Stalin's Organ

Mopes-a-lot reckoned somewhere he's off to polish his 10" gun barrel - how many here reckon he's bragging?? :mad: :mad:

What - you're going to pay a pawn shop money to be able to walk out with him?? Tsk tsk.......

The penguins say Hi, and you're welcome any time.

Did I say you did? And why would I care anyway? Or, in words you might perhaps understand....baaa......baa.....baaaaa.......bbbaaaaa...there's a good little mutton chop.

They reserved those names for beef dishes. </font>

Oh? And you're playing what exactly? Tiddly winks?? No....that would require some skill and forethought......and opponents too....and we all know you're all too busy playing with yourselves Never mind - we priase the powers that be for small mercies such as having peng p1ss off - such things are worth smilies even

Time for a new one ladies :mad: :mad: :mad:

Stupid title for a stupid thread full of stupid wallies! Especially Mopes a lot and Snickers, but everyone else too - TNT to the lot of ya! :mad: :mad: Pillocks :mad: :mad: :mad: [ October 14, 2003, 02:17 AM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organ ]

Possessive pronouns aside - why? AFAIK no-one on this thread is playing AK, and if various ppl want to have their contributions to the AK CD criticised then perchance this thread is not really the ideal place to do it??!!

Pillock! To avoid checking and posting in 2 forums you should have not bothered opening this one!! What's this thread got ot do with CMAK?? In case you hadn't noticed we're all playing cmbb!! Leave pollution of this thread by your pustulent self until you're at least talking about hte game!! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Well said. </font>

But they were crewed at the time. The only tanks "unmanned" were those that the British destroyed themselves on Hill 213 long after the Wittmann had left the scene. </font>

At least your chaps managed some exercise then! I suspect the only person you'll be beating by hand is yourself you scurrilous poodle - but if you want a bit of TNT chucking then send something my way - I'm sure to be able to do a little better than the late, and never particularly great, Mistress Pourer-of-Piss

That's TNT Tossers to you sonny boy. :mad: :mad: Be it noted all that Dave-H managed somehow to lose my fiendishly awful scenario Katukov continues as the Russians vs the AI.....just how he managed this is a matter for a Royal Commision of Inquiry, for never before in the annals of CMBB history has so much been defeated by so little!!

I did this time! Feel free to complain, whine, whinge and generally throw tantrums when you see what's gonna happen!

So 99 and Ass - have you started that littel number I sent Ass a couple of days ago yet?? [ October 04, 2003, 09:20 PM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organ ]

Hey 86 (how appropriate - you sure need to get smart!!) - what's your e-mail addy?? [ October 02, 2003, 02:16 AM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organ ]

Yeah - allied tankers mainly! AT guns killed more tanksthan anythign else - the Pak 40 was the most common German AT gun, the 6 pdr and 45mm probably the most common Allied ones. T34's were mainly used against infantry, with the preferred Russian AT armour being SU's.

Yep - the 20mm round isn't very lethal - it doesn't produce a lot of lead flying sround inside the target. Chances are you'll get the kill, but it might take seveal shots, and there's quite a good chance your crew won't notice that they've KO'ed the target until its crew bails out and will keep pumping rounds into it well after it's actually dead.

According to a 2nd NZ Div grog friend of mine they're talking about trial pre-production versions of the PIAT issued to a few units in mid-1942. He believes they were issued 2 to a battalion and most units didnt' really think much of them at the time.

I dunno that a flame thrower "forces" it inside as such, but it will use an awful lot more gas per shot than a molotov - especialy a vehicle mounted one. IIRC we're talking 2-5 gallons per shot (9-25 ltres), verses a pint (1/2 litre) for a molotov.

Fixed MG's are relatively common in tanks - more particularly soviet ones tho. The 2 side MG's in the Stewart were fired by the driver - they were aimed by pointing htewhole vehicle, and were probably quite useful for supressing enemy infantry!!

They were not poorly equipped for thte time - shrek's, fausts and bazooka's didn't always exist, and before they came along killing tanks with infantry required brave and/or stupid men to get very close and throw things at the monsters. Pretty much all nations made some sort of thrown AT grenades - whether called mines, grenades or charges. Some worked on the monroe principle (hollow charge), some were incendiary (molotov cocktails) some were just largeg quantities of explosives to smash something (grenade bundles, satchel charges). Some stuck with magnets, some tried sticky coatings. All were things any sane person would much rather not have to use!!

For starters guns are chambered for a particular size of cartridge - so if you just slap a heavier shell on the front it goes slower. If you do rechamber the gun you have higher pressures - a larger propellant chargge pushing a heavier projectile, so you also have to increase the weight of hte breech and barrel to contain those pressures - I imagine it would soon become an exercise in futility as your 500 ton "2 pounder" struggles to contain hte pressures incured by firing a 17 lb shot IIRC Kinetic energy = 1/2 * mass * velocity*velocity (v^2) - so in a simplistic sense it's better to go faster than to becoem heavier.

If soviet tankers were given shrapnel already fused at zero, and not told how to reset the fuses to anything else, then perhaps they might think of it as case shot and refer to it as such? Just speculation as to how case and shrapnel might be considered as the same thing.