Jump to content

And now.....


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, landser said:

Hole 1 is a mean dogleg right. But maybe you could take it right over the trees there.

Yeah, golf too now

And all due to me carelessly tossing idioms around. Gotta be more circumspect.

I think we should all be proud of the inclusive nature of this fine forum.  But golf?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lethaface said:

I think this discussion is now mixed between what defines a tank, the politics in the German army during WW2 about who controlled the Stugs and whether the Swedish 'S-tank' was capable in the anti tank role.

If the former owners didn't call it a tank and the crew had to wear artillery uniforms, I rest my case. I admit I am not an expert on the S-Tank. But the manufacturer calls it an S-Tank and with guns you can shoot at tanks too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The way I see it, it's a tank if the person using it calls it a tank, or if the person building it calls it a tank, or if it's used in a battlefield role that would (or could be) be performed by a tank.

Or if it's a Monday.

Or the word, "tank," is now used as a generic term for, "any vehicle that drives around on tracks," by a buddy of mine back from three tours in Afghanistan who refers to his M113 as a tank.

It seems only on forums like this are the real nitty gritty details hashed out.

I love you guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, General Jack Ripper said:

The way I see it, it's a tank if the person using it calls it a tank, or if the person building it calls it a tank, or if it's used in a battlefield role that would (or could be) be performed by a tank.

Or if it's a Monday.

Or the word, "tank," is now used as a generic term for, "any vehicle that drives around on tracks," by a buddy of mine back from three tours in Afghanistan who refers to his M113 as a tank.

It seems only on forums like this are the real nitty gritty details hashed out.

I love you guys.

My pacifist inclined sister called the M113 a tank when she saw one. Your buddy is among good company. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/9/2021 at 2:55 PM, chuckdyke said:

My pacifist inclined sister called the M113 a tank when she saw one. Your buddy is among good company. 

I once saw an M113 trundling down the Eastern Freeway in Melbourne, and I remarked to my then wife, "check it out - there's a tank on the road."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Freyberg said:

I once saw an M113 trundling down the Eastern Freeway in Melbourne, and I remarked to my then wife, "check it out - there's a tank on the road."

In psychology it is called stimuli generalization. If you tell your wife there goes an 'APC' you know (subconsciously) that you must explain what an APC is. Like my sister who at best regards the armed forces as a necessarily evil.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2021 at 5:18 AM, Irididdle said:

AAAAAA, Gimme the stupid DDR helmets, oh god I can see it in my head already.

Here you go:

http://www.ddr-uniformen.com/?page_id=416

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/M45_(Stahlhelm)

 Minute 5:48: https://archive.org/details/DieDeutscheWochenschauNr.733

Quote

 

The NVA steel helmet has an eventful history, the beginnings go back to the Third Reich. There the steel helmet used later in the NVA was invented and also patented under the Reich patent no. 706467. It was tried here to manufacture a helmet easier to produce, which has better protection against splinters and bullets by the beveled edges. The straight surfaces at the front of the Model M42 were often penetrated by bullets and splinters. The end of the war did not allow a large series production, the helmet has not come out beyond a pre-series in 1945.

Based on a memorandum from the Army Medical Inspectorate, which pointed to the increasing number of head injuries and other shortcomings of the previous German helmet models M35 and M40, the development of a new steel helmet was approved by the Army Weapons Office in 1942 - bypassing the Ministry of Armaments and Adolf Hitler's ban on new helmet designs.

The work was carried out at the Chemisch-Technische Reichsanstalt by the Institut fßr Wehrtechnische Werkstoffkunde Berlin (Director: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Fry and Dr. Hänsel). Four models were shortlisted for testing: "A" = a slightly modified helmet 35, "B", "B/II" and "C". The experienced manufacturer of steel helmets, the Eisen- und Hßttenwerke AG Thale/Harz, which had been commissioned with the production of the test samples, also submitted the "Thale proposal", which had been developed as a modification of the model "B" under the direction of the chief engineer Erich Kisan. During firing and troop tests, the two "B" models proved to be the best. The prototype was registered as a patent on December 7, 1943 under the number 706467. The further results were summarized in a memorandum and presented to the Fßhrer's headquarters in the fall of 1944. Despite the positive assessment of the helmets as well as the great savings in material and working time, it refused to introduce a new helmet model - apparently for logistical reasons and for reasons of tradition. Only a few hundred helmets were issued for troop testing. Series production did not take place.

The NVA later took up this design again and produced this helmet from 1956 in series, in the course of time this was revised several times. The later versions had clipped chinstraps which loosened with load. Due to the far protruding sides, soldiers were often stuck on edges of vehicles or trenches, which led to injuries to the spine. Ballistically and in the hearing the NVA steel helmet is until today one of the best, if not even the best! The protective effect has only been surpassed since the introduction of Kevlar helmets.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

 

Reichspatent-706467-Stahlhelm-NVA.jpg

Edited by sawomi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...