Tank poll

[Butcher]

What gun is he referring too . I would prefer a source in a language I can read . You claim it was and can be done . Show me something in either German or English I can't read Russian . I really am not sure what gun he is talking about ? If it was US M4 is he stating M2 is only effective to 600 yards ? To illustrate my point about attacks against tanks . Here is a link , note shallow angle . Your source is claiming suicide bombers were common against Soviet tanks ? They don't even invade Manchuria until 2 days before Japan accepts terms of Potsdam ? He says they helped alot ? Really ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOn-Jt7J6Tk

Use Google Chrome and translate the page, it's quite clear the main guns were used against aircraft, since you can't figure out how to translate a webpage here's what it says - Its an interview from an aging Russian who was a tanker during WW2, he gives detail on how he used the main gun against german aircraft and Japanese, There are a few german/russian accounts of using main guns against aircraft's - there simply isn't a book that specifically points out someone who shot down multiple aircrafts against them.

One account I have read was the German 6th Panzer Army early in the War, Russian IL-2s were still developing tactics at the time and used to have a long drawn out dive, this was latter changed to a steeper dive after a few IL-2s were shot down in 41/42, only problem is again its in Russian and I have a hard enough time trying to translate the information.

There are enough accounts it could be done, Since we have Icons also it makes tracking aircraft a hell of a lot easier then without, without it would be infact extremely rare to see an aircraft shot down by main gun.

[Karnak]

You guys with no real life military experience just don't get it. If tanks could shoot down aircraft with the main gun don't you think it would have happened by now? From 1916 to date. I am not talking about video games. It is like trying to shoot a flying bird with a rifle while sighting through a drinking straw from the trunk of a move car. What part of this don't you understand? I can't explain it any simpler than this.

Your claim here is that if the bird flies straight at your straw, no tracking or movement of the straw needed, it is magically invisible to it.  That is absurd.

[hlbly]

Use Google Chrome and translate the page, it's quite clear the main guns were used against aircraft, since you can't figure out how to translate a webpage here's what it says - Its an interview from an aging Russian who was a tanker during WW2, he gives detail on how he used the main gun against german aircraft and Japanese, There are a few german/russian accounts of using main guns against aircraft's - there simply isn't a book that specifically points out someone who shot down multiple aircrafts against them.

One account I have read was the German 6th Panzer Army early in the War, Russian IL-2s were still developing tactics at the time and used to have a long drawn out dive, this was latter changed to a steeper dive after a few IL-2s were shot down in 41/42, only problem is again its in Russian and I have a hard enough time trying to translate the information.

There are enough accounts it could be done, Since we have Icons also it makes tracking aircraft a hell of a lot easier then without, without it would be infact extremely rare to see an aircraft shot down by main gun.

OK give me source for German account . I am highly skeptical of any source that says Soviet tankers faced Kamikaze attacks . So I don't know how to translate a webpage . What would it matter . Your source says that this helped alot against Japanese suicide bombers . Total combat loss of Japanese aircraft against Soviets was 10 . So how does alot apply ? Enough accounts it could be done ?

[hlbly]

Your claim here is that if the bird flies straight at your straw, no tracking or movement of the straw needed, it is magically invisible to it.  That is absurd.

Karnak once again you ignore the problem of acquisition . You are enclosed in a turret with a field of view of about 8 degrees . How do you  find it ?

[Butcher]

OK give me source for German account . I am highly skeptical of any source that says Soviet tankers faced Kamikaze attacks . So I don't know how to translate a webpage . What would it matter . Your source says that this helped alot against Japanese suicide bombers . Total combat loss of Japanese aircraft against Soviets was 10 . So how does alot apply ? Enough accounts it could be done ?

Here's the problem you are looking for -
American's and British didn't face an exclusive war against the Germans across a 2,500 mile front - Finding an American/British tanker who shot at aircraft is going to be quite troublesome. Russian information/source is extremely NARROW to come by, this is just one tankers experience and trying to remember details from 50+ years earlier, some information might be off correct - do you remember every detail of what you did last week? I give the kamikaze info to be a little far fetched, but it doesn't determine everything is a lie and made up, he does have a book and I cannot get my hands on an english copy of it.
Now look for German sources - how do you extract information from dead tankers? Its extremely hard to find AAR's of german tankers something i've been searching for years now. Simple details like one time a German Panzer had to shoot the barrel of a KV-1 tank because its rounds simply wouldn't penetrate the tanks armor, so the gunner aimed for the barrel and hit it instead making the tank useless.

I've given two accounts, and pretty sure there are far many more out there of what you are asking, problem is I don't have access to every information there is, I have to consider it source since it was an actual Russian tanker whose book details were pulled from.
I can give you the name of his book, perhaps you can find an english copy and prove otherwise?

[Wiley]

You guys with no real life military experience just don't get it. If tanks could shoot down aircraft with the main gun don't you think it would have happened by now? From 1916 to date.

The difference is, they had limited ammunition for that gun that their lives depended on.  They weren't sitting on a mountain of ammo and time in a barca lounger like we are.  The one time I've main gunned an aircraft in this game, I was looking through the scope for the tank he flew over at about 200 feet when I elevated and shot him.

I am not talking about video games. It is like trying to shoot a flying bird with a rifle while sighting through a drinking straw from the trunk of a move car. What part of this don't you understand? I can't explain it any simpler than this.

I've hit more than one bird in flight with a rifle, arrows too.  The easiest shots were when they were coming straight on.  Much like in the game.

Karnak once again you ignore the problem of acquisition . You are enclosed in a turret with a field of view of about 8 degrees . How do you  find it ?

So are you both saying the field of view on the tanks through the scope is too wide ingame?

Wiley.

[Butcher]

Karnak once again you ignore the problem of acquisition . You are enclosed in a turret with a field of view of about 8 degrees . How do you  find it ?

The Russian tanker specifically said he left his hatch open unless bombs were overhead or he was in a city, then he'd keep the hatch closed, then again this is one tankers actual account.

- Does the German aircraft materiel significant damage? What can you say about the Henschel HE-129?
- Not every time, but it happened. Henschel do not remember, maybe this was. Sometimes managed to dodge the bombs. Bomb because you can see how it flies. Opened hatches, pokes his head and said to his driver, say "Bomb tears to come." But in general there were cases when burned tanks. The losses did not exceed 3.5 tanks per battalion. Often burned a tank. It is much more we got it in the settlements of faustpatronnikov. In Hungary, I remember once I was tired before he had said to his deputy, lead battalion of you, and I sleep. And I fell asleep right in the fighting compartment Sherman. Under the Balti we dumped munitions from aircraft by parachute. We currently have a parachute. That's it, I fell asleep. The parachute silk, and silk head lice do not start. And I'm so fast asleep! Suddenly I woke up. Why not? From the silence woke up. What is it, why the silence? It turns out, flew planes, burned two tanks. During the march on the tank a lot of things in bulk - crates, tarpaulins. Here are two tanks and set on fire. The battalion has stopped, choked the engines, and all was quiet. And I woke up.

- Have you locked the hatches during the fighting in the city?
- We always locked the hatches. I am of such an order did not hear anything. That's me when I was in Vienna broke, threw grenades into the tank from the upper floors of buildings. I ordered the drive all the tanks in the arches of bridges and buildings. But his tank was forced to withdraw from time to time into the open, to spread shtyrevuyu antenna and communicate by radio with the command. Radio operator and driver were working inside the tank, but left the door open. And on top of someone threw a grenade into the hatch. It exploded at the back of a radio operator, and both were killed. So we are in the city closed the hatches necessary.

[Ack-Ack]

Shooting flying aircraft is gamey and should be done away with. Just make it so rounds don't hit flying planes kind of like the friendly collision model we have now.

It actually isn't gamey and it was done in real life. This is what a former Soviet battalion commander (6th Guards), Dimitriy Loza said about defending their Lend-Lease Shermans from air attack.

Q: The Sherman had an antiaircraft machine gun Browning M2.50 caliber. Did you use it often?

- I don't know why, but one shipment of tanks arrived with machine guns, and another without them. We used this machine gun against both aircraft and ground targets. We used it less frequently against air targets because the Germans were not fools. They bombed either from altitude or from a steep dive. The machine gun was good to 400–600 meters in the vertical. The Germans would drop their bombs from say, 800 meters or higher. He dropped his bomb and departed quickly. Try to shoot the bastard down! So yes, we used it, but it was not very effective. We even used our main gun against aircraft. We placed the tank on the upslope of a hill and fired. But our general impression of the machine gun was good. These machine guns were of great use to us in the war with Japan, against kamikazes. We fired them so much that they got red hot and began to cook off. To this day I have a piece of shrapnel in my head from an antiaircraft machine gun.

Again, while there might not be any records confirming planes were shot down by a main gun on a tank, it is quite clear that tankers did use their main guns on occasion to defend themselves from low attacking planes.  What would make it gamey is to do what you suggested, now that would be gamey and rather lame.


ack-ack

[hlbly]

The Russian tanker specifically said he left his hatch open unless bombs were overhead or he was in a city, then he'd keep the hatch closed, then again this is one tankers actual account.

- Does the German aircraft materiel significant damage? What can you say about the Henschel HE-129?
- Not every time, but it happened. Henschel do not remember, maybe this was. Sometimes managed to dodge the bombs. Bomb because you can see how it flies. Opened hatches, pokes his head and said to his driver, say "Bomb tears to come." But in general there were cases when burned tanks. The losses did not exceed 3.5 tanks per battalion. Often burned a tank. It is much more we got it in the settlements of faustpatronnikov. In Hungary, I remember once I was tired before he had said to his deputy, lead battalion of you, and I sleep. And I fell asleep right in the fighting compartment Sherman. Under the Balti we dumped munitions from aircraft by parachute. We currently have a parachute. That's it, I fell asleep. The parachute silk, and silk head lice do not start. And I'm so fast asleep! Suddenly I woke up. Why not? From the silence woke up. What is it, why the silence? It turns out, flew planes, burned two tanks. During the march on the tank a lot of things in bulk - crates, tarpaulins. Here are two tanks and set on fire. The battalion has stopped, choked the engines, and all was quiet. And I woke up.

- Have you locked the hatches during the fighting in the city?
- We always locked the hatches. I am of such an order did not hear anything. That's me when I was in Vienna broke, threw grenades into the tank from the upper floors of buildings. I ordered the drive all the tanks in the arches of bridges and buildings. But his tank was forced to withdraw from time to time into the open, to spread shtyrevuyu antenna and communicate by radio with the command. Radio operator and driver were working inside the tank, but left the door open. And on top of someone threw a grenade into the hatch. It exploded at the back of a radio operator, and both were killed. So we are in the city closed the hatches necessary.

So what if he said he left the hatch open ? M4 does not have a hatch for the gunner .  I have spent the last few hours looking for any reference to any main gun engagement vs AC . Only thing I found was in reference to games .

[Ack-Ack]

So what if he said he left the hatch open ? M4 does not have a hatch for the gunner .  I have spent the last few hours looking for any reference to any main gun engagement vs AC . Only thing I found was in reference to games .

Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks: The World War II Memoirs of Hero of the Soviet Union Dmitriy Loza

ack-ack

[hlbly]

It actually isn't gamey and it was done in real life. This is what a former Soviet battalion commander (6th Guards), Dimitriy Loza said about defending their Lend-Lease Shermans from air attack.

Again, while there might not be any records confirming planes were shot down by a main gun on a tank, it is quite clear that tankers did use their main guns on occasion to defend themselves from low attacking planes.  What would make it gamey is to do what you suggested, now that would be gamey and rather lame.


ack-ack

The fix I think is to move the sight about 20 degrees in deflection and 20 in elevation when you switch to gunner from TC .


He says they used them against Kamikaze . What Kamikaze attacks ? Kamikaze pilots had a hard time hitting ships because of poor training . This I don't know about but I find it a little hard to believe any Kamikaze attacks were launched against tanks .


The Soviet Strategic Offensive in Manchuria, 1945: "August Storm" by David M. Glantz.


Another 20 transport and liaison types were in the flying section of 2 nd Air Army Hq. and Kwantung Army Hq. There were also a number of unserviceable planes at each repair depot.

    During operations against the Soviet Union about 10 aircraft were lost in combat and about 50 to other causes.
    Approximately 10 hq. recon planes and 6 transports (Type M.C.) [Ki-57/ MC-20] were transferred to the Soviets. Other planes were handed over to the Chinese Communist Army, which later entered Manchuria, the CCA established the Air Training School in Manchuria. At that school approximately 40 Japanese Fighters (Type 4) are [written in immediate postwar period] employed in training. However, just after the end of the war the Chinese Nationalist Army advanced to southern Manchuria, and it is presumed they captured some Japanese planes at the Mukden and Changchun airfields

[hlbly]

Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks: The World War II Memoirs of Hero of the Soviet Union Dmitriy Loza

ack-ack

How would having a hatch open for the TC help a gunner acquire an aircraft ?

[Wiley]

How would having a hatch open for the TC help a gunner acquire an aircraft ?

Is what we see from the scope in game too wide a field of view?

Wiley.

[hlbly]

Here's the problem you are looking for -
American's and British didn't face an exclusive war against the Germans across a 2,500 mile front - Finding an American/British tanker who shot at aircraft is going to be quite troublesome. Russian information/source is extremely NARROW to come by, this is just one tankers experience and trying to remember details from 50+ years earlier, some information might be off correct - do you remember every detail of what you did last week? I give the kamikaze info to be a little far fetched, but it doesn't determine everything is a lie and made up, he does have a book and I cannot get my hands on an english copy of it.
Now look for German sources - how do you extract information from dead tankers? Its extremely hard to find AAR's of german tankers something i've been searching for years now. Simple details like one time a German Panzer had to shoot the barrel of a KV-1 tank because its rounds simply wouldn't penetrate the tanks armor, so the gunner aimed for the barrel and hit it instead making the tank useless.

I've given two accounts, and pretty sure there are far many more out there of what you are asking, problem is I don't have access to every information there is, I have to consider it source since it was an actual Russian tanker whose book details were pulled from.
I can give you the name of his book, perhaps you can find an english copy and prove otherwise?

Even you have trouble believing the Kamikaze attacks yet you want us to believe the other stuff . Experiencing a suicide attack and remembering where I bough cigarettes is entirely different .Wrong . German documentation was extremely good right up until the war was over . They can account for every single Tiger tanks fate right up until the end .

[hlbly]

Is what we see from the scope in game too wide a field of view?

Wiley.

I am not sure Wiley . Field of view should be about 8 degrees .