How would the Cromwel do in the MA

[danny76]

comet wasn't THAT fast only maxed out at 32mph actually when the M-18 maxed out at SIXTY it also used a torsion bar suspension on a light chassis allowing speed turning on dimes... the thing only weighed out at 17.7 tons. It was the fastest tracked vehicle of WWII bar none

Tanks travelling at 60mph are a complete fantasy, they can, same as they can jump over berms and kinfe edges at high speed, normally seen on the manufacturers sales video's. In RL tanks that are jumping ramps at speed would be rendered ineffective in short order, with optics and radio's etc being damaged, gunlaying calibration knocked to hell, not to mention the cut up and bruised crew.

At high speed the greatest threat to crew is the tracks snapping and coming off the rear pulley, and over the top, potentially decapitating the commander/operator. Coupled with the roll potential of a now one tracked high speed 56 tons of steel. Tracks strech  considerably in normal use  and the potential for pins snapping at speed precludes high speed use.

[gyrene81]

Tanks travelling at 60mph are a complete fantasy, they can, same as they can jump over berms and kinfe edges at high speed, normally seen on the manufacturers sales video's. In RL tanks that are jumping ramps at speed would be rendered ineffective in short order, with optics and radio's etc being damaged, gunlaying calibration knocked to hell, not to mention the cut up and bruised crew.

At high speed the greatest threat to crew is the tracks snapping and coming off the rear pulley, and over the top, potentially decapitating the commander/operator. Coupled with the roll potential of a now one tracked high speed 56 tons of steel. Tracks strech  considerably in normal use  and the potential for pins snapping at speed precludes high speed use.

I'm guessing you have never driven a combat tank. I have only test experience in the Abrams but I got a lot of time driving the M60-A1 and the M-88 tank retriever, in the desert at higher than combat speeds...40-50 mph across the desert...never threw a track, never broke one, broke a torsion bar once when we rolled over a large boulder...a lot of tankers did break things, especially the dipstick reservists because they didn't know how to operate the things at high speeds.

None of my crew suffered an injury during our runs...and if you had a good driver, you could sit on top of the commander's cupola fairly easily.

The M1 Abrams is a much better tank and 45-55 mph off road...it has a very good suspension system...you have to really jerk it around off road to break or throw a track.


312BAR is just looking at the maximum road speed...cross country speed was dependent on the terrain, and rarely exceeded 45 mph even in vehicles that could go that fast, nobody wanted to break down and take a chance on getting caught by the enemy...unless they were being fired on, then the basic rule was, get it in gear and move.

[RipChord929]

Crusader and Cromwell, hell yes

Gun wise there was some overlap between the two vehicles.. 6pdr insalled in the last versions of Crusader(90% had 2pdr), and first versions of Cromwell. But Crommy was upgunned to 75mm ASAP..  Had the GV version of the Merlin engine too,

Love all the cruiser tanks

RC

[PJ_Godzilla]

(Image removed from quote.)
?

Exactly - both underarmed AND underarmored...

Give me the Nashorn, Wespe, and Hummel. I only expect to have to look at the enemy with the first one.

[danny76]

I'm guessing you have never driven a combat tank. I have only test experience in the Abrams but I got a lot of time driving the M60-A1 and the M-88 tank retriever, in the desert at higher than combat speeds...40-50 mph across the desert...never threw a track, never broke one, broke a torsion bar once when we rolled over a large boulder...a lot of tankers did break things, especially the dipstick reservists because they didn't know how to operate the things at high speeds.

None of my crew suffered an injury during our runs...and if you had a good driver, you could sit on top of the commander's cupola fairly easily.

The M1 Abrams is a much better tank and 45-55 mph off road...it has a very good suspension system...you have to really jerk it around off road to break or throw a track.


312BAR is just looking at the maximum road speed...cross country speed was dependent on the terrain, and rarely exceeded 45 mph even in vehicles that could go that fast, nobody wanted to break down and take a chance on getting caught by the enemy...unless they were being fired on, then the basic rule was, get it in gear and move.

Not much experience. Six years on cheiftan, challenger 1 and 2, some scimitar and scorpion experience. So no not really.

[PJ_Godzilla]

Not much experience. Six years on cheiftan, challenger 1 and 2, some scimitar and scorpion experience. So no not really.

So, did you ever have a track decapitation occur in one of your units?

Second question: I recall, on a trip to DRS industries down in Huntsville, looking over their optics/electronics/sensors cases - ALL of which were seriously hardened (thick, multipoint attachment cases with isolation for the contents) to protect their contents from the high-freq Buzz that spikes through a tanks shell when it gets HAMMERED by an incoming shell.

Do you honestly expect me to believe that you can't drive a Challenger at 60 for fear of damaging the delicate guts of such a sensitive beast?

I.e., I'm calling bull-flicking-cheetos on that assertion.


This here is the Challenger MBT. It's one of the best MBTs in the world and feature reactive armor that can defeat most shaped charges as well as a rifled 120mm gun that can reach out and penetrate hardened steel at fearsome distances.. We'd let you crawl around in it but we're worried you might bweak it.

[morfiend]

??

The US 57 mm Gun M1 was essentially a MK II British QF 6 pounder, with a slightly higher muzzle velocity due to a longer barrel (the Mk II had the barrel cut down from 50 to 43 calibers).

Ammunition was slightly better for the British (APC and APBC vs straight AP), but there was really little difference in performance on that front.

  I'd like my 6LBer to travel about 350 mph and to be sticking out the front of that beautiful new Mossie!

   

[OOZ662]

Do you honestly expect me to believe that you can't drive a Challenger at 60 for fear of damaging the delicate guts of such a sensitive beast?

Seeing as we're discussing WWII equipment and not Modern Warfare systems, I would say yes. I can't remember which tank it was (as I was on a reading spree), but it was one of the German light tanks; one of its downsides was that after cresting more than a small bump, the gun needed recalibration. Having looked at the images of the Tigers in restoration, I don't see much "hardened" equipment in there; regular radios and somewhat specialized optics. Comparing a digital-age beast of a tank with composite armor to a 40's rolled steel can seems a bit silly to me.

[PJ_Godzilla]

Seeing as we're discussing WWII equipment and not Modern Warfare systems, I would say yes. I can't remember which tank it was (as I was on a reading spree), but it was one of the German light tanks; one of its downsides was that after cresting more than a small bump, the gun needed recalibration. Having looked at the images of the Tigers in restoration, I don't see much "hardened" equipment in there; regular radios and somewhat specialized optics. Comparing a digital-age beast of a tank with composite armor to a 40's rolled steel can seems a bit silly to me.

It WOULD if anyone were doing it - but no one is. My questions are in response to Danny 76 - who claims time in the Challenger and Chieftain and also claims they can't be driven at those speeds without screwing things up. You lost the plot, OOZ - as do any of us when we don't read the full post (yes, I've done it too before).

As I say, those modules I was looking at in Huntsville were for the M1A1 - a contemporary of the Challenger, and they were hardened and isolated.
Worst case, we're guilty of a highjack.

[OOZ662]

I was addressing both of you.

You lost the plot, OOZ - as do any of us when we don't read the full post (yes, I've done it too before).

I make it clear in my post when I only read partial posts or threads.

[danny76]

It WOULD if anyone were doing it - but no one is. My questions are in response to Danny 76 - who claims time in the Challenger and Chieftain and also claims they can't be driven at those speeds without screwing things up. You lost the plot, OOZ - as do any of us when we don't read the full post (yes, I've done it too before).

As I say, those modules I was looking at in Huntsville were for the M1A1 - a contemporary of the Challenger, and they were hardened and isolated.
Worst case, we're guilty of a highjack.

The Challenger 2 has a 12-cylinder, 1,200hp Perkins Caterpillar CV12 diesel engine and a David Brown TN54 gearbox, with six forward and two reverse gears. Second-generation Hydrogas suspension and hydraulic track tensioner are fitted. The maximum speed by road is 36mph and 25mph cross country. The range is given as 450km by road and 250km cross country

Case rested

[danny76]

I'm guessing you have never driven a combat tank. I have only test experience in the Abrams but I got a lot of time driving the M60-A1 and the M-88 tank retriever, in the desert at higher than combat speeds...40-50 mph across the desert...never threw a track, never broke one, broke a torsion bar once when we rolled over a large boulder...a lot of tankers did break things, especially the dipstick reservists because they didn't know how to operate the things at high speeds.

None of my crew suffered an injury during our runs...and if you had a good driver, you could sit on top of the commander's cupola fairly easily.

The M1 Abrams is a much better tank and 45-55 mph off road...it has a very good suspension system...you have to really jerk it around off road to break or throw a track.


312BAR is just looking at the maximum road speed...cross country speed was dependent on the terrain, and rarely exceeded 45 mph even in vehicles that could go that fast, nobody wanted to break down and take a chance on getting caught by the enemy...unless they were being fired on, then the basic rule was, get it in gear and move.

You really mean to tell me you have been in a cross country 50mph drive in an m88 which has a maximum speed of 26 mph or in an m60 a1 with a maximum speed of 30 mph? Or better still in a n M1 Abrams ( top speed 42mph on road, 30mph ccross country?

I do believe that you and other posters here are having issues with kph and mph
The World's Fastest Tank. (Digest).

[Karnak]

  I'd like my 6LBer to travel about 350 mph and to be sticking out the front of that beautiful new Mossie!

   

This.   

[PJ_Godzilla]

I was addressing both of you.

I make it clear in my post when I only read partial posts or threads.

Yet you made no such statement here.

Danny and I were both writing about modern tanks. I fail to see where you got the impression either of us were comparing modern tanks to WWII-vintage tanks.

[PJ_Godzilla]

The Challenger 2 has a 12-cylinder, 1,200hp Perkins Caterpillar CV12 diesel engine and a David Brown TN54 gearbox, with six forward and two reverse gears. Second-generation Hydrogas suspension and hydraulic track tensioner are fitted. The maximum speed by road is 36mph and 25mph cross country. The range is given as 450km by road and 250km cross country

Case rested

I'll accept your case regarding the top speed of the Challenger. It's a bit ponderous, isn't it?

As for your original case: "Tanks travelling at 60mph are a complete fantasy, they can, same as they can jump over berms and kinfe edges at high speed, normally seen on the manufacturers sales video's. In RL tanks that are jumping ramps at speed would be rendered ineffective in short order, with optics and radio's etc being damaged, gunlaying calibration knocked to hell, not to mention the cut up and bruised crew."

I still call "dookies" since your stated reason had nothing to do with the tank's top speed. Further, I think it's well established the the M1A does something like exactly that - travelling at 50-55MPH with impunity.