Elmar Bijlsma
-
Posts
3,883 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Elmar Bijlsma
-
-
Alright, enough lurking, long past time to dust off my old forum account and say "hi" and thank all of you contributing this gem of a thread, which is keeping me well ahead of the mainstream media.
Can we just admire the huge leap in technology? No, not ATGM or drone tech. Pah! Who cares about that? No, the all important meme-tech. It has come leaps and bounds since The Great Meme War. The other day I was in the car with my brother in law, who barely even acknowledges the existence of the internet, when my 6 y.o. nephew pipes up. "Look, a tractor!" and I decide to be a smartass and deny it is a tractor. "It cannot be a tractor, it isn't towing a Russian tank behind it" and it even got a laugh from my brother in law. The memes of Russian ineptitude, and SOF-like abilities of Ukrainian farmers even reached him. I was surprised.
Of course, this war isn't all fun and games. I for one deeply lament Steve deciding to put actually making games on the back burner. Not that I can blame him, his new profit making scheme sounds very lucrative: Cold calling autocrats the world over.
"Hello Mr Maduro, I am calling to let you know we are going to be making a game set in Venezuala"
-Please don't. Here's 5 million dollars to **** off.
"For 5 million more, we will change the setting to Colombia"
Well done, Steve, that is now two countries you have plunged into chaos. If you ever make a game set in the modern Netherlands, I am gonna start packing.
-
I just popped in here to pay my respects.
Berlichtingen was one of those people that made this community so extra-ordindary. We are all lessened by his passing.
...
And he would not forgive me if I wasted this opportunity to tell you Pengers that you were all pretty ****ing lessened to begin with.
-
You are a life saver. Setting affinity did the trick for me.
Could not get the game to load the 3D map at all (or, oddly, the editor's 2D map) after upgrading to Win X. After trying all the compatibility options in vain, I thought I had reached an end of an era.
My North African RobO campain lives on!
-
Nothing like seeing an old discussion to ease me back into befouling this forum with my presence.
As pointed out by others, the physics of the "ricocheting into belly armour" just does not add up at all.
First of all, the angle required to reliably bounce into the underbelly pretty much makes it impossible to penetrate any sheet of armoured steel. It is exceedingly unlikely to penetrate that plate after losing energy and shape in bouncing off the ground. Furthermore I cannot figure how anyone can expect this damaged and reduced in energy projectile to penetrate armour if it could not even bury itself into whatever ground surface the tank was standing on while it still had its original shape and energy.
As ever when it comes to the claims of airmen, it is perhaps best not to unquestioningly trust the testimony of someone who is observing events through a gunsight filled with tracers, smoke and dust while travelling several hundreds of kilometres per hour.
-
M12 GMC? Holy ****, they actually did it!
*wipes a tear away*
First they gave me the Crusader AA, now this?! Only the Wasp and 25pdr to go and I need to think of new items to ask for.
-
I still fondly remember an Italian electrical company called Powergen Italia.
-
Glad to be of assistance
Steve
Well I'm not a satisfied customer. I suggest you stop all downloads until the following grievous error is fixed. I mean, look at the announcement:
We've reached the Drop Zone, the green light is on, sound off for equipment check... go go go!Really?! Equipment on the green light? It is a bit late at that point, one better not find anything wrong or a paras death and his burial is the same event.
Personally I would suggest people hook up and do a last check when the red light comes on.
I see no other option: MG release should be delayed for a week or two to have that sentence QA-ed properly.
-
Arpella, while I agree with the general sentiment in your post, the Sherman was not designed as an infantry support tank. It was always expected to act like a true medium and deal with enemy tanks if and when it came upon them, US TD doctrine not withstanding. And it was easily capable of doing so when it first arrived in theatre.
You don't give a tank fancy optics and an even fancier stabilizer if you expect its main role to be blowing landser out of foxholes.
-
Look at it from the big picture. There were two basic choices:
1. Launch offensives through the Sigfried Line AND then an amphibious assault across the Rhine, both of which would sustain horrible losses.
OR
2. Circumvent both with the Market Garden plan.
I can certainly see the temptation for #2.
Especially since the supply situation did not allow for #1.
-
The M26 had the better record in tank on tank engagements.
The rest of the time it was a bitch to operate. It basically had all the pros and cons of a Panther: Good in a fight if you could get it to a fight.
-
Then why didn't the British tanks get the same reputation?
Pretty much every cruiser tank up from A9 to Cromwell did have that very reputation.
Actually, it's pretty well documented that Shermans did tend to brew up easier than other tanks, partly because the ammo was located in vulnerable spot. Even when the ammo wasn't hit directly, an internal penetration might cause shrapnel that would set them off. This led to the development of the wet stowage.
I think you'll find that the ammo stowage of a Sherman was not that much different then it's contemporaries. Same for their location, underneath and to the sides of the turret, where you need them to be.
I do know there was an issue with tankers carrying more then their allotted ammo complement, stored in what spare space the tank had. But then again I recall the Germans doing the same thing.
-
You'd like evidence? I'll give you some when I return home later today. However I guarantee you that the Ronson nickname was applied by CW crews (Ronson lighters - lights the first time, every time!) and Tommy Cookers by the Germans. This is well known fact.
Also Elmar the early Shermans did NOT have wet ammo stowage, and I believe Shermans tended to burn more than other tanks since they used GASOLINE instead of DIESEL fuel.
Nope, British post battle research indicated every tank, allied and German, went *woosh* in about 75% of first penetrations.
Fuel has nothing to do with it. You think that with the energies involved in penetrating armour that the ignition point of diesel as opposed to petrol is going to matter? Besides, only the Russians and the USMC used diesel for their tanks. Everyone else was using petrol too.
In a vehicle stuffed with ammunition it is the explosives cooking off that you need to worry about. The stowage of it prior to wet stowage being utterly unremarkable an equivalent to the ammo stowage of other tanks, I might add.
The Sherman got its reputation for catching fire because it got shot at with high velocity guns, thus being penetrated penetrated more reliably. German tanks getting shot at with capable guns suffered the same fate.
-
Quick drive by:
Sherman WAS expected to take on German armour. It was not it's main job but it was certainly designed to do so from the onset. Up-gun projects for it were under consideration before it ever saw action against Panther or Tiger.
Shermans burned no more or less then any tank that gets penetrated by an anti tank weapon. Anything you stuff with ammo and then shoot through with a large cannon tends to go *woosh* and that includes everyone's favourite Teutonic überpanzer. Unlike all those other tanks the Sherman did receive wet stowage, making the Sherman much less likely to burn upon penetration.
Sherman M4a3s were still kicking ass throughout the Korean war while M26s were being replaced by M46s.
Shermans being called Tommy cookers and Ronsons? I'd like to see evidence of that. Shermans weren't even called Shermans except by the Brits and the press. If the jagdpanzer 38(t) was not called Hetzer then I sure as hell am not going to take those nicknames for fact.
My opinion: Sherman is a viscously maligned piece of kit.
-
To hell with super-light SPGs, get me an M12!
The case for it is good:
*It saw action in the correct geographic area and timeframe.
*It uses the M3 chassis so can be built, in part, from earlier work.
*It has a great big stonking gun.
-
Perhaps those were Hummels?
-
You haven't read the whole thread, have you....
Eh? I did and found no reference to them on second reading either.
-
No one slipped in Crocs and Wasps yet? For shame!
-
At this point I think Steve is not going to be wrongfooted by any sort of optimism. He knows this community's favourite word is "more"!
-
In fact, this is the first time we've ever had Navy ground units in a CM game.
Even more fact: the Russians had naval infantry in CMBB.
You are forgiven for this grievous error only because:
Crusader AA.*hug*
Now... back to work on flamethrowers, please.
-
Most likely these were British born blacks or at least resident at the time of call up as typically I would expected colonial soldiers to remain in ditto units.
Being a naval trading nation Britain accumulated a moderately sized black community. I think Liverpool was noted as having a good sized one but presumably other coastal towns would have had their share.
So other then being blacks in Britain prior to the post-ww2 mass migration, I doubt these guys were anything unusual.
-
massive1974,
you need to read up on the WW2 Pacific and specifically the behaviour of the Japanese if you think that the Germans were the big racist baddies of WW2.
The behaviour of Japanese combat and garrison units makes most SS units look like a hippie commune. The Japanese had a deeply entrenched racism towards, well, everyone else. They murdered fellow Asians by the millions without needing to industrialize the process.
-
God dammit Jason, someone finally mistook me for a guy that might know something and then you go and answer their question for me.
But yeah, that answer sounds about right.
-
Here's a good read from the resident tank buff from World of Tanks.
http://worldoftanks.com/news/919-chieftains-hatch-us-guns-vs-german-armour-part-1/
http://worldoftanks.com/news/1006-us-guns-german-armor-part-2/
-
Any penetration obtained by the 76 on the Panther front glacis should be on the freakish side of lucky. Without HVAP it just was not up to the job, at any range.
With HVAP you would still need a good dose of luck, if the Isigny tests may be taken for typical.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Behold a Belgian comedy skit with much the same vibes:
https://www.dumpert.nl/item/100026058_301fb072
Sufficiently low hanging fruit that you English speakers that cannot make heads or tails of a fellow Germanic language should get a chuckle. (to be honest, we Dutch barely understand our southern neighbours either).
"Forget Coca Cola Zero, we have zero cola. 0% sugar, 0% cola."