K_Tiger

Looks like a Weapon from Star-Wars, maybe a Rebellion gun to shoot down the "Death-Star"... :eek:

Maximum "effective" range! The Rocket will possible fly mutch farther....

It's not a Brummbar. It's one of those dinky little Sturmtiger.[/QB]

Can i sell something on this Forum, too?? "Hi Mom"

Something to laugh, in pre war germany, there existed a sport discipline named "Stiehlhandgranatenweitwurf" it was comparable with other olympic trowing disciplines. The record holder trow the grenade, if i remember correctly, over 79 meters.

Hi Rexford, and thanks again for your informative posting. There is something from interest for me but i didnt understand it. What means "estimate range within 10% of actual" whats this actual??

Is my english so bad, or is this above one of the funny`st things i read here?? You mean the more guns are pointed at you, you have the chance to kill more ennemys?? not to mention the bigger guns.

Nice try, and whats your second language, french?? Muahahaa... Bastables@ I think it isnt fair and IMO not possible to campare the fighting capabilitys from groundtroops in a statistical way, you did. Those guys who where frozen to dead in front of Moskow are in your statistic but the most werent killed true ennemy inf., or the Kompanie of Russians who start an Human Wave on some Mg positions, no one can say, they fighted worser, we can only blame the leadership for it. Stalingrad, every kid could kill any "elite" Soldier in Streetfighting, it doesnt tell us how good they performed. If we think about, that 60% of cassualitis were inflicted by Mortars and Artillery, so the side with the most of this armament is better or...? Let them rest, even the vets arent pleased about such statistics.

Tiigri... im not so sure about the effects of the faster turret from a sherman! Normaly, you dont need to turn the turret more than 90°. If the sherm hase a overall advantage from 4-6 sec. wen turning the turret in 360° there is only 1-1.25 sec advantage at 90°...so not so mutch, if you ask me. I reed a lot...but never about accounts from german tankers who sayed "damn, we hade no chance because of the fast sherman turrets"... And sorry to BTS...but the cross-country zipping out of the hip shooting gyro-übershermans are still a joke and such threads are the results... *mean the CMBO Sherms* Anyone can borrow me a shovel, for a deep dug in?? [ December 22, 2002, 06:27 PM: Message edited by: K_Tiger ]

There so many reasons to produce a Tank like the "Tiger". 1. Saved resources in Manpower, even Hitler was aware about this and ordered, due to the high losses of mens, all future tanks to have four man crews, but Guderian and other involved persons, did change his mind. Nobody knows, how many men would be died, if insteed a tiger, two Pz. IV had been built. 2 Not to mention the positive Moral effect for own troops and the negative for the ennemy. 3. Propaganda influence for the hole country "Wunderwaffe" ect. If there where no pre war decission "there is no need for a heavy tank" or/and the decission 40/41 no research into weapons who couldn deployed in one year...dont need to mention no full war economic. How bad had looked the rest of the world, from the technology sight? So sit down, relax and dont start again to compare "Shermans vs. "Panther" or why cant the great US.off.A build better Tanks than such punny, small countrys like the germs. It reminded me on flamewars between Ford and BMW, Mercedes drivers.... )

Thx Steve for the quick response and not kicking my but around here, for my semi-groggie statements.. Like i sayd in the same CMBO thread long, long time ago, was a land....aehem..back to the topic.. For me its ok like it is, not to let the 88 shoot at aircrafts...It still drives me crazy to hide-unhide those smaller flaks..and then there died..without to scratch anyone.. If this would happen to my 88`s they are to expensive and my hair will start faster to change into grey.. I still belive, 88`were used against tactical bombers, maybe not so often in the attack or strafing phase, more when they are on her way and after the attack. Still not in the CMBB scale.... I saw pics from 150mm AA guns..maybe only a few were build...or this are handpainted pics (Arg..where are the sources, when you need thems). Steve.. know what you mean with the deep charges thingy...but this implements a "blast-round", Brandgeschosse are far away from this concept and where more meant for direkt hits....(doesnt read about AA-Flamethrowers, too).. No, i know exactly how fast, or not so, do a low and fast flying aircraft looks like. Here, only two miles away, we have a small airport. Once i saw a film about a 88`in action and i was verry impressed how fast they traverse this big gun, not only around, also in elevation in the same time.

The real thing was CC2 and the Campaign system is unmatched. The thrill, to hold off the XXX Korps, fall back to get more and better equipment or on better positions was real great. But to say, CMBB is better due to more Vehikles, is the same like a IL2 player comes here and start to laugh about the CM grafik! There was a time, i liked also games like Ascendancy. Colonisation of the space, but allways i get my hand on a game with a good strategical system, gives me allways crap on the fighting level, and games with superb Fights like CM are ..... "Hallo Mutti".....take my .2€

Thats an "Eagle" or a "Hole-in-one" isnt it?..

Huh?? 100 meters?? Do you know how flat this is?? The nearbe 20mm would love it.. Ground strafing highs are mostly 300-500 meters, but i talking about taktical bombers, a little bigger than FW190, Thunderbolts, Hurricanes...ect. A Gun-Crew is able to fire 6 Rounds per minute (timefuzed or similiar) enough to get of some he`s. Also, you dont need to hit allways, sometimes, its enough to confused or set the pilot to panicking...a 50-100 meter away exploding 88 shell isnt to lough about if you sit in a aircraft. Maybe they need 100 shots to shoot down a plane, but hey, its a cheap exchange.. )

Ah Steve, you forget to mention the 150mm AA gun...

Hmm... for the "heavy" (75mm, 88mm) AA-Guns im not so sure with the statement that they can only hit "strategical" Bombers. In one of my books, maybe Saenger & Etterlin, they say, "after introducing the "Brandgeschosse" they scored three times more hits! This ammo is somefink like incendary rounds or else, three times, sounds like they hit something, and im sure, it wasnt allways the "big boys" As a second quote in this book (all about the 88`Flak) it was possible to hit incomming and outgoing low level aircrafts. When was the introducing of the 88?? Around 1935/36?? At this time, there was no "High-Altitude-Bomber" in sight, so why such a big gun?? I accept it, that no one tryed to shoot at a diagonal flying fighter-bomber, but there were alot more targets on the front, i think JU87, IL2, Blenheims, He111 (in taktical mission and so on, are good targets to shoot at. Damn, what would i give, to shoot with a 88 at aircrafts, doesnt matter if i could hit anything or not. Also did the AA-Crews mostly know, where the attack came from. It wasnt always a surprise, if we belive, all Fighthers would start when the bombers are allready on her strafing run, they hadent found any targets! But its still out of the "CM" scope, to implement heavy AA who shoot at aircrafts. In reality, they would start maybe at 5.000m-8.000m.

No, no....all german Pilots know: "If it looks beautifull, its german"...

Even the battleship "Tirpitz" was camoed, so i dont think the germs made it "just for fun" or only to have a nice, fashion like, colored army.

There is a different between agressive and suicided!!

Excelent colors!! I will see them on my CM Vehicels soooon...please hurry up! especialy Hoopy... )

DSL 768/128 since two years....

What, you personally? Now that's what I call a hobby </font>

What would Charles need a car for? Surely he is at his keyboard working on the next incarnation of the game 24X7 [/QB]

Stupid?? If they buy new cars, then its sure it will be Maybachs...

The Picture with the deep wading Stug looks on the one side funny and on the other real dangerous....im not so sure i would cross this river in a stug...