SU152

[PJ_Godzilla]

The Somua S-35 had a turret carrying a 47mm gun, as did the Char B1; the 2nd also had a hull mounted 75mm gun.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOMUA_S35
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Char_B1

If doing a wiki before you post is to hard, I have an old book on WWII tanks that I don't use much anymore that I'd be glad to send you; that way you can refer to it before you post so that you don't show your ignorance on subjects.

Mea Culpa. I should've checked again. I stand corrected. The drawback of the turret was that it was a one-man design, meaning the commander also had to load. I switched the two in a faulty recall.

The point stands, also, that the SU152 doesn't have a fixed turret. It has no turret at all.

[PJ_Godzilla]

Mea Culpa. I should've checked again. I stand corrected. The drawback of the turret was that it was a one-man design, meaning the commander also had to load. I switched the two in a faulty recall.

The point stands, also, that the SU152 doesn't have a fixed turret. It has no turret at all.

I should also ask, why are you demanding Crusader III? They were known to be a pretty lousy armour/armament combination, at least by '42-'43: a 6-pdr with 51mm of frontal armor. Compared to the Panther's 75 L70(we NEED that tank) and 150mm of (well sloped) frontal it really doesn't stand up. I don't even think it'd do well against the later models of PzIV.

When you say, IV, otoh, I'm assuming you mean Cromwell, since a Wiki search shows no Crusader IV.

Being fastidious in your searches, though, I assume you already know this.

[PJ_Godzilla]

I should also ask, why are you demanding Crusader III? They were known to be a pretty lousy armour/armament combination, at least by '42-'43: a 6-pdr with 51mm of frontal armor. Compared to the Panther's 75 L70(we NEED that tank) and 150mm of (well sloped) frontal it really doesn't stand up. I don't even think it'd do well against the later models of PzIV.

When you say, IV, otoh, I'm assuming you mean Cromwell, since a Wiki search shows no Crusader IV.

Being fastidious in your searches, though, I assume you already know this.

Funny, even a Google search shows no Crusader IV.

I've got an old book I can lend you...

[Keiler]

The 152mm gun has a pretty low muzzle velocity at around 600m/s for most rounds. Call it a shell lobber .
That means hitting at range difficult due to its steep impact angle when the round finally arrives there. Any minor misjudgement results in a miss.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/152-mm_gun-howitzer_M1937_%28ML-20%29


I would rather see it as a siege tank, dealing massive HE damage against buildings. AT capability imho is rather restricted to self defense...
As was already mentioned, reload time is a serious drawback also.

Matt

[Nemisis]

The Somua S-35 had a rotating turret carrying a 47mm gun, as did the Char B1; the 2nd also had a hull mounted 75mm gun.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOMUA_S35
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Char_B1

If doing a wiki before you post is to hard, I have an old book on WWII tanks that I don't use much anymore that I'd be glad to send you; that way you can refer to it before you post so that you don't show your ignorance on subjects.

I was going to say, didn't it have a turret, and a bigger gun? I know when the war started, the british and french had, more, better tanks than the germans, but didn't use them well.

[PJ_Godzilla]

It did, but as I noted in my subsequent post, it was a one-man turret, diminishing it's effect. Also, the tanks were not deployed and used en masse but rather penny-packeted into the fray as infantry support. So yes, tactics and design both played a role.

Indeed, you'll see contemporary British ref to "cruiser" and "infantry" tanks - e.g. the Crusader III and Churchill, resp. The two had expressly different purposes.

Von Krimm, who berates my lack of a search, mistakenly refs. Crusader IV in his sig but I believe he means Cromwell, since Crusader IV doesn't exist. Regardless, it was of the former type and was an evolution of the Crusader series.

[Nemisis]

I. Wonder if the Germans didn't use tanks en mass, if we would hot another round of trenches. No loader though? Yes that would limit it's efectivnes.Still though, the Germans had fewer, not as good tanks yet, due to superior doctrine, pushed back and surrounded the BEF at Dunkirk forcing the withdrawl of British and free French forces.