Europa Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 I'm wondering after playing germans alot: Why are there no tanks with very armoured turrets on flimsy hulls? I might be damaged due to playing CMAK instead of dying in Normandy, but I get the impression that a small number of such vehicles would be useful in hulldown positions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Weight at the front of the turret is at a premium in a tank, because this is where most of the weight for the main gun sits. So if you have a big gun and a lot of armor at the front of the turret, you have to put a heavy counterweight at the back of the turret to counterbalance it. There's only so much weight you can add to the turret before it starts creating structural and/or balance problems. For example, an overly heavy turret creates higher center of gravity, can create problems with turret traverse mechanisms (too much weight to rotate), or with the overall weight balance of the tank. This is why you see tanks like the PZIV, which starts the war with a short 75 and relatively balanced armor protection between the hull and turret. As it gets upgunned and uparmored, though, pretty soon they hit the upper limit for the amount of weight they can add to the front of the turret, and have to choose between a bigger gun, or more armor. Most of the time, designers chose the bigger gun. Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Enigma Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 lol so say someone screwed up the caculations, there a chance a tnak could tip over onto side onto the gun if the turret was turned 90 degrees from the front? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Actually, if you look at the good old Sherman you'll see an 85-ish mm gun mantlet paired with a front hull about the thickness of a sheet of paper (I'm away from the game and working off memory here). Something similar for the M10s too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 The problem is also to come up with a turret rotation mechnism which can move the turret if the tank is standing on a slope. E.g. the KV-2 couldn't. The root of the problem is that the turret ring mechanism is expensive (mechanism, bearings etc), and tank planners for too long were building too narrow turret rings which then limited upgradability. I disagree with the original poster's thesis that strong-turret tanks are actually useful. A tank always meant for moving and attacking first. Also, if the thick turret would be sufficient, then the Germans would have put such a large plate on their tank hunters. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 I'm reminded of the awful problems the M10 TD had with its unbalanced turret. Horribly slow rotation on any kind of a slope. that's why with later and later models the rear counterweight kept getting bigger and bigger til the final 'duck bill' counterweight projected far out from the turret. This is usually the point where one hopes for an 'unbalanced turret' feature in the new game engine, but I doubt there wil be any M10 TDs running around in CMx2:Space Lobsters. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webs Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Redwolf: The root of the problem is that the turret ring mechanism is expensive (mechanism, bearings etc), and tank planners for too long were building too narrow turret rings which then limited upgradability. Exactly. This was the "problem" with the Matilda. It was an amazing tank for its time, but it was stuck the the 2-pdr because its turret ring was too small to withstand a heavier gun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS was 71331 Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Why can't tanks get an "unbalanced load" indicator light? My clothes washer gets them all the time, so the mechanism shouldn't be too expensive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Fine, just get in your time transporter... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Actually, I'm pretty sure they had unbalanced load indicators in the '40s. But what good would it do? This is a design issue, not something that occasionally happens when you put a few too many AP rounds on one side of the turret -- a heavy turret front makes the turret unbalanced *all the time*. An unbalanced load light would just be a rather expensive and complicated running light. . . Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merkin Muffley Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 Originally posted by MOS was 71331: Why can't tanks get an "unbalanced load" indicator light? My clothes washer gets them all the time, so the mechanism shouldn't be too expensive. Perhaps you should add a car battery at the same time as your clothes to avoid the imbalance in the first place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 An 'unbalance indicator' light would be kind'a redundant if the light comes on only when the turret rotation slows to a crawl - something that would be readily apparent. An experienced tank driver would make a point of avoiding eleven degree can angles when he comes to a stop! Concerns like these were why it often took awhile for a tank to get into a proper hull-down defensive position. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Originally posted by Merkin Muffley: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MOS was 71331: My clothes washer gets them all the time, so the mechanism shouldn't be too expensive. Perhaps you should add a car battery at the same time as your clothes to avoid the imbalance in the first place. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.