from Christie, despite his tread removal idea (which is just sort of bizarre), the suspension was still better than the early Sherman suspensions. But it's wrong to give him much credit for the design of the T-34, since his only connection to it is that its suspension was based on a suspension he designed 10 or more years before the first T-34 was built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christie did have a huge hand in making the Soviets want for an all terrain "fast tank" possible thru his suspension though.

So, in playing a huge part in the easrly develpopements of the BT's, he in turn by defualt played just as big of a role in the making of the T-34.

The T-34 was a direct decendent of thr BT series tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

So, in playing a huge part in the easrly develpopements of the BT's, he in turn by defualt played just as big of a role in the making of the T-34.<hr></blockquote>

Just as big? I take that to mean "huge". Is that really what you mean?

Sometimes I envy you guys for your ability to make broad sweeping generalizations as well as definitive statements at will. I guess it comes with experience in the subject matter.

Oh, and about the British not being interested in the Christie design. Wasn't there at least a few vehicles designed that utilized the Christie suspension? The Cruiser series seems to ring a bell.

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

Christie did have a huge hand in making the Soviets want for an all terrain "fast tank" possible thru his suspension though.

So, in playing a huge part in the easrly develpopements of the BT's, he in turn by defualt played just as big of a role in the making of the T-34.

The T-34 was a direct decendent of thr BT series tanks.<hr></blockquote>

Instead of producing fast and imprecise generalizations, go here http://history.vif2.ru/index.html , for a better education in this field ;) (look inside tank developement)

[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: Tanaka ]</p>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is wrong with what i typed in? I figured i'd get to the point instead of simply plagerizing books and random websites like so many seem to do here.

Was what i stated incorrect or something? Also as a side not, i would not base fact on a website.

Next time your going ot direct someone to a source of information, give them a list of some books to read.

Anyone can make a website and put whatever they want in it, does'nt make it fact.

So in turn, i would like to add a link here that would take you to your local book store or library, but you'd have to do that on your own. tongue.giftongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

What is wrong with what i typed in? I figured i'd get to the point instead of simply plagerizing books and random websites like so many seem to do here.

Was what i stated incorrect or something? Also as a side not, i would not base fact on a website.

Next time your going ot direct someone to a source of information, give them a list of some books to read.

Anyone can make a website and put whatever they want in it, does'nt make it fact.

So in turn, i would like to add a link here that would take you to your local book store or library, but you'd have to do that on your own. tongue.giftongue.gif <hr></blockquote>

You will be horrorized to know that the people involved in the making of that site is credible enough to be heard by Steve from BTS (who has degree in History and is specialized in East Front, BTW) with great respect when they come here from time to time to say something.

And some people here is still waiting some good books references from you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, do you know how many people in the world have gone to school for a couple years and recieved a degree in history? well alot.

So is you see one person as the ulitmate authority on history, well thats great.

But you should put down the World War 2 History books for a moment and pick up a joke book ro something, mabe your sense of humor will surface.

And as far as "studying" world war 2 and claiming to have knowldeg eof hostry is a joke. World War 2 was what? 39-45 right? and how long is history again? alot of other things have happend, even alot of things that,..sit down now,......have nothing to do with war at all.

If your looking for me to write and essay on a messege board about something that everyone knows about, and could technicly be taught in a full day, well your going to be waiting awhile.

When you get cik of reading book after book on the same battles, equipment ect.. try rradong about some other war, theres' been tons of them,...read up on the crimean war or something i don't know you might find it interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too true Iron!

This forum is no place for free spirit, that much is painfully obvious by the way your innovative and sensitive (dare I say artistic) posts are being constantly rejected.

The poor sods that languish here are all prisoners of their own rigid thinking, their minds stuck in unyielding preconceptions of what transpired during those tumultuous years.

It seems every attempt at creative thinking is drowned by reflexive demands for facts and sources and, as you put it so well, an "essay on a messege board about something that everyone knows about, and could technicly be taught in a full day".

I say stick to your guns Iron! Your a breath of fresh air in this stagnant dungeon of so called scholars.

Keep telling us what nobody knows about and things that couldn't be taught in a full day.

M.

[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: Mattias ]</p>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haha! My only point is that i find most topics in here overly magnified and examed. does it realy matter wich way the wind was blowing and the chance of percepation of the weather before the bismark was sunk? i mean how many conversations can there be on armor thickness of a single vehicle?? well charlie, i think the slope was at a 41.8 angle, and that why the heavily aerodynamic piece of metal hurled at it from great veleocity penetrated the armor. brilliant. well no i disagre george, i think the armor was actaly at a 41.7 degree angle, i found it in a book. well no my book states clearly that it is 41.8!! you are utterly wrong!! no i'm not! my book said 41.7!!! pointles and immature argument ensues, and there you have about 80% the posts.........don't beleive me? this forum was actuyaly worse, the people here who calim to be mature, well they have written some hillarious stuff!! i went into the archives of the forums and started reading posts form 1999 and 2000, BTS had to constantly mediate with these so called rigid thinkers and would talk to them and appropriatly at the time like how they were acting, like bratty kids, i.e baby boomers, lol,

so before you try to claim you've always taken the high rode and your a scholar like everyone else here, take a look back, if you want prood i'll actualy start posting some of those things, they were pretty funny in a pathetic way. MadMatt almost closed down the forum on account of these jokers.

So in closing i'm gald your behaving a little better, but keep in mind the archivesd are open to everyone to read, lol ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

haha! My only point is that i find most topics in here overly magnified and examed.<hr></blockquote>

You know Chef, you're right. In fact, you are so right that I can't begin to understand what the heck it is you are still doing here with us stuffy, groggy scholars!

An open mind like yours should be used in a much more creative way, doing something important for the world at large. Go grasshopper, leap forth from thy accursed sorroundings and bring light into the world above this forsaken dungeon! We would all love to go with you of course, but our damnable intellect chains us to the cold floor of reality much too tightly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had it in my head that Flamethowers were pretty useless...then I stumbled upon this thread...

and FT's still seem useless. At least these flames seem to be mostly of the "Nerf" variety.

Progress & Solidarity!

S.M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> I don't think Christie had any say in the sloped armor. In fact, everything but the suspension was original Russian engineering.<hr></blockquote>

Commissar, I don't know if Christie had any actual say on the design of the T34, but most of his early tank designs (Pre WWII) had very sloped & streamlined armor.

It would not be a stretch to say he was among the first (If not the firts) tank designer to used sloped armor in his tanks.

uslt-M1936.jpg

Many other Christie prototypes here.

Gyrene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gyrene:

It would not be a stretch to say he was among the first (If not the firts) tank designer to used sloped armor in his tanks.

<hr></blockquote>

Didn't seem to be much for turrets, though

tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The Commissar:

Didn't seem to be much for turrets, though

tongue.gif <hr></blockquote>

CHristie didn't like turrets. Felt they weren't of much use and spoiled the "lines" of his tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×