Jump to content

Capt Cliff

Members
  • Posts

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Capt Cliff

  1. The report stated that the target was already identified by the Commander, so the 20-30 seconds stated is simply for the gunner to find the target to engage. Certainly it is entirely possible for circumstances to cause 20-30 seconds to go by. In fact, in CM:BN we have examples of engagements taking even longer or never happening at all. But what are those circumstances? Certainly not if the target is dead ahead at 500m, I'd say.

    It's like so many anecdotes that one reads. Without context and some sense of statistical merit, it's not very useful. It's certainly not useful to us and therefore we aren't going to do anything with this report.

    Steve

    So true. The only to solve this is to talk to a Panther gunner or commander who actually used this vehicle in combat. I saw a Youtube video of a Panther with a guy who seemed like he used them in combat. Any way of contacting him?

    Here's the video; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5rzkJAgHH4

  2. I've only read have this thread. The 20-30 second gunner target acquisition time seems really, really, really off to me. That's a very long time in tank on tank warfare. It would come on top of whatever time the Commander took to identify a target as well, so that's really puzzling.

    Agree that from a CM perspective the operational limitations have no meaning. Tactical stuff does, though I don't think too much weight should be given to this particular report. Steve

    Steve

    I respectfully disagree. There are too many variables to say 20 sec is a long time, 30 maybe. But that maybe be from spotting the target by the CO, alerting the gunner and driver, the driver increases rev's (most likely not reving an engine to max under no load that is a bad idea dynamically for the engine), spin the turret till it's close via the hydraulic's and then hand cranking the turret to the target. If the target is moving the gunner needs to guestimate how much he leads the target and the gun elevation for long range shot. So 5 sec for the CO to alert the crew, another 5 sec for gunner and driver to coordinate the turret spin via intercom (foot tapes on shoulder wouldn't work), 10 to 15 sec to spin the turret close at 1000 rpm or idle engine speed and then 5 sec to aquire the target in the gunners sight and another 5 sec to guesstimate a lead. So that 20 to 30 sec maybe ok. Then this is repeated if the next target is outside the gunners sight angle.

  3. Yep, when you set the game language to 'German', the vehicle status is in German. That's kind of the point of being able to choose the game language, in fact. :D

    Yep, just saw where he posted from. But I also noted when playing the German, in the English version, the infantry runs around speaking German. Nice touch but if the user can't understand German it's sort of a waste.

    Anyway ... the vehicle was bogged or immobilized?

  4. I'm pretty sure you don't know what you're talking about.

    Same to you Sport. Your not thinking of the practical application only what the possible max performance of the turret is AND not ANY battlefield conditions. Gee in Saving Private Ryan they could hear the German tanks coming down the road, so I guess Speilberg was wrong about the squeaky German tank bearings??

    Oh and it was uncool highlighting my text like that. It miss leads people that you know what your talking about. At least I am honest about what I am unsure of instead of just shooting my mouth off. What's the saying "Best to keep your mouth shut and let people wonder if your a fool instead of opening your mouth and confirming you are a fool too all listening."

  5. Err no 3000 is the red line and it was then governed down to 2500rpm in the production of the ausf A to cut down on overheating in the engine bay: 2500rpm was the safe max RPM. In combat do you really think you'd be concerned with noise disapline when you're in a 700hp tank shooting at 38 ton tanks both with 3inch sized shells travelling at anywhere from 600 to 900 m/s.

    I don't remember recon maintaining hand signals and noise discipline when involved in fire fights with militia in Timor, They'd yell out target indication and fire and movement orders while firing very loud guns unfortunately giving away their positions in order to kill the enemy.

    Do you have any sources or troop instructions where panther crews were to hold noise discipline's even to adversely effect their ability to shoot at other tanks, you know in combat?

    High and low is because their was 3 gearings for turret transverse by hand, hydraulic by rocket pedals (high) and hydraulic by stick (low) on the gunners right.

    Whoah dude take your Prozac!!

    But reving the engine should create an exhaust plume as well as noise. Enemy infantry in the area could hear it rev it's engine, especially if the Panther was set for ambush. The point was your not running your engine at max revs, BTW the 3000 rpm gave max hp of 700 per the Maybach site I found. There was also the problem of coordination of the driver, reving the engine and the turret operator (or who ever had the controls) to work together to get the turret spun around to the correct angle then hand cranked to the exact angle. Might be difficult with the engine reving, unless they had head sets for the Panther crew. Unknown to me. With these factors it might take a bit longer than 10 sec to zero in on a target with a Panther turret. I guess the Sherman turret was operated by only one person and indepentant from the engine rpm, so much more responsive and faster.

  6. Yes, but the Panther's sight had both 2.5X and 5X settings, so the gunner was not always looking down an narrow field of view. The Sherman's sight had only 5X but to compensate, he also had his own periscope. The Panther's arrangement was superior in that the gunner never had to take his eyes out of the sight, whereas the Sherman gunner lost time moving back and forth between the two viewing means.

    But the Sherman could shoot while it was moving and the Panther had to be stopped.

  7. Ausf D= 60 secs

    Ausf A 3000rpm = 15 sec

    Ausf A/G 2500rpm High = 18 sec

    2000rpm High = 23 sec

    1000rpm High = 46 sec

    2000 rpm low = 45 sec

    1000 rpm low = 93 sec

    Ausf F = 30 sec (Never saw combat service)

    It appears we have comflicting data from this posting and the thread orginator. I don't see the fast times ever being in use. At 2500 rpm that would put that Maybach engine in the Panther almost at red line, or at least at the max 700 HP @ 3000 rpm. That's really reving the engine. In a combat situation would you rev the engine making all that noise and most likely an exhaust plume possibly giving away your position. I am not sure what the 1000 rpm high and low means but 1000 rpm is close to idle so splitting the differents is take 60 sec to transverse 360 degrees. So 20 - 30 sec with the engine at idle is not that far off.

  8. Very interesting if it's true. The actual French Army report would be better than some guy's ramblings on a blog forum.

    But I have heard that German tanks had to be stopped and taken out of gear or the "clutch depressed" before the main gun was fired. That it would strip the tranmission gears if the main gun wasw fired while they were in gear. I believe this was with the PZIV, but not sure, since it was continually up-gunned but nothing was done to address the recoil.

    An that the Panther had a slow turret I also heard or read about. If the Shermans keep moving and firing on the move, with the gyro-stabilizer, a Panther had a hard time hitting. But once it did hit ... bye bye Sherman.

  9. It has also been argued that battlefields weren't where the AAA got deployed, and that it was ineffective at deterring ground attack where it was involved on the battlefield. So what people are asking for is effectively the edge case of AAA being intentionally used as meatchoppers. I make no comment on the validity or otherwise of the argument.

    During the seige of Bastogne the quad .50 cal M-16's were used extensivly to hold sections of the line that either couldn't be held by infantry or there weren't enough grunts to hold the line. It appears from TO&E's I have found on the web and other locations that triple A was assigned at the Division level, generally a company sized unit.

  10. 1) When exiting the editor the editor should prompt the user to "save" or exit, if the file has been changed in anyway, and not just exit. This might save a lot of grief if a miss click is done by hitting the exit button and it exits you from the program. This sort of thing is standard.

    2) Trees; it might be mice if some verbage is added to the trees/foilage. Like tall trees or medium trees or short trees. The little picture is ok for the type but not the size.

    Anyone else free free to chime in ...

  11. I've always wondered about the problem with "saving" damage on maps. I wonder how difficult (it must be very difficult) it is to extract a map from a saved game saved file? Obviously, if that could be done, voila! I assume that a saved game file is hard coded such that we can't extract the map from one like we can extract textures from a brz file.

    The data has to be there it's a matter of extracting it and reapplying it to the battle map if that battle map is chosen again. Unless they out sourced the code to China and no one at BF can read it now, no just funning.

  12. I think generating AI plans on the fly would be much, much more difficult than generating the terrain, and this is the real reason for not having a map generator.

    Best regards,

    Thomm

    I agree 100%. A map generator would be useful for 2 player games and not for player vs AI where the AI opponent needs guidance. Something CMx1 didn't require and CMx1 did lack. I stopped playing vs the AI in CMAK long ago.

  13. IIRC the decision to drop CMx1 Operations and move to CMx2 Campaigns was based on complaints from players about how Operations worked, but someone would have to dig out the old threads to see BFCs rationale. Personally, I liked Operations and played many by PBEM.

    In theory, you can do more or less the same thing with Campaigns, by having a campaign on the same map, I seem to recall there were some short user made CMSF campaigns done that way.

    The lack of persistent damage is an issue. It has been raised in the past, but probably won't be addressed until the scenario editor is revised, hopefully for the Bulge Game.

    Thanks Sarge!! But the Bulge game is $110 down the road ... and in these economic times chances of people buying are getting chancier. IMHO.

×
×
  • Create New...