Kamp Kuzma: The Operators' Campgrounds (For Operating)

Heres the reason. Russian 85 mm ZiS-S-53 shell, Its caliber might be big, But its range isnt good. German 7,5 KwK can take down a target from 2000 meters.

Also. 85 mm ZiS-S-53 Armor Penetration wasnt that good either.

And i quote

Nope. Get a standart car propelant (gasoline) mix it with G.I. soap it creates a napalm like substance in a barrel. Get a fuse and a trigger than burry it.

When someone set it... KABOOM! ^^

Well that is quite interesting. Leave it to the Germans to make quality work but the Russians had the numbers. Imagine if those two had joined forces during the war.

That is also interesting, Lance. That'd make for a good trap and signal

Quality over Quantity.

Germans just got bullrushed.

But if theyd stop constant developing and just built Panzer IV and V they could have won the war.

But still.

A funny fact.

As soon as german was allowed to use the tank shed, they built a tank that makes M1A1 Abrams look like crap.

Maus?

Maus wasn't that good a tank, tbh

LOL

Nope
Modern tank. Leopard tanks

I thought we were still talking about WW2. . .

We are. I just Went a bit futher.

Anyway

Guess what this is. Its a WW2 tank



Answer is here

Second If you guessed it correctly, Guess what tank was fixed up to look like it.

Ill be going home. YOull have 30-45 mins to think about it.

I think I'm going to leave it for today. I'm quite tired.

Anyway. How are the suprises?

*Rolls around in the snow*

Leopard and Abrams are both relatively similar. Because both stem from same development project in the 70's.

Germans would not win the war if they just produced Panzers IV and V. Sure, they are good tanks, but mathematics are mathematics.

Each Panzer of that level needed much more resources then T-34. It also needed advanced factories; I'm pretty certain Russians could assemble their tanks with hammers, some nails and maybe a bit of welding.

A single Panzer needed more resources to be replaced then a T-34, resources that Germans did not have after certain point. Maybe in case of Panzer IV it still worked, but I'm pretty sure that Panzer V was pretty demanding technically.

Quality matters, but as Thermopylae shows, at some point quantity can overwhelm it. German industries could not match the same production level, especially being bombed. Ergo, they could not replace their losses at the same rate as Soviets did, and it still took them a lot of resources to do so.

Besides, T-34 was not that primitive design either. It coudl not match Panzer V, but it was definitely a match for smaller German tanks, especially after it's cannon was upgraded. And that was before Soviets begun to produce IS tanks, which could kill any German tank with those ridiculous artillery cannons.

And all that is a moot point anyway, because IL-2 could fry and of the magnificent Panzers with impunity. Same for cannon-equiped Hurricane.

Tanks are nice, but they can't exactly fire in the air.

That particular problem has been taken care of in some models. Prime example is HMG mounted on T-72 turrent with primal function of air supresion but the thing is that you never have a single body of same type unit but you have a diversity so the tanks are supported by AA units etc etc. The arguments here are straightforward and inflexible schemes where nobody calculates with other types of units that are deployed.

Yes. IF you think that way and fit every panzer with top of the line gadgets. T-34/85 is pretty much barebone. And yes. IF they have only built Panzer IV and V they have won.

Oh, Ground-attack aircraft. Don't forget about bordkannone-armed Ju-87Gs and Hs129 Panzerknackers.

And yep, Roomy's quite right. To sum it all up, almost a lot of German-manufactured tank engines are fragile and unreliable. The Sd.Kfz. 171 is a pretty good example.

And Kei, I'd love to be the group's Drill Instructor. For old time's sake.

Know what you mean about Sd.Kfz. But i still stand firm on my beliefs. IF they produced only Panzer IV and V they would have won.

I wonder how russians have fought if not for the lend lease...

Any ideas?

Lend-Lease? I'd say it's quite a failure. Some of the Allied-supplied weapons created havoc on Soviet logistics. Plus, some of 'em are not suitable to the terrain and conditions. Like the M3 Stuart, which pretty much did nothing. Considering that the little motherfucker is undergunned, too lightly-armored, likely to burn up in a few seconds, and the narrow tracks made it unsuitable to the Russian winter.


But I'd say, there are some successful weapons as well. Like P-39 Airacobras, notedly used by Alexander Pokryshkin and his units.

Hmm. Good points. Russian winter can be cruel.

I wonder if it fits.

In soviet russia Winter prepares for YOU!

Yeah, and the mud pretty much fucked Operation Typhoon.