Maximus Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 OK, I just noticed this a liitle while ago while testing out Marco Bergman's new "baggaged" Sherman II. I noticed that the Sherman III costs more than the Sherman V. So I went back into the Editor's Map Preview and compared the two's stats. Sherman III is faster and has better armor thickness. The Sherman V also has only 85% armor quality. Now I looked up both of these tanks in Chamberlain's "British & American Tanks of WWII" and found that the Sherman III is the M4A2 model and the Sherman V is the M4A4 model. BTW, the A4 model came before the A3 model, hey, go figure! But anyway, how could the A2 model be a better tank than the A4 model? And yes, the Sherman is a tank. Going back to WWI standards, a MkI was a tank. Any grogs out there that can shed any light on this seemingly paradoxial anomoly? ------------------ "Upon my signal, unleash Hell."--General Maximus, Gladiator "Aim small, miss small."--Mel Gibson, The Patriot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 M4A2 had a diesel engine, M4A4 had petrol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Both the M4A2 and M4A4 used fully welded hulls. However, the front armour on the M4A4 was simpler than the M4A2, using five major sections instead of seven. Both used castings and rolled plate for the major sections, but I am unclear which sections were made of what. I suspect the M4A4 used more castings and less rolled plate, which would account for its poorer rating. ------------------ When it's my turn to march up to Glory, I'm gonna have one HELL of a story... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Forever Babra: Both the M4A2 and M4A4 used fully welded hulls. However, the front armour on the M4A4 was simpler than the M4A2, using five major sections instead of seven. Both used castings and rolled plate for the major sections, but I am unclear which sections were made of what. I suspect the M4A4 used more castings and less rolled plate, which would account for its poorer rating. I would think the gasoline powered tank is more likely to burn when it is hit - though the ammo stowage in each was not good (dry stowage). Rarity doesn't seem to be an issue - about 8,000 of each were built according to George Forty. The ASL rulebook also gives them a RF of 1.0 (if you trust that as a reference). The ASL rules also say the Brits liked the Sherman III the best because of "better speed, performance and reliability." [This message has been edited by Michael Dorosh (edited 01-31-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullethead Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 The M4A4 aka Sherman V never had the "Ultimate Sherman" front armor configuration of 2.5" at 47^ slope. Instead, it always had the original 2" at 56^. This was considered inferior despite the better slope. Also, the Sherman V used the Chrysler Multibank 30-cylinder engine so was considerably heavier (and a couple feet longer), and thus slower, than all the other types of Sherman. Hence the lower price. ------------------ -Bullethead In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there is bacteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted February 1, 2001 Author Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: M4A2 had a diesel engine, M4A4 had petrol. Petrol? What is that, the Commonwealth term for Gasoline? I'm just kidding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Maximus: Petrol? What is that, the Commonwealth term for Gasoline? I'm just kidding! That's what I get for quoting George Forty, I guess! Actually Canadians used to laugh at the American Army during WW II cause in Canada, our civilians used words like "gas", "flashlight", "wrench", etc., but the Canadian Army used British terms like "petrol", "torch" and "spanner." Americans, on the other hand, used "gas", "flashlight" and "wrench" in civilian life AND army life, which seemed odd and "unmilitary" to Canadians. On the whole, Canadians I think respected American soldiers - but were always surprised that the US Army did things so differently from the Commonwealth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted February 1, 2001 Author Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: On the whole, Canadians I think respected American soldiers - but were always surprised that the US Army did things so differently from the Commonwealth. Differently? You mean the Canadian Army thought it was odd that the US Army called things by what they actually are? BTW, what the hell is a "spanner", does it span something? I got it, Commonwealth Armies like to make up some B.S. term to stand for an ordinary everyday item. So what if I started calling a battlemap, a war-parchment. Or a helmet, nogginwear. This world would be a lot simpler if people didn't make up nonsensicle names for things. Like Pop, for instance. What the hell is Pop? It's a freakin' Coke, for crying out loud!!!! LOL! NOTE: The above post was nothing personal to Mr. Dorosh, but just a bit of sarcasm to the inconsistencies of modern language. ------------------ "Upon my signal, unleash Hell."--General Maximus, Gladiator "Aim small, miss small."--Mel Gibson, The Patriot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Maximus: Differently? You mean the Canadian Army thought it was odd that the US Army called things by what they actually are? BTW, what the hell is a "spanner", does it span something? I got it, Commonwealth Armies like to make up some B.S. term to stand for an ordinary everyday item. So what if I started calling a battlemap, a war-parchment. Or a helmet, nogginwear. This world would be a lot simpler if people didn't make up nonsensicle names for things. Like Pop, for instance. What the hell is Pop? It's a freakin' Coke, for crying out loud!!!! LOL! NOTE: The above post was nothing personal to Mr. Dorosh, but just a bit of sarcasm to the inconsistencies of modern language. I should have pointed out that those terms are common terms in British civilian life. A "boot" was (and is) the trunk of a car, a "lift" was an elevator, a "pavement" was a sidewalk, and when a girl asked you to "knock me up in the morning" she wanted you to call on her - not impregnate her. The point being that Canadians used American terms in civilian life, but British terms in military life - which is why the "regular English" that they used at home, and was used by American soldiers, seemed so "unmilitary". And I get the feeling it was you Americans that broke from convention and started giving things funny names, not the other way around. Funny world, I will agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted February 1, 2001 Author Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: I should have pointed out that those terms are common terms in British civilian life. A "boot" was (and is) the trunk of a car, a "lift" was an elevator, a "pavement" was a sidewalk, and when a girl asked you to "knock me up in the morning" she wanted you to call on her - not impregnate her. No, no, silly. A "boot" is what you wear on your foot. It is *not* a car trunk. See, you just proved my point. A car trunk is a car trunk. "Pavement" is a mixture of crushed rock and cement or oil, (concrete or asphalt). A sidewalk is a sidewalk. OK, a "lift" I can see. And when a girl asks me to "knock her up in the morning," I say, "No thanks you whore, I can't afford the child support." Again, this post is meant in fun. PS. How do all those British people live in Flats? I knew they were shorter than Americans, but I didn't know they were *that* small! Lennox Lewis excluded, that's one tall M'F'er. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 You must be right Maximanus, that's why it's called OGEC not OPEC. I mean everyone knows when you say gas you don't actually mean it is, well that's perfectly logical isn't it? BTW I see your best mate Rob/1 has been giving you thread title composition lessons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 That's what we get for tryin' to help out Maxim-ass. If you don't like the language the English gave you, learn another, and stop telling the rest of the world what's right. ------------------ When it's my turn to march up to Glory, I'm gonna have one HELL of a story... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacestick Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Simon Fox: You must be right Maximanus, that's why it's called OGEC not OPEC. I mean everyone knows when you say gas you don't actually mean it is, well that's perfectly logical isn't it? BTW I see your best mate Rob/1 has been giving you thread title composition lessons. I think the "p" stands for producing and not petrol as you imply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Sheesh errr? producing what? This is a 'taking the piss' kinda thread so lets not get too serious here Pacestick. Where did I use the term 'petrol'? In fact it is petroleum. Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacestick Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Simon Fox: Sheesh errr? producing what? This is a 'taking the piss' kinda thread so lets not get too serious here Pacestick. Where did I use the term 'petrol'? In fact it is petroleum. Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries It was in the spirit of "taking the piss outa" when i posted but you are quite correct. All I managed to do was piss on my own leg Don't be so glass jawish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subvet Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Maximus: BTW, what the hell is a "spanner", does it span something? Well, in America a there is a class of tool called a "spanner wrench." We don't call all wrenches a "spanner" though, just the spanner wrenches. A spanner wrench can take on many different shapes. Often they are used on couplings or ring type fasteners. The coupling/ring will have one or two slots or holes and the wrench has one or two pins or blades that fit into them. ------------------ Craig "Only a madman would consider the possibility of war between the two states (France and Germany), for which, from our point of view, there is no rational or moral ground." - Chancellor Adolf Hitler, Oct. 14, 1933 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Maximus: BTW, what the hell is a "spanner", does it span something? A good way to describe you methinks Regards Jim R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Subvet: Well, in America a there is a class of tool called a "spanner wrench." We don't call all wrenches a "spanner" though, just the spanner wrenches. A spanner wrench can take on many different shapes. Often they are used on couplings or ring type fasteners. The coupling/ring will have one or two slots or holes and the wrench has one or two pins or blades that fit into them. Christ, a spanner/wrench grog. I've seen everything now! Regards Jim R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordfluffers Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Maximus: Differently? You mean the Canadian Army thought it was odd that the US Army called things by what they actually are? BTW, what the hell is a "spanner", does it span something? I got it, Commonwealth Armies like to make up some B.S. term to stand for an ordinary everyday item. So what if I started calling a battlemap, a war-parchment. Or a helmet, nogginwear. Right Maximus, for your cheekiness, Im going to have to flame you now!!! Where does the English language come from, England or the USA??? You may speak English but you Yanks should remember you are merely colonials who have grossly misused and damaged our great language. A spanner is the correct term, wrench is wrong. Petrol is a fossil based fuel, gas is the stuff that comes out of your arse, it also floats around, methane is a good example. Its not a muffler, its an exhaust, for that matter its a boot not a trunk. Its not a vaction, its a holiday. Its a nappy not a diaper. Im a Brit not a Limey, although you are still a Yank because it's our language and we get to make the rules. Understand???? One other thing colour is spelt with a 'U', and through is not spelt 'thru' even if it is easier to stick on signs for fast food restaurants. I hope this has been an enlightening English lesson for you!!! P.S. The British captured the Enigma Code Machine and decoded it entirely on their own. U571 had nothing to do with it. Go make your own legends up or steal someone elses!! (Disclaimer - this post is deliberately offensive and provocative so don't get angry with me, I'm only being argumentaive for the sake of it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted February 1, 2001 Author Share Posted February 1, 2001 But lassey, you forget, the American language is derived from every language around the world. We only use British English as a base. BTW, we can't hardly understand a word you all speak. Mainly as stated above, you all have different names for everything. I still don't understand what a spanner is. A Holiday is a day that is obseverved as a time of reflection on some historical figure or event. A Vacation is the time a person takes off from ordinary every day life (work or school) to go somewhere for a break from daily routines. Exhaust is the by-product of internal combustion engine. It is usually carbon-monoxide and water vapor. A muffler is a device that fits onto an exhaust pipe to muffle the sound of the gasses going through the pipe. Petrol is the short term for petroleum, just as gas is the short term for gasoline. However gas, natural gas, is a fossil fuel that comes out of the ground to be used for heating and such. BTW, English is actually a Germanic language, so there! Also it is underwear, not knickers. But, hey, when the British can come up with a tasty dish, let me know. For the world knows that the British can't make a good tasting dish if their lives depended on it. LOL! This is starting to sound like the Cesspool. What I don't get is even though you have a strange term for something, you still seem to know what the American equivalent is. So who's stealing from whom? It's like French Canadians pretending that they don't know English. Please! [This message has been edited by Maximus (edited 02-01-2001).] [This message has been edited by Maximus (edited 02-01-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordfluffers Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Maximus: But lassey, you forget, the American language is derived from every language around the world. We only use British English as a base. BTW, we can't hardly understand a word you all speak. Mainly as stated above, you all have different names for everything. I still don't understand what a spanner is. LOL! This is starting to sound like the Cesspool. What I don't get is even though you have a strange term for something, you still seem to know what the American equivalent is. So who's stealing from whom? It's like French Canadians pretending that they don't know English. Please! Right that's it you rude little colonial!! A spanner is what you might term a wrench (funny thing for using on bolts etc. like on bikes). English is based upon Saxon, Norse, Celtic, a bit of French, and Latin, not particularly Germanic although some Saxon influences are there! Also it is underwear, not knickers. It is underwear, not knickers however, pants are underwear(like Homer Simpson') and NOT trousers which are very different. But, hey, when the British can come up with a tasty dish, let me know. For the world knows that the British can't make a good tasting dish if their lives depended on it. Have you never tried steak and chips??? Or Bangers and mash?? oh how miserable your lives must be!! Anyway you show me a good American dish that hasn't been raped or stolen from another culture!! What I don't get is even though you have a strange term for something, you still seem to know what the American equivalent is. So who's stealing from whom? It's like French Canadians pretending that they don't know English. Please! Ahhh but that's because we're educated and have a learned understanding of the wider world, your ignorance is no defense. (You walked into that ) P.S. Last time I was in NYC, A woman asked me where I was from, I told here England. She asked me if that was near Mexico. Ha ha!!! Another time I was in NYC another woman asked me when I told her I came from England whether they spoke English there!!She was amazed at how good my English was!!! OMG you crazy Americans P.P.S. You're right this is very close to the cess pool, it's hanging on for dear life! [This message has been edited by Lordfluffers (edited 02-01-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andrew Hedges Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 I spent the first semester of fifth grade in Canada - in the 70's - and learned that the item that Americans call a "rubber band" was simply referred to as a "rubber" by Canadians. Luckily, I didn't understand the American meaning of the term until I was older. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullethead Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 I see all this blather about spanners and wrenches, but I am shocked that nobody has mentioned the key difference between whisky and whiskey. And you all call yourselves grogs! ------------------ -Bullethead In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there is bacteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Andrew Hedges: I spent the first semester of fifth grade in Canada - in the 70's - and learned that the item that Americans call a "rubber band" was simply referred to as a "rubber" by Canadians. Luckily, I didn't understand the American meaning of the term until I was older. Nope - you may be remembering it wrong, or it may have changed, but rubbers are what we wear over our shoes in the winter (kind of like an overshoe). Elastics here are what you guys call rubber bands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Anyway you show me a good American dish that hasn't been raped or stolen from another culture!! Why, chili, my good man. The funny thing is, many people in the USA think that chili is a Mexican food, but Mexicans want no association with what was concocted originally in Texas (and all the mutations that followed afterwards ). One cookbook mentioned that one Mexican dictionary went so far as to label chili "detestable." You can agree with that if you want, but I couldn't care. I myself will always seek out a decent, BLAZING, well-cooked pot o'chili. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts