Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
Quoted
Then the proposed Italian and Argentine tanks would be cold war...
Well, there are the wartime 75/70 and 88/71 guns...
Currently armour thicknesses are around 50mm at most, which is penetrable by a 47-50mm gun at ~ 1000m, which is around the practical maximum range. The shells don't go bang enough, which leads to low velocity 75mms, which have a shorter practical range but similar penetration. Now, with thicker armour appearing, like the 63mm sloped at 60° on the newest Atlantean tanks...
This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Vukovlad" (Apr 3rd 2009, 9:14pm)
Quoted
Originally posted by Vukovlad
Neither the italians nor Argrntines mounted that kind of guns on their tanks until the cold war (excl. the Semovente M41M da 90/53). ignoring all other aspects
This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Vukovlad" (Apr 3rd 2009, 9:52pm)
Quoted
Originally posted by Vukovlad
Well, they aren´t building them here either, they are building Type 96
As a curious tidbit In the game "When Tigers Fight" ( an alt history with the Axis winning the war followed by a German -Japanese war in 194 the japanese copies the T-34 which among others equip the "Emperors Loyal Hebrews" Army....
Quoted
Well, I don't blame Walter for not wanting to build the Chi-Ha.
This post has been edited 2 times, last edit by "Rooijen10" (Apr 3rd 2009, 10:00pm)
Quoted
Originally posted by Rooijen10
Quoted
Well, I don't blame Walter for not wanting to build the Chi-Ha.
Don't worry, The 'Chi-Hahahaha' is around. It would have been a sin not to use it.
http://wesworld.jk-clan.de/thread.php?postid=56679#post56679
... there is even a little bit of it in the Type 96 tank!
Quoted
Most of the historical Japanese tanks I've seen look... well, a bit pathetic.
Quoted
What TS shows on it's summary page is the equivalent armor NOT the actual armor thickness.
Quoted
Ah, right, I forgot. Still, I don't blame you for wanting to stop building it. Most of the historical Japanese tanks I've seen look... well, a bit pathetic.
Quoted
But easy to ship around the Pacific, which is more important.
Quoted
There's always the 120ton O-I tank as well with a 105mm gun.
Quoted
Yes, it looks too modern,
Quoted
Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
I'm not sure, I didn't do the AT-35 design, did I? I know I did the AT-27 and the AT-32, but I don't think I did the AT-35.
Quoted
Originally posted by Brockpaine
The Japanese 3"/50cal gun on the Type 96 is longer by caliber than any 3" gun historically fitted to the Russian T-34. The longest 3" gun ever fitted to the Russian T-34s is the 76.2mm/42.5cal F-34 (ZiS-5) gun - the original T-34 had a 76.2mm/30.5cal gun, which is entirely in line with the current Iberian versions of the Type 96.
The Japanese 3"/50cal gun won't be surpassed by a real-life T-34 gun until you compare it with the Russian ZIS-S-53 85mm/54.6 cal gun, which started development from the M1939 AA gun in 1943. So yes, the Japanese tanks really are 1943 tanks in 1936. The Iberian tanks are least fall within the pale of what is possible.
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH