Guest Pillar Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 http://members.tripod.com/~fingolfen/superheavy/p1000.html [This message has been edited by Pillar (edited 10-05-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanderer Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 Please tell me that was not a serious idea by the German's ---------------------------- "I love it, God help me I do love it so" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 Hey Commissar, There's your solution to the house problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombardier Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 That is the most ridiculous thing (almost) I ever saw!!! What purpose would it serve that could justify the logistics of operating that “tank”? Oh, wait! Isn’t that what they use to move the space shuttle to the launch pad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 This design seems to have some merit, if they actually had the technology to build it... All this stuff is at http://members.tripod.com/~fingolfen/othh.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingcursor Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 I kind of like the 1500 with the 80cm gun. A veritable mobile siegfried line. ------------------ "Both sides agree not to bomb civilians" - Washington Post, Sept 3, 1939 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disaster@work Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 I think Hitler was on heroin when he thought that one up. What roads could support that thing? It would carve trenches wherever it went. Could it even be transported on rail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 only if they include this American tank in the add-on pack *chuckle* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 The house tank: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted October 5, 2000 Share Posted October 5, 2000 ROFL! Good one Pillar, you never fale to make me laugh... Too bad those pics don't work ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 On the other hand, if any of the Allies saw that monster anywhere in the field crawling towards them, I'm betting they would abandon their little Shermans and rush in the opposite direction... Oh, and the site stated that each round would be 350 kg's...that's over half a ton I believe. Wonder how long it would take for the thing to reload. Yet then again, at an armor of waht must be several feet thick, Im not sure anything but a battleship's cannon would stand a chance of piercing it. Accompanied by many "guardian" tanks of a smaller variety (ie - KT's, Panthers ) this would actually be a pretty tough nut to crack assuming you got it to move at all ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 Odd that the pics don't work isn't it? They work if you paste the link in your browser window, just not as in-forum images. Maybe the site has some sort of protection against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rommel22 Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 The P-1000 is in PG2, well the modified cersion of PG2. You can get the mod for pg2 with the p1000 and p2000 at builders partadise (pg2). I am not sure of the actual url since I am at work, but at home I have it bookmarked. It's an interesting pice of work. Look nice though, good for parades ------------------ From the Das Reich book as said by a German soldier "when the Russians reached us, we opened fire, the first wave had no weapons. The second wave didn't either (fire fodder). The 3rd and 4th had weapons and opened fire on us. By this time we were low on ammo, but we drove them back." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michlos Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 What is interesting is the fact that the Germans actually built 3 prototypes of the Maus. If they would have had the resources to mass produce this one it might just have prolonged the war for quite a while. ------------------ < All gave some, some gave ALL> Owner of MiNa's CMBO Page http://www.combat-mission.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmead Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 Keep in mind that like forts in the Civil War you could always bring enough ships cannons to suppress any crews, or more appropriately Billy Mitchell could bring enough airpower to bear to sink any battleship (Yamato anyone). A slow moving, slow firing, limited manuver vehicle in small numbers would have had great local effect, while they lasted. Bring in the Typhoons! You could also just ignore them as they couldn't move aroound very much. has anyone been to Aberdeen to see the US supertanks? The T128 with doubled tracks and HVSS units gives you pause, they had to design it so the outer tracks could be removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaffertape Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 Tiger what the hell is that... That... THING on the Sherman chassis? Looks like a prop from a bad sci fi movie. Those side tubes don't seem to have room enough behind them OR any ability to elevate. Nor do I see any way that crewmen would have room near that centre gun to fire the ball MGs. Any more info on that thing? GAFF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmead Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 Doh, double post [This message has been edited by kmead (edited 10-06-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelWeenie Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gaffertape: Tiger what the hell is that... That... THING on the Sherman chassis? Looks like a prop from a bad sci fi movie. Those side tubes don't seem to have room enough behind them OR any ability to elevate. Nor do I see any way that crewmen would have room near that centre gun to fire the ball MGs. Any more info on that thing? GAFF<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> IIRC, those are 7.2" Birney guns (recoilless rifles) to take out concrete fortifications. Or something like that. ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schugger Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 Cool stuff! Imagine that thing in a QB: Turn 1: immobilized Turn 3: Stuart sneaks up, farts with his 37mm cannon. BOING! Gun damaged. Turn 4: Abandoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schugger: Cool stuff! Imagine that thing in a QB: Turn 1: immobilized Turn 3: Stuart sneaks up, farts with his 37mm cannon. BOING! Gun damaged. Turn 4: Abandoned.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What about the other gun . Regards, John Waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter S Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 That superheavy German tank design, the 'Ratte', if authentic, is perhaps one of the dumbest ideas I have ever seen in the history of military vehicle design. Maybe one day when ultra-durable suspensions, small scale nuclear power plants and lightweight rail guns become commonplace on the battlefield can such a beast be considered feasible, but 1945/46?!? Forget it. While it's firepower is impressive, it's rate of fire was probably pathetic. And given the state of gasoline and diesel engines in the 1940s, the Supertank's cross country and road speed would have been equivalent to a snail's pace, meaning it would be limited to operating on more developed roads and highways, further lessening its overall impact on the battlefield. Most importantly, the Ratte is extremely large, meaning even medium bombers would have a chance of nailing it with low altitude carpet bombing using armor piercing ship-killing bombs. Also keep in mind that given the Ratte's obscene cost and high maintenance requirements, it would have been an infrequent sight on the battlefield, attracting unwanted attention wherever it went. Essentially every single tank and artillery shell and air dropped bomb within miles would be directed against such a freakish monstrosity. Heavy armor or not, it would have been knocked out of action before it even reached the front lines... I'd take a couple platoons of Panthers or Tigers over that rolling bomb magnet any day... Lastly, the Maus, Germany's less 'impressive' 100 ton supertank, was another stupid and wasteful project. I would consider the King Tiger to be at the borderline where good sense blurs with folly as far as WWII German tank designs go. A 70 ton tank with an exceptional 88L71 gun was more than enough for the WWII battlefield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 This is the experimental demolition tank t-31. The two outer tubes are 7.2" rocket launchers in a 5-shot revolver style launcher (carried 30 rockets), the center gun is a dummy gun, and it has two .30 cal mgs. It was fitted to take a dozer blade and a hull-mounted 50-gallon flamethrower as well, and it had a .50 cal mg atop the rear turrent roof.... I'm still trying to figure out where one would sit to fire the .50 cal ? -john [This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 10-06-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 here's a tank allied players would love to use in CMBO, a quad-20mm Sherman designated the "Skink" .... Not many were built because the allies had no need for an AA-tank. The British did use this in NW France against infantry I've read. ("Sherman" by R.P. Hunnicutt) -john [This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 10-06-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtualfreak Posted October 6, 2000 Share Posted October 6, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tiger: This is the experimental demolition tank t-31. The two outer tubes are 7.2" rocket launchers in a 5-shot revolver style launcher (carried 30 rockets), the center gun is a dummy gun, and it has two .30 cal mgs. It was fitted to take a dozer blade and a hull-mounted 50-gallon flamethrower as well, and it had a .50 cal mg atop the rear turrent roof.... I'm still trying to figure out where one would sit to fire the .50 cal ? -john [This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 10-06-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Tiger that has to be the UGLIEST,Most EXPENSIVE tank that the Americans ever tried to produce! now I know were all my tax dallors are going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT Posted October 7, 2000 Share Posted October 7, 2000 Sorry guys but if we are going to wish for a AFV to be added it must be this one: http://www.algonet.se/~toriert/tsar_tsar.htm MikeT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts