Top 10 tanks of the war

Holy shoot, and Otto complains about me!

 

I doubt that the look of an AFV rates highly on the desirable qualities list. The Crusader, for whatever its looks, was pretty much a dog of an AFV. This was a light tank in production at least two years after its design should have been abandoned. It had no better armor than the American M 3 Stuart, and an equivalent gun.
Yes, the Brits did shoehorn a 6 pdr into the III model but only by making the crew compartment extremely cramped and inefficent. The Crusader was mechanically complex and unreliable compared to German and US AFV as well.
If anything, British WW 2 armor development might be summed up as "Mediocrity thy name is any British tank."

 

I second that.

 

Oh you Stug lovers you!

 

How do we adapt the "If it looks right it flies right" saying to a tank?

 

The Churchill tank was NOT crap, or the firefly, or the Comet...


​

 

If it has an 88 it cannot be ugly ever so it must have an 88!!!

 

The Churchill? Are you joking? 87000lbs for a tank that initialy mounted 2 (2!) x 2pdrs? The Russians in the same time frame were mounting a long 75mm gun on a KV-1 weighing the same and they thought it undergunned, and later the JS-2 mounted a long 122mm gun on a frame weighing the same thing. Even with the later 6 pdr and the 75mm gun taken from the Sherman the Churchill in Russian terms was just a pea-shooter!

The Firefly? Yes, it was based on what was a damned good chassis, and adding a superlative gun ought to make a good mix.

The Comet, yes, a good tank too, even if considering I wasn't able to squeeze my 1.63m frame into the front hatches! Another tank for Aethiopians!

 

Are you converted yet?

 

Oh I have always liked them, I just preferred the ladies that could turn their heads

 

Even though it is not from WW2 the Sweeds built a main battle tank with no turret, the STVR 103 or S tank. Check it out.

Oh and the Jagd-Tiger is the best. WOW!

 

Talk about difficult to hit in a 'hull down' position. Crewed by 3 (commander, gunner/driver and rear driver).



both Commander and gunner/driver could aim and control the gun from their respective periscopes.

 

The Churchill never had 2 2pdrs. The first 2 models had 1 2pdr and a 76mm howitzer in the nose.

Oh, the jagdtiger wasen't a tank-it was a tank destroyer. But I love it too!

 

All right, Mr. Picky

Churchill I - 2pdr on turret + 3in How in hull
II - 2 pdr in turret + BESA instead fo 3in How in hull
II CS - 3in How on turret + 2pdr in hull (wow, Mk I in reverse!)
III & IV & IX - 6pdr
IV (NA75) - M3 75mm gun (US)
V & VIII & XI - 95mm How
VI & X - 75mm gun (Vickers)
VII - ditto

 

How about this one...........The Black Eagle. It also has a crew of 3 and is the first tank to not have anyone in the turret.

 

For its weight the Churchill was. As Za points out a 2 pdr on a 40 + ton tank?!! Even in its later versions the best that could be mounted on it was a 6pdr or 75mm both of which were no better than the gun on early Shermans.

The Firefly? An AMERICAN Sherman tank modified to take a larger gun. This is not a "British" tank. It is an American tank with nothing more than a British gun shoehorned into it. Do note, the US Army Material Command did contemplate putting an M 26 turret on the Sherman (the turret rings are the same size) as an interm measure in early 1944 but didn't, instead just waiting for the M 26 to get into service.
Look at the Cromwell. To get a 17 pdr into it the British had to lenghten the hull adding an extra road wheel, and then put on a huge slab sided box of a turret ending up with the ungainly Challenger.

The Comet? An improved Cromwell that still had the same slab sided armor of the Cromwell with similar suspension (Christie vertical spring), mechanics and, the single improvement of a cut down 17pdr (the "77mm") that would fit into a properly designed turret. Some advance there.

The first really good British tank design is the Centurian, and that is virtually, if not entirely, a post war vehicle.

 

Oh and the Jagd-Tiger is the best. WOW!

Hopefully, this was meant tongue-in-cheek. The JadgTiger was a true dog. Yes, it had a big gun and heavy armor but it was a mechanical nightmare. The overstressed transmission took 7 to 10 days to change out (this required removing the top of the fighting compartment, removing the gun and mantle 9 ton load, removing the top of the driver's compartment, then removing the drive shaft and much of the equipment in the driver's compartment and, finally, removing the transmission. Then the maintenance guys had to put all this back once the transmission was repaired). The suspension was overloaded (particularly the Porsche version) and frequently snapped torsion bars requiring several days in the shops to replace.
The engine was overloaded. The ammunition was primarily stored high in the hull and used seperate shell and cases leading to an almost certain ammunition fire if the vehicle was penetrated which, in turn, would lead to an almost certain catastrophic explosion of the vehicle.
Its weight made it difficult to transport, even harder to road march, incapable of crossing many bridges, and in general a tactical obstacle to movement.
It had so many shortcommings that it was virtually worthless as a combat vehicle.

 

I wonder how long it will be before the Chinese have this tank?

All very true, except for the last line, but to me it looks awsome. When it did make it to combat it did okay.

You also forgot to mention that when the gun was sighted-in just driving would mess it up, which is why the barrel lock was installed, but not to many men wanted to jump out in combat and release the barrel.

 

Well it all depends on when the Russians are going to be willing to sell it. There were rumors of this tank first going to the Koreans (south) but that was cleared up by the Government. As of right now this tank is still kept in a great deal of secrecy but when production starts, it will set new standards for tanks to follow.

 

Oh and I prefer this Jagd-Tiger