Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: gofaster on September 30, 2005, 05:18:09 PM
-
... and I'm really wishing we'd get an American tank.
I think the M-24 Chafee, in combat in 1944 with various Allied armies, would be just fine and wouldn't disrupt gameplay.
(http://www.hobbiesr.com/images/hsg.jpg/hsg-404.jpg/hsg31119.jpg)
NA M-24 Chaffee Close Window
Light Tank
The M24 Chaffee Light Tank.
BASIC INFORMATION:
Designation: M-24 Chaffee
Manufacturer: NA
Country: United States
Service Date: 1944
Type: Light Tank
Crew: 5
DIMENSIONS:
Length: 16 feet, 6 inches
Width: 9 feet, 8 inches
Height: 8 feet, 1 inch
Weight: 40,500 lbs
PERFORMANCE STATISTICS:
Powerplant: 2 x Cadillac 44T24 V-8, 100 hp Gasoline Engines.
Max Speed: 35 mph
Max Range: 160 miles
ARMAMENT(S):
1 x 75mm main gun
2 x .30 caliber machine guns
1 x .50 caliber machine guns
HISTORY / NOTES:
The M24 Chaffee was a light tank used throughout 1944 into the 1970's. This was a light tank, employed by reconnaissance units. However, in the U.S. Army divisions in Japan before the Korea War, it was the only type of tank available and all of them were in what was supposed to be the divisional heavy tank battalions. Each division had about 15 to 17 M-24 tanks at the time.
However, if that is deemed inappopriate, then I wouldn't mind a Sherman.
(http://members.cox.net/johnahamill/m4a3e8a.jpg)
M-4A3E8
Nicknamed the "Easy Eight", over 4,500 M-4A3E8s were produced beginning in March 1944. The HVSS or horizontal volute spring suspension gave more shock absorption and allowed wider tracks and more mobility. The tank mounted the 76mm gun and had more steeply sloped frontal armor. The turret and gun mantlet were both larger. Earlier versions of the M-4A3 retained vision slots for the driver and co-driver, but later models like those shown here used periscopes. The M-4A3 used an 8 cylinder 500 horsepower radial aircraft engine.
Standard Armament: One 75mm - 105mm, One .50 cal AA, One .30 cal coaxial, One .30 cal hull
Traverse: 360° (36°/sec) powered
Elevation: +25° to -10°
Ammunition: 97, 300, 4750
(http://www.strategyplanet.com/commandos/images/sherman_13_big.jpg)
-
youre a brave man. Im surprised all the naz....err Germanfiles havnt started slapping you silly yet for such an outlandish request. How dare you add an American tank when there are so many more German tanks to add?!! Doing so would prove that HTC is Biased towards American vehicles! :rolleyes:
Of course its a good idea...it wouldnt last long agasint the Panzer and T34, but it would add some more variety to the game. I dont think GVs are high on their list at the moment tho..but then again..Ive been known to be wrong...from time to time.
-
Oh.. Second time tonight, but here goes another Shermie-thread.
M4 Sherman - Feel the love tonight! (as sung by Arlo?) linkage (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27119)
-
If no to a Sherman then how about a Pershing?
I love that old war footage of a Pershing stalking a Tiger II and killing it.
ack-ack
-
(http://x-plane.org/home/RedDog/nopony.jpg)
-
Originally posted by RedDg
(http://x-plane.org/home/RedDog/nopony.jpg)
pathetic... photshop it and remove pony and put in a sherman with a pic....
-
I suppose I've commented on this before, but in case I haven't, I'll do it now. History obviously has its place in all of our hearts, but I just don't see adding a GV to the game that will just get pwned by anything but an M8 for history's sake. If it were a pershing or something else that could stand up 1 on 1 with the german armor, I'd be fine with it. But the simple fact that the American advantage of simply producing more tanks than the Germans does not apply to the gameplay we see here, so it is mostly irrelevant and makes for lopsided fights.
Just my thoughts...
-
Think perks...
What fun to brew a tiger from 6. No one's gonna force you to drive it. So, nod and be on your way.
Q: Why do you fly a P40 booz?
A: Cause I can.
get it yet?
*hic*
-
Originally posted by Booz
Think perks...
What fun to brew a tiger from 6. No one's gonna force you to drive it. So, nod and be on your way.
Q: Why do you fly a P40 booz?
A: Cause I can.
get it yet?
*hic*
I have no clue what you are trying to tell me with this... Do I need a decoder ring or something?
-
Originally posted by TW9
do u have that on your pc or know a link to the footage by chance?
Only seen the footage on History Channel when they rerun the Modern Marvels show on US tanks in WW2. But there is a site out there that has additional pictures taken by a partisan that show in a series of photos the kill from the Pershing on the Tiger II and the bail out of the crew. For the life of me, I can't remember where I found the link.
*edit* Here is a link that tells the story.
Duel at Dessau (http://www.3ad.com/history/news/super.pershing.1.htm)
ack-ack
-
Actually its a Panther that gets stalked. The combat film crew is with the Pershing's unit as they enter Cologne (I think). They are moving in on the center of the city and the Panther takes out a Sherman. I believe they show the crew bailing out and one of them does not have his legs anymore. The camera crew works its way forward enters a building and from the second story finds the Panther nosing around a corner. At about the same time the Pershing finds the Panther. The 90mm on the Pershing hits the Panther and the crew starts bailing, then another round hits. I think the show it was on was the Modern Marvels Sherman Tank edition.
Cheers.
Edit: Found a couple links
http://home.earthlink.net/~crcorbin/ColognePictures.html (http://home.earthlink.net/~crcorbin/ColognePictures.html)
Bate's Cologne Film (http://www.3ad.com/history/wwll/article.pages/bates.index.htm)
-
advantage of simply producing more tanks than the Germans does not apply to the gameplay we see here
hehehe.cuz we all know that numbers mean nothing in ah :P
-
Shemans were so overmatched that their loss rate was 250%. Meaning EACH Sherman averaged being knocked out, and being put back into action 2.5 times.
-
U want the Sherman challenge - take the M8 out for a spin. I love doing it - b/c once in awhile you catch a Panzer with its wang in his zipper.
-
Sherman was a very good design when it came out in 1942 - certainly up there with the T34 of the day and arguably better than the short low velocity 75mm armed pz4.
It became a very bad design when they didnt update it's damn gun for over 2 years - and even at that point (summer 1944) most of the AP ammo given to sherman crews wasnt too good.
In the mean time the Pz4 got 2 high velocity 75mm gun upgrades and several armor upgrades, as did the Stugs. Oh, and during the same period and the germans also intruced some tanks called Tiger 1 (1942) and Panther (1943).
Pershing came along in 45 but only 200 were used in the war staring in march 45, so compared to 50,000 shermans and countless 10s of thousands of other US and allied tanks (not even countingthe russians) it was ridiculously rare. Even the kingtiger of which only 475 were produced was much more common, even if you just look at absolute numbers and more so if you look at relative numbers of % of total tank forces.
Basically it only makes sense to have sherman as the 1st USA tank.
-
Originally posted by Howitzer
I suppose I've commented on this before, but in case I haven't, I'll do it now. History obviously has its place in all of our hearts, but I just don't see adding a GV to the game that will just get pwned by anything but an M8 for history's sake. If it were a pershing or something else that could stand up 1 on 1 with the german armor, I'd be fine with it. But the simple fact that the American advantage of simply producing more tanks than the Germans does not apply to the gameplay we see here, so it is mostly irrelevant and makes for lopsided fights.
Just my thoughts...
Welp, if you put in a latewar Sherman to match the latewar
PzKw IV, the ownage should be pretty even. Of course the GV
war here is pretty much fantasyland to begin with.
-
sorry if a bit OT, but has to do with Band of Brothers
remember those Jugs that came in low leval escorting the goons
at Bastogne ?
from 367th Dynamite Gang history....
The German Ardennes Offensive occurred as the holidays approached. A planned move to a field in Belgium was canceled. On the night of December 18th a Forward Air Control Team from the 393rd Squadron was sent to Bastogne to assist the 101st Airborne Division. The team consisted of an experience flight commander, Captain James Parker, a radio operator, a driver and a radio equipped jeep. The team joined the 101st just an hour before the last road to Bastogne was cut. When the weather finally broke, Parker did a superb job of directing the flights of fighter aircraft that were reporting in to him. Bastogne was saved due to the guts and determination of the 101st Airborne Division, Captain Parker, and the Ninth Air Force fighter-bomber pilots.
by Edwin S. Chickering
Group Commander - November 1944 - September 1945
(392nd 393rd 394th were the 3 wings of 367th)
flying 38J's until they ran out, then were moved into Jug40's
-
Originally posted by Cooley
sorry if a bit OT, but has to do with Band of Brothers
remember those Jugs that came in low leval escorting the goons
at Bastogne ?
from 367th Dynamite Gang history....
The German Ardennes Offensive occurred as the holidays approached. A planned move to a field in Belgium was canceled. On the night of December 18th a Forward Air Control Team from the 393rd Squadron was sent to Bastogne to assist the 101st Airborne Division. The team consisted of an experience flight commander, Captain James Parker, a radio operator, a driver and a radio equipped jeep. The team joined the 101st just an hour before the last road to Bastogne was cut. When the weather finally broke, Parker did a superb job of directing the flights of fighter aircraft that were reporting in to him. Bastogne was saved due to the guts and determination of the 101st Airborne Division, Captain Parker, and the Ninth Air Force fighter-bomber pilots.
by Edwin S. Chickering
Group Commander - November 1944 - September 1945
(392nd 393rd 394th were the 3 wings of 367th)
flying 38J's until they ran out, then were moved into Jug40's
COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEY , lol im tired, as you can see. Going tob ed lol
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
pathetic... photshop it and remove pony and put in a sherman with a pic....
Yep, would be even better. But I don't have Photoshop. Maybe someone who does can change it.
-
Originally posted by Howitzer
I suppose I've commented on this before, but in case I haven't, I'll do it now. History obviously has its place in all of our hearts, but I just don't see adding a GV to the game that will just get pwned by anything but an M8 for history's sake. If it were a pershing or something else that could stand up 1 on 1 with the german armor, I'd be fine with it. But the simple fact that the American advantage of simply producing more tanks than the Germans does not apply to the gameplay we see here, so it is mostly irrelevant and makes for lopsided fights.
Just my thoughts...
You are talking from a MA
POV, dont forget the other arena's. we need the sherman!
-
I want a 88.
-
Originally posted by Cooley
Bastogne was saved due to the guts and determination of the 101st Airborne Division, Captain Parker, and the Ninth Air Force fighter-bomber pilots.
And the 10th Armored and 420th Field Artillery.
-
Originally posted by BlkKnit
You are talking from a MA
POV, dont forget the other arena's. we need the sherman!
And what about those other arenas? Say it's used in the CT... as... uh.. what? A sherman, right? What's it going to fight against? Nothing. Nada. Zip. There are no other early war tanks at all that at as weak and pathetic as the sherman. If you put it in, it will be fighting other shermans that were put on both teams (and are acting as stand-ins). No matter how you use it it's just got no contemporaries in AH, so it doesn't matter if it's left out. At this point in time it can't compete, and nothing matches its time frame, so if it's left out there's no hole in the GV set and putting it in would only create a new gap (you'd need an early war panzer). So basically it's pointless.
I love the sherman, sure. But it'd be a total POS in AH2.
-
yeah, ok. And the B5N is a beast ;)
Actually..I was thinkin how nice it would be to have it (or something US / allied) for use in the SEA.
-
OK if a tank needs to be added how about one that can go up against a Tiger other than anouther Tiger.
JS-2 Stalin tank would be nice. 120mm main gun. Perk it like the Tiger.
Or the T34-85. That one would have a decent chance againts a Tiger.
-
I'm not sure how much people would like the JS-2.
Its armor would be quite good but would anobody put up with its rate of fire being only 2 shots a minute as was historical because of very heavy 2 piece ammo and cramped turret - and only 28 rounds of ammo total?
All that for Armor piercing performance scarecly better than Tiger Is 88mm.
-
Well, we need two or three versions of the Sherman and another one or two Panzer IVs and another T-34.
We need the 75mm armed Sherman for D-Day and earlier. We need the 76mm armed Sherman to augment the 75mm after D-Day. The 17lber armed Firefly would be nice, but not required.
We need the Panzer IV D for earlier time periods and a Panzer IV F would be nice to fill the gap, but not required (and I may be remembering the versions wrong).
The T-34/85 is needed to give some other tank besides the Panzer IV H a viable role in AH's MA and for historical purposes from late 1943 onwards.
As to what the Sherman would fight in the CT, well, German tanks, even the ones that grossly outclass it.
-
The problem with the M8 is that it can't climb a hill like a tracked vehicle can.
However, I've been doing ok in the LVTa4 tank, taken from a GV base instead of a carrier. I just wish it had the 76mm with AP rounds. And a rocket launcher mounted to the turret (which would make it a popular selection for town attacks and anti-tank work, since you wouldn't have to wait for a reload time).
-
(http://members.cox.net/skychimp/nosherman.jpg)
Very fast very sloppy:p
-
(http://www.michiganhistorymagazine.com/extra/tanks/images/m26.jpg)
Weighing nearly 45 tons with a 90mm gun, the Pershing received its indoctrination into warfare on March 7, 1945 in Remagen, Germany. Although the tank saw limited service during WWII it was well matched against German tanks. At the close of World War II Pershing production stopped at the Detroit Arsenal and slowed at other government arsenals, but at the outbreak of the Korean War full production began. During the war the fast and well-armed M26 performed well against Soviet tanks used by the North Koreans. There were more than 2,400 M26s built, but more importantly other U.S. Army tanks were molded after the Pershing's design. The 1945 M45 with a larger 105mm gun and the 1948 M46 with a more powerful engine were both variations of the original M26.
The Sherman Tank was the main tank used by the United States Army during the Second World War. It replacement, the Pershing M26, wasn't delivered until January, 1945. It had a 90mm gun and its 500hp engine could achieve speeds of 30mph. The tank arrived too late to make much contribution to the war in Europe but it was used in Okinawa in the summer of 1945.
-
(http://www.worldwar2aces.com/store/images/tm35210b.jpg)
Despite the serious teething problems in its mechanics, the British Infantry Tank MK.IV or the "Churchill" went on to earn a high reputation among the WW2 British armored fighting vehicles. Following the tradition of the rhombic-shaped predecessors during WW1, its design priority was placed on heavy armor, a wide trench crossing capacity and the ability to travel across the shell-torn battlefields. Speed was not considered to be essential, since its main role would be to escort and support the infantry. Christened the "Churchill" after the Prime Minister of England, it began to arrive at the Tank Regiments in June 1941. The Churchill tank stable is classified into several types according to the main armament used, or the hull and turret construction. The MK.VII was radically different from the earlier models, with the hull and turret completely new in structure. The entire hull was welded, rather than being riveted. The maximum armor thickness was increased from 102mm to 152mm. Consequently, the weight augmented to 40 tons, resulting in a reduction in top speed from 18 to 13 mph. The turret was redesigned for higher strength and improved productivity. The four walls were a single casting of varying thickness, onto which the roof plate was welded. The powerful 75mm gun was adopted as the main armament. The active service of the Churchill tanks, especially from D-Day onwards, is worthy of the name of the principal British tank.
-
Originally posted by Howitzer
I suppose I've commented on this before, but in case I haven't, I'll do it now. History obviously has its place in all of our hearts, but I just don't see adding a GV to the game that will just get pwned by anything but an M8 for history's sake. If it were a pershing or something else that could stand up 1 on 1 with the german armor, I'd be fine with it. But the simple fact that the American advantage of simply producing more tanks than the Germans does not apply to the gameplay we see here, so it is mostly irrelevant and makes for lopsided fights.
Just my thoughts...
Thus sprake Howitzer, a man with a grand total of 50 minutes in GVs in the last three tours combined. Obviously, an expert. Listen to him, fellas--he knows all.
-
Interesting difference with two versions of the same story. The other story has the crew killed instantly after they get out of the tank while the other story says the crew was taken POW later on.
Which one is correct?
-
Originally posted by Rino
Welp, if you put in a latewar Sherman to match the latewar
PzKw IV, the ownage should be pretty even. Of course the GV
war here is pretty much fantasyland to begin with.
LMAO, what here ISN"T fantasyland???
-
The Pershing seems a little Vietnamish though, but I could be wrong