Slapdragon

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: Why didn't they build a turretless vehicle, with the 17 pdr, the thick Churchill hull and a fate plate (as opposed to the thin Archer)? Or for that matter, why didn't they design tank destroyers (or German-style tank hunters) or even SP AT guns after the Archer. Did they intend to rely on US-given M10? or did they decide very early to rely only on full MBTs (like most armies did after WW2)?<hr></blockquote> The 17 pounder was not well suited to the interior weapon position in the Churchhill. The M10 with a 17 pounder was just something that became available, and was never intended to be an important system. However, it turned out to be so successful with a 17 pounder that it was used many years post war.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: Speaking of the eliminated bow MG< what happend to the radio operator if his place was used for ammunition?<hr></blockquote> He was forced to run along side the tank. Seriously, most British tanks repositioned radio equipment into the turret anyway, and gave much of the radio duties to the Commander.

DF use of the Hummel was in "last stand" scenarios. I agree that the best way to simulate a hummel firing battery is to buy a 150mm Arty battery.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Sgt_Kelly: Being a citizen of a country renowned for its lack of national pride, I usually refrain from the expression of such sentiments. But I must protest vehemently against the perpetuation of a gross and criminal injustice : THE FRENCH FRY WAS INVENTED BY THE BELGIANS, NOT THE FRENCH !!! I believe the Americans to be the authors of this great injury, as they failed to note the crossing of the French border into Belgium. We were prepared to let it pass (along with so much else at the time) then, but not now !<hr></blockquote> Actually I have crossed the French and Belgian border a number of times and have failed to see the difference between the two countries. In fact, I would propose that France be added Belgium as the department of Southern Namur to reduce European confusion and to get France back into NATO.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: The British Firefly's ammo stowage caused the bow MG to be deleted. God forbid an American tank not be bristling with machine guns; perhaps this was why they didn't want to adopt it as well? Most Commonwealth tanks deleted the .50 calibre on the turret as well; not so the Americans who even put Ma Deuce on their 2-1/2 ton trucks and jeeps (something not done in standard Commonwealth units either).<hr></blockquote> 1 in 9 US trucks had .50 cal mounts on them.

Actually, the Firefly was ordered by the US fairly early, at a time that the British figured the Challenger would meat all of their needs. The primary reason it was not adopted was Patton, who also put the kabosh on the M26 causing it not to be ready for D-Day (although to be fair, their was reason to stick with the M4 for D-Day because of the issue of transport.) By the time the firefly became available (the British soon sequestered them for UK use) again it was too late. A few where acquired by the US and never issued.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Graaf Spee: Are you sure that it's iron? I have always heard that it was lead. Maybe I'm confusing it with the shotgun calibers where 'they' use one pund of lead divided by the caliber. When I think about it it actually makes sense, shotguns use mostly lead pellets(?)but with guns you would want something harder. /Kristian<hr></blockquote> Yes, iron, as lead was never used in cannon (to heavy actually).

The M2HB became a preferred anti-sniper weapon because it penetrated masonry. Many snipers, behind what they thought of as cover (and was for small arms) were vulnerable to the penetration power of the M2HB. At the same time the M2HB had a high enough rate of fire to be an effective suppression weapon, while the 20mm, while powerful, was overkill against ground targets (although death to light AFVs).

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Chosun-few: It's the weight of the shell, i think it is a hangover from cannonballs which were done by weight. howitzers were measured in inches. the 25 pdr being classed as a gun or gun/howitzer.<hr></blockquote> It is actually the weight, in pounds, that an iron sphere of that diameter will be, so you should be able to plug in the formula for figuring the area of a sphere, and multiply the weight of iron per cube inch, and get the "pound" designation. This is approximate, because the iron cannonballs were not pure, and I believe the cannon balls used for the designation where actually hollow, when this system of measurement was first put into place, so your numbers may vary, but they will retain the relationship between each weapon.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Mattias: The 77mm and the 17lb used the same ammunition (Chamberlain & Ellis) and if CM is right it seems the AT gun did so as well. M.<hr></blockquote> They did, the 77mm was shorter, with a redesigned breach, and was the (somewhat distant) basis for the post war 20 pounder 84mm weapon, which was designed in hopes of increasing the killing power of the 77 without sacrificing rate of fire by poor chamber placement as occurred in the 17 pounder.

Both the Pershing and the Super Pershing were used in combat. For a nice account, read "Death Traps" which discuss the use of both these tanks. This book even has pictures of Pershings in combat, and a Panther being blown up by a Pershing. The Super Pershing was available for nearly a month, and used , but only fired one shot in combat, causing a catastrophic explosion in its target (which was not identified by the action reports of the oral account extant of the operation in part because of the severe damage the long 90L70 caused to its target).

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Trebor: A couple weeks ago I ran across a poster who said he could supply info to anyone interested in interviewing WWII vets. I meant to E-mail him later to get the info, but when I went to follow up, I couldn't find where I wrote his e mail addy. I don't remember what thread it was in, and now I can't find that info again. Could the person who posted the info on interviewing WWII vets please e-mail me at Trebor1415@hotmail.com ? Thanks, Trebor BTW, I'm new to the game and I've learned a lot, about the game and WWII, lurking on these boards recently. Once I get up to speed, I'm looking forward to meeting some of you for PBEM games.<hr></blockquote> I have info, and when I retrun to my office I will send it to you, or at least a list of books I use in my course, most of which are cheap. Just e-mail me in a week and it all could be yours!!! If you want a short form, I can get that to you tonight. [ 01-01-2002: Message edited by: Slapdragon ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Andreas: Silly sods.<hr></blockquote> Seconded and carried by acclimation.

For most companies that produce Mac and PC versions of Games, Mac sales represent 20% or less of sales in recent years, but the cost to service Mac customers (how much money do you spend on customer service) is about 10% per Mac customer compared to PC customers, meaning the company makes more money per user on the product. This magnifies the presence of the Mac players in the profit picture, at least until Microsoft stabilizes its OS production and puts more money into OS QC (although XP looks real good from the gamer standpoint).

First, lets ignore TSword. A short look at his extensive posting history (5 posts) show he has one axe to grind: That BTS somehow screwed everything up. Since he is probably a cipher for a banned or current member, there is no real need to pay any attention to him other than to wish him over to the WW2Online forum. Second, I have an interesting study of ballistic plates in body armor that presents a tested theory that layered plates actually resist steel shot penetration better than a single plate because shock force (one of the several forces at work in penetration) spreads out with each successive plate, spreading out the shock wave that high velocity rounds cause which weaken armor and cause easier penetration. On the other hand, the use of eratz armor like sandbags rarely have any effect on penetration, making me suspect the situation is far more complex than meets the eye. None of this is saying that the test Rexford uncovered is wrong, just food for thought. I am curious about what controls where present in the test.

I want my doodads. Daddy, can I please have my doodads?

It looks like an M41 with the turret turned rear, I have a picture of the rear of an M41 in Vietnam, and that is a similar if not exact match.

It is funny how Mace and sheep go together. One of the map makers in the magenta onion created a farm called "Mace's Sheep Ranch."

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Seanachai: Okay, whatever. Just so long as you know I hold you in the lowest esteem possible.<hr></blockquote> Yes sir, that and a dollar will get me a bagel and cream cheese. In the Onion, I think someone named a town after you, but I am going to ask that it be changed to a dump.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Seanachai: Not more than 1500 points, oh dis-esteemed opponent, and something like reality in unit choice.<hr></blockquote> To late, on the way already.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Seanachai: ROIGHT, THEN! THERE'S ONE LAD AS IS A BLIGHT ON THE GLORIOUS PENG CHALLENGE THREAD, AND HE KNOWS WHO HE IS...STEADY, THERE, SLAPDRAGON! I'M SPEAKING TO YOU, MY HAPPY LITTLE MAN!<hr></blockquote> My, the confusing little bit about the Magenta Onion and all. You of all people should appreciate this attempt to create an antigrog campaign that is idiotic and ludicrous. Byt not only did your splattering get your caps lock stuck, but it seems to have obscured a major portion of your screen. QUOTE]Originally posted by Seanachai: jaundiced eye

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Andreas: Where's my turn?<hr></blockquote> My current computer does not have CM on it, I have to get back home to use it.

Roll theme music fade in title on slug --Tales of the Magenta Onion-- music under voice over: "They lived on an Island Paradise a thousand miles from the outside world." "A beautiful island of running streams, deep forests, and quaint towns." "A land that time forgot." "But greed, wealth, and a general history of poorly prepared dinner dishes, made the residents of the little island of Fea Cebola step off into," "WAR!" "Two cities, locked in fierce combat over earth shaking issues, watch as armies mobilize." "Great Generals look to their maps, and watch as armies start to march." "On the border, a silence falls as the leaves start to sprout spring green, even as snow pregnant clouds still threaten civilization". "These are the stories of the great conflict which shook 20,000 square kilometers of the modern world." "Welcome to the Tales of the Magenta Onion" fade out.

The more I read on this, the more I am surprised to find out that nearly every western country had German based optical manufacturing in it, and that optic designs were virtually the same because they were from the same machines, made to the same processes, using engineers trained in the same techniques.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by daft: Slapdragon, I'm very interested in that. Please send to: edwards@mail14.calypso.net Regards ~Henric Edwards<hr></blockquote> Let me dig it out and send it. It is the type of history anyone can do, and that historians value greatly. Realizing that it is not the end all of history, and that it has it limitations, you become part of the writing of history as a gatherer of primary source information. I have done nearly a thousand and think it is about the most fun thing you can ever do.