Tiger Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 `Tiger Here's some more work on it. The 3-d model for this tank is foo-barred. Nearly pulled my hair out trying to fix the wheels on this one. Unfortunately the side bmp (3460) is overlapped by another side bmp (3450) and guess what? They do not align anywhere near close. That's why 3460 is blacked-out in the original CMBO bmp. Oh well here's some improvements (?): [This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 02-26-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
109 Gustav Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 Finally, a worthwhile churchill mod. I may have to send a raiding party to Combat Missions so I get to host your mods. Just kidding, Manx. ------------------ Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat. But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown. And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing. The Last Defense- Mods, Scenarios, and more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyStrike Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 Drool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeE Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 A pretty mod, but man I can't but think that is one ugly tank. Did the Brit's have some 90 degree rule, where all the armor had to be straight up and down? On a more serious note, I wonder if this armor was easier to produce, because it was "flat"? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest machineman Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 I likewise wonder what was up with the whole flat armour idea (not just the Churchill, but PzIV, Tiger, etc). I've done plenty of welding, and welding something together on an angle is no harder than 90 degrees especially once you have some sort of jig. And surely it was easy enough to fire away at a flat vs sloped plate and discover just how much harder sloped plate is to penetrate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
109 Gustav Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 I would say it's for more interior space, but the Church was one of the roomiest tanks of the war, so it could afford to lose some space to sloped armor. I don't think it would be that much harder to roll out plates of armor with the edges at a 45 degree angle, and it isn't any harder to weld at an angle. ------------------ Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat. But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown. And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing. The Last Defense- Mods, Scenarios, and more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 The thought that sloping armor is a good idea, took quite while to sink in. You need more plate for sloped one and you lose space in the process. It took T-34 to really hammer in the thought. To appreciate the mental leap, imagine a sloped bulletproof vest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wadepm Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 Actually, sloping the armor reduces the amount of plate needed if you keep the tank footprint the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PawBroon Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 Excellent work Tiger as usual. I am at the office actually so couldn't test it but would that MOD include the particular gun of the AVRE? ------------------ You are not Obsessive-CMpulsive, you are Allied-Retentive. Mark IV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 Originally posted by wadepm: Actually, sloping the armor reduces the amount of plate needed if you keep the tank footprint the same. And if your opponent is kind enough to fire from the same elevation. ------------------ Mein Vater, mein Vater, und hörest du nicht, Was Erlenkönig mir leise verspricht? - Sei ruhig, bleibe ruhig, mein Kind; In dürren Blättern säuselt der Wind. Stereotypes The Un-Rant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 Appropriate name for such a cute lil creature. Orta have a cigar sticking out its hatch. Nice work Tiger. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lord General MB Posted February 26, 2001 Share Posted February 26, 2001 Sir, WOW! Drool! When can we get our hands on this puppy? ------------------ Salute! Lord General Mr. Bill Supreme Commander 1st Army Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordfluffers Posted February 27, 2001 Share Posted February 27, 2001 IIRC, the British tank designers refused to design sloped tanks (until the world beating Centurion in 1945) because they believed (stupidly) that the effects of the sloped armour would be negated by the tank moving acroos angled terrain, i.e. a tank moving down a hill would give a much lower angled front. Very bizarre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted February 27, 2001 Share Posted February 27, 2001 Originally posted by Lordfluffers: IIRC, the British tank designers refused to design sloped tanks (until the world beating Centurion in 1945) because they believed (stupidly) that the effects of the sloped armour would be negated by the tank moving acroos angled terrain, i.e. a tank moving down a hill would give a much lower angled front. Very bizarre. Uhhh.... Okay. ------------------ Mein Vater, mein Vater, und hörest du nicht, Was Erlenkönig mir leise verspricht? - Sei ruhig, bleibe ruhig, mein Kind; In dürren Blättern säuselt der Wind. Stereotypes The Un-Rant [This message has been edited by Forever Babra (edited 02-26-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted February 27, 2001 Author Share Posted February 27, 2001 Bump for the newest image. Still a bit to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted February 27, 2001 Author Share Posted February 27, 2001 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russellmz Posted February 27, 2001 Share Posted February 27, 2001 holy cow that's nice ------------------ russellmz, Self-Proclaimed Keeper for Life of the Sacred Unofficial FAQ. "They had their chance- they have not lead!" - GW Bush "They had mechanical pencils- they have not...lead?" - Jon Stewart on The Daily Show [This message has been edited by russellmz (edited 02-27-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Clark Posted February 27, 2001 Share Posted February 27, 2001 Looking GREAT Tiger! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordfluffers Posted February 27, 2001 Share Posted February 27, 2001 Originally posted by Forever Babra: Uhhh.... Okay. Babra darling, Im talking about the front of the hull, mantlet and turret being sloped, not the sides of the turret. In general, British tanks were built with 90 degree armour plates on the front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted February 27, 2001 Share Posted February 27, 2001 First of all, that's looking very good, Tiger. However just one note, it appears to be a bit too dark. Care to lighten it up a tad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Bates Posted February 27, 2001 Share Posted February 27, 2001 Originally posted by Lordfluffers: IIRC, the British tank designers refused to design sloped tanks (until the world beating Centurion in 1945) because they believed (stupidly) that the effects of the sloped armour would be negated by the tank moving acroos angled terrain, i.e. a tank moving down a hill would give a much lower angled front. Very bizarre. As a policy it is stupid, but as a matter of fact the angle would move towards 90 degress if travelling down a hill. Which is why when CM players say that a tank facing towards the foot of a hill, has better armour angle, are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Bates Posted February 27, 2001 Share Posted February 27, 2001 Originally posted by Maximess: First of all, that's looking very good, Tiger. However just one note, it appears to be a bit too dark. Care to lighten it up a tad? Are you joking? I suggest purchasing a new monitor or better still an Apple Mac which is not hobbled by a PCs gloomy gamma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted February 27, 2001 Share Posted February 27, 2001 Originally posted by Lordfluffers: Babra darling, Im talking about the front of the hull, mantlet and turret being sloped, not the sides of the turret. In general, British tanks were built with 90 degree armour plates on the front. Looks like some mighty fine slope on the front of that Crusader to me. What-everrrrrr.... ------------------ Mein Vater, mein Vater, und hörest du nicht, Was Erlenkönig mir leise verspricht? - Sei ruhig, bleibe ruhig, mein Kind; In dürren Blättern säuselt der Wind. Stereotypes The Un-Rant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Williams Posted March 1, 2001 Share Posted March 1, 2001 *Bump* How's it going, Tiger? Getting close to release? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Clark Posted March 1, 2001 Share Posted March 1, 2001 Ah, I was looking for this thread earlier today... Can't wait to get this Mod! ------------------ "Fear is for the enemy... Fear and Bullets." "They didn't want to come... but I told em, by jeepers, it was an order." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts