Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: OOZ662 on February 27, 2006, 01:14:55 PM
-
I hoping some of you history guys with the big ol' stacks of books can help with this one. :D I need info about technology and general war stuff to put into a Flash project.
First off, I'm making everything fit into three eras, one set for the Allies and one set for the Axis; Early, Mid, and Late war. For each of these eras, I'd need info on major new aircraft and tank technology for the period.
-Example: (For the Axis) Germans invent the Panzer IV, which has _____ advantages over earlier tanks.-
Secondly, there will be a general history of the war. I'm guessing that the best thing for this section would be major troop movements, areas captured, cities destroyed, ect.
The project is a small one, so I don't need a summary of the war or a breakdown of every plane and it's advantages, just things that changed the way things worked and influenced the war.
Many thanks for your help. :aok
-
Google it OOZ!! lol.....ill keep my eyes open and see if i can find any of my books!
-
Problem with Google is the innacuracies that I hate so much. And the fact that there are so many websites made for games and/or by 9 year olds...
-
You are going to need to be a lot clearer on what you are looking for, because your post is incredibly vague. Three eras, you need info, ugh huh?
"The project is a small one"
Hardly, and I think you under estimate the ammount of research and info you will need to go through.
May I suggest a "WW2 Atlas" there are several good ones you can order in the $25 range, and they sum up the war in chapters. Anything more specific than that, you are in for a lot of digging.
-
Well, I meant small in that each era only needs about 30 seconds of info. I've already found a bunch on my own from playing this game for two and a half years; I'm just looking for revolutionary technologies that sprung up during the war, such as combat flaps, jet engines, and the sort.
If you don't feel like providing huge amounts of info, a list of extraordinary technologies would be great so that I can go research them on my own.
And sorry for the vauge-ness, I was typing it in class every time the teacher looked away. :D
-
Originally posted by OOZ662
...I was typing it in class every time the teacher looked away. :D
Is this what our tax dollars are paying for?? ;)
-
hope this helps...
At the outbreak of hostilities between Germany and Poland, the Whermarch (i know i cant spell, shut up) had no particular quantity or quality advantage in tanks or infantry. However, their tactical doctrine was the most advanced in the world at the time. The German Army relied on mission objectives rather than master plans, allowing for lower-level comanders to take the initiative and achieve the objective however they saw fit. In addition to this, even the earliest Panzers built under the Nazi regime were all equipped with radios, allowing for fluid coordination in the field. This made up for the German's lack of good tanks. Even durring the invasion of France, most Panzers were armed with 20mm cannon and were poorly armored whereas those of the French and British armies were armed to the teeth and very strongly armored. But the advanced tactical and stratiegic doctrine of the new German Army won against all odds.
this is a Pz. II, the most numerous german tank at the beginning of the war. it is armed with a 20mm automatic cannon and a 7.92mm machinegun. its maximum armor is about .45 inches thick.
(http://www.axishistory.com/fileadmin/user_upload/p/panzer2-parade.jpg)
this is a Char-Leger H-39 french medium tank. it was armed with a high-velocity 37mm pourpose-built AT gun. its' maximum armor is 1.57 inches.
(http://www.artehistoria.com/batallas/jpg/BAT157.jpg)
unlike the allied armies, the germans had no heavy tanks at the beginning of the war, nor would they untill 1942 with the introduction of the Tiger.
this is a captured Renault Schneider B-1. it is armed with a 75mm howitzer in the front hull and a 47mm AT gun in the turret. its' maximum armor is 2.4 inches thick.
(http://www.ww2mmrefphotos.com/photos/France/Char%20B1%20Bourrasque.jpg)
this is the A12 Infantry Tank Mk II Matilda II. it is armed with a 40mm AT cannon. its' maximum armor is 3.07 inches thick. it was nearly indestructable untill the germans fielded the Pz. IV equipped with a long-barreled 75mm cannon.
(http://anzacsteel.hobbyvista.com/Armoured%20Vehicles/Images/Matilda02.jpg)
-
SMIDSY look up the Somua S35
-
i chose to focus on the H-39 because the S-35 completely outclassed anything the germans could field, and thus could not be compared to the german light tanks. also, i just like the Hotchkiss:aok
-
Wow; exactly if not more than I was looking for for the early tanks. Thanks! :aok :D
-
Have a bit of time, so I'll take a stab at another entry . . .
Smidsy does a good job with the early armor. Only 2 points to add. First is that the French tanks did have one fairly major flaw . . . they almost all relied on a one man turret. So, the tank commander was also the loader and the gunner. Second is that the Germans also sported PzkwIIIs and Pzkw 38(t)s that had 37 mm guns, and an early version of the PzkwIV (C version IIRC) that had a low velocity 75mm howitzer.
"Mid war", which I would take to mean 41-43, saw the invasion of the Soviet Union. The Germans by then had begun to upgrade the old chassis. Many PzkwIIIs were up-gunned to a 50mm gun, but the armor faced the same obsticles it did in France. Many Russian tanks were "light tanks" that were dealt with fairly easily. But the Russians also had many "heavy tanks", such as the KV-Is, whose armor was too strong for the German weaponry. The KVs carried a 76mm gun that was more than capable of killing the German tanks. But, also like the Western Front, the Russians did not have many radios, and generally relied on a command tank giving signals to the other tanks. (oddly, this situation lasted even to the end of the war -- even in 1945 the Germans were often able to stop a Soviet armored attack by identifying and killing the command tank. The Russians simply never adapted)
Enter the first T-34. The field test of the first T-34 was to send it against the German front. It litterally drove several miles behind German lines, simply trashing everything in its way. The 37mm and 50mm guns couldn't stop it -- the angled armor (absent on the German tanks) made the small caliber rounds bounce into the air rather then penetrate the armor. It was finally destroyed by a towed 88mm AA gun.
The inferiority of the German tanks shocked them into producing the Tiger. It sported the 88mm gun and enough armor to withstand the t-34's 76mm gun. The Germans also once again up-gunned and up-armored the PzkwIIIs (higher velocity 50mm) and PzkwIV (with a 75mm gun instead of the howitzer, the "F" version). Now the Germans had armor that met or surpassed the quality of the Russian tanks. Despite its superiority, however, the Tiger is mostly a larger, heavier PzkwIV in terms of hull design. It was not until the Pzkw V "Panther" tank was introduced in 1943 do you see German armor adopt some of the sloped armor found on the T-34. The Panther also mounted a VERY high velocity 75mm gun whose armor penetrating power rivaled the 88mm gun on the Tiger.
One more development in the Mid-war period was that the Germans found their production capacity wanting vs what they were facing in North Africa and Russia. To speed production along, they began producing in increasing numbers "turretless tanks." Without the rotating turret, these vehicles were simpler and cheaper to produce. They also tended to benefit from lower profiles and thicker armor in the front to support the gun. The "Sturmgeschutz", or assault guns, began with 75mm howitzers and a few with 105mm howitzers. The StuGIII, like the PzkwIV, was slowly upgraded throughout this period as Russian armor became more of a problem. The Germans also began development of "Panzer Jaeger" assault guns, which were stop-gap mobile AT guns on lightly armored chassis. Ultimatly the Jagdpnzrs came into being, which sported the high velocity AT guns, but in a very heavily armored chassis beginning with the Elefant in '43 IIRC.
Sorry, no pictures. But to recap . . . Mid war East Front, German armor begins still inferior, but superior tactics win again. Germans begin upgrading existing chassis, create first true heavy German tanks. Russians essentially find one chassis/design that works well (T-34) and begin producing it in unfathomable numbers. T-34 introduces highly sloped armor to tank design. Germans begin to produce more turretless tanks in an attempt to increase overall armored numbers.
Hope this helps.
-
the PzkwIIIs were available in pathetically small numbers at the outset of hostilities with france. same for the IV. also, the 75mm gun had such a low velocity it could not penatrate most allied medium and infantry tanks. yes it sounds big, but it was used only to support infantry. similar to the use of the 75mm gun on the sherman in late war battles.
-
Originally posted by SMIDSY
the PzkwIIIs were available in pathetically small numbers at the outset of hostilities with france. same for the IV. also, the 75mm gun had such a low velocity it could not penatrate most allied medium and infantry tanks. yes it sounds big, but it was used only to support infantry. similar to the use of the 75mm gun on the sherman in late war battles.
Meant to put "a few" in there before the Pzkw IV -- thanks for catching it. But I did clearly mention it was a low velocity howitzer. Found the following on the internet which should shed some light on actual numbers.
Some German Pzkw inventory figures
I have some copies from the Geschichte des zweiten Weltkrieges book that I made at the Johns Hopkins Library, right before I left Maryland. There is a table from page 124 that gives artillery and tank inventory numbers for 1 September 1939 (at the start of the war), 1 April 1940 (before the attack in May), and 20 June 1941 (right before the invasion of Russia). These are the tank inventory numbers:
______________'39______'40_______'41
Pzkw I:______1,445,____1,045,_____889
Pzkw 35(t):______--,_____163,_____203
Pzkw II:______1,228,____1,095,___1,197
Pzkw 38(t):______--,_____256,_____801
Pzkw III:_______101,_____388,____1,565
Pzkw IV:_______213,_____148,_____358
In some ways, the numbers of Pzkw I's in service in 1941 is surprisingly high. By 1941, though, it has fallen to third place in the inventory. The Pzkw III had become the most used tank. In 1940, it was the Pzkw II, with the Pzkw I a close second.
The 35(t) and 38(t) are Czech-built tanks that had the 37mm gun, as did the PzkwIIIs. The 37mm AT gun in the towed version was the standard German AT gun at the time. Regardless, to Smidsy's point, it had little chance against the heavier French and British tanks of the day unless firing on the side or rear from very close range.
By the way (I don't see it mentioned yet), the PzkwI was a small (6 ton) tankette with a two man crew and only two machine guns in the turret for armament.
-
particularly the french tanks which were equipped with the 47mm gun which was considered the best tank gun of the time.
-
Couldn't do this without you guys; especialy for tanks. :aok :D
-
well, i have the combined knowledge of 5 different forums full of history buffs. plus i have a fancy for early war tank combat.
-
I still need major help on late war tanks. I'm also in need of general war movement info, but I figure on Googling that.
-
Take a look at Buderi's "The Invention that Changed the World." everything you need to know about the development of Radar in WWII. Great bibliography too.
For AC engine development, look at Schlaifer & Heron's "The Development of Aircraft Engines and Fuels."
-Blogs
-
Originally posted by OOZ662
I still need major help on late war tanks. I'm also in need of general war movement info, but I figure on Googling that.
Sorry, ooz662, been really busy as of late and didn't feel I had enough time to do justice to what you want. Also figured someone else would have jumped in by now. Still don't have a lot of time, so this will be sketchy. . . .
East front, 44 and 45 (late war). Germany had introduced heavy tanks (tiger and panther) mid war. Germany had also introduced several low-slung turretless TDs with sloped armor and high-velocity guns. Thus the T-34 with the 76mm gun was becoming increasingly ineffective. In response, they upgunned the T-34 to hold an 85mm gun. This gun was still not capable of taking out a Tiger or Panther at long range on a front shot, but vs side, rear and/or close in it was deadly. Unlike the German upgrades of the PzkwIV, however, the T-34/76 could not be "field modified" to hold the new gun as the turret had been totally redesigned. Thus the T-34/85 was introduced through new production, and the existing T-34/76s remained in service to the end of the war.
The Russians were still looking for more firepower and heavier armor. They introduced the JS (sometimes call IS - stands for "Joseph (Iosif) Stalin") heavy tanks. At first they were armed with the 85mm gun, but were soon upgunned to hold first the 100mm, then finally the 122mm gun. This very large gun was finally able to kill the heavy German tanks at range. The JS-III was an up-armored version (same thickness as the King Tiger)introduced in 1945, but IIRC none saw action.
Russia also produced some turretless tank destroyers, but these were not used as often as the Germans were relying on their turretless tanks. The SU-85 for example gained some measure of fame, but T-34s were usually in enough supply that true tanks remained the backbone of Russian armor. Despite the heavy tank and TD introductions, most Russian tanks produced in late war continued to be the T-34/85. This was their armored strategy -- produce a good tank, certainly not the best on the field, but produce a lot of them. Overwhelm the enemy with numbers. Being Russia, the losses didn't matter as long as in the end there were enough that it guaranteed a Russian tank would be the last one standing.
Germany, as I stated, had upgunned and somewhat up-armored the PzkwIV, ultimately to the H version we have in the game in 1944. Panther and Tiger were already introduced. Germany continued to try to use technological superiority to overcome the numeric inferiority, producing heavier tanks and Tank Destroyers (TigerII or King Tiger, JagdPanther (88mm gun), and JagdTiger (128mm gun!) for example). In other posts you can find the "Maus" super-heavy tank, which was only experimental but is indicative of where the Germans were trying to go.
In the end, in most cases in the late war, a single German tank head-to-head with a Russian tank would win. A fully upgraded PzkwIV would have a chance even vs. the T-34/85. BUT -- it was never a one-on-one battle by that time. Russian tank losses were always heavy in the armored duels of the late war, but they were replaced. The numbers of German armor continued to decline in relation, and were ultimately overwhelmed.
Sorry for the sketchiness, but that is all the time I have for now.
-
Back on the Western front, and in Africa, the Allied forces were learning how bad of an idea that a gasoline powered tanks could be. Simultaneously, they were preparing for a numbers war to fight off the German tactics of advancing armor across a very narrow front. In practice the German's did not often get to use these tactics against the Allies.
While Russia & Germany were locked in an arms racing trying to outmass each other's turretless tank destroyers, the US took a radically different approach. US designs were fast, manuverable, lightly armored, but most still retained a turret. The earliest was simply an M3 with a M1897 75mm gun, mounted on a limited traverse turret, stuck on the back. Some mounted guns heavy enough to require a counterweight on the back, which can be seen on the M10 Wolverine & M36 Jackson. The M18 Hellcat was probably closest to this ideal, with a great suspension, very fast top speeds, and a 76mm gun. In July 1944 M18s claimed 53 Panthers & Tigers for 17 losses. Yugoslavia still fielded M18s up until the early 1990s.
Many, many US infantry divisions had an attached tank destroyer battalion, and frequently a tank battalion also. In practice they were used interchangably, so they went to battle with under-gunned tanks, or under-armored tank destroyers. This lasted until the end of the war, and the arrival of the M26 Pershing heavy tank.
-
Quick notes on basic armored tactics. . .
Early German - mass your armor in armored (panzer) divisions. Concentrate the divisions in one area, use them to shock your enemies and split the line. Follow through with your armored reserves and mobile infantry to run roughshod over rear areas. Let your slower footsoldiers move up to protect the flanks. Main purpose is to surround and demoralize enemy, causing them to surrender, i.e. win by manouver. (Thus the early victories despite inferior armor.)
Late German (after going on defensive) - still mass armor whenever possible. Organize them into mobile fire brigades. When the enemy attacks and is about to break through your infantry lines, send the mobile reserve to plug the gap.
Russian -- attack across a broad front with superior numbers. Pull armor back from strong resistance and tie down the enemy with artillary fire. Re-deploy armor to weaker areas of the line. When a breakthrough has been acheived (unlike the Germans) -- turn against the flank and roll up the line. Main purpose is to kill the enemy, i.e. win by brute force.
Early British and French -- Spread your tanks out. Doctrine calls for direct support of infantry, almost WWI style.
Later British -- Armor becomes more concentrated, but never moves completely away from "infantry tanks" that are heavily armored, yet slow (see Matildas and Valentines).
American -- Schizophrenic. Armor design and doctrine calls for the Sherman to be a direct close support tank to the infantry, with mobile anti-tank batalions to fight all tank v tank duels. Army is heavily motorized to fight the same mobile warfare that gave Germans so many successes. In practice, most American generals including Ike tend to advocate broad front strategies that use attrition to wear down and defeat the Germans. Lack of "heavy tanks" makes US armor ill-suited for this type of warfare.
Notable exception is Patton, who subscribes to the mobile warfare and narrow thrust strategy. Unlike German strategy, the breakthrough is acheived by infantry assault. After the breach, mobile infantry and armor pour through the gaps. Like the early Blitzkriegs, Patton drives very quickly and very far into the enemy rear so the bypassed Germans become hopelessly cut off. (One Third Army tanker once boasted "we hold the roads, the Germans hold the shoulders.")
-
Already described outright up-gunning of tanks. Every nation did this.
Of course, redesigning, field modifying and at times outright developing larger, more powerful guns takes time. A different approach would be to change the type of ammunition.
June of 1941 and Barbarossa found the Germans in 37mm and 50mm armed tanks going against thicker armored Russian opponents. The smaller steel shot AP rounds would at times actually shatter against the thick Russian armor. The Germans found that a solution was to use tungsten, which was more dense than steel and would not shatter. However, a shot made from tungsten would be too heavy -- the gun breeches would blow out given the amount of propellant necessary. They solved this by designing a round that had a tungsten core surrounded by lighter alloy metals. The resulting shot, called AP40 or Arrowhead by the Germans (also known as HVAP or High Velocity Armor Piercing by the US, and APCR or Armor Peircing Composite Rigid by the Brits), was actually lighter than standard AP rounds, thus had a higher muzzle velocity. Unfortunately, because of the poor weight to diameter ratio, the shot lost velocity much more quickly too. Thus it was more deadly at close ranges, but at longer ranges the standard shot was actually better. Also unfortunately for the Germans, tungsten was in short supply, so the special ammunition was never as available as they would have liked.
For the PzkwIVs that were still using the low velocity howitzer, the Germans developed a HEAT round (High Explosive Anti Tank). HEAT is essentially a very large shape-charge weapon that channels the explosion down a narrow channel. This essentially acts as a blowtorch that melts the armor and sends hot material and gasses inside the tank, killing the crew. The obvious advantage of this round is that it does not depend on the velocity of the gun firing it, making it ideal for low velocity guns. Eventually the US and Britain would develop their own HEAT rounds for their howitzers as well.
The Brits in 1944 introduced APDS, or Armor Peircing Discarding Sabot rounds, for their 6 pounder (57mm) and 17 pounder (76mm) guns. The direct decendants of these rounds are still used today. These were the first rounds that had a small, solid, dense core surrounded by a "sabot" that separates from the core as teh round leaves the muzzle. Because the shot is light, the velocity is very high. Because it loses the outer shell (unlike the AP40 round), it maintains excellent carrying power over range. Because it is dense, it does not shatter. The 17 pounder with the Sabot round even exceeded the Tiger II's 88mm gun in pure armor penetrating power. The Brits by 1944 had mounted the 17 pounder on the Sherman chassis, creating the "Sherman Firefly". This was in effect the deadliest tank destroyer in the field.
-
That's all the info I need; thanks greatly. :D
Now, to find images... :noid
-
Some great reads fellas:aok
Thanks for sharing with the community!
-
Originally posted by OOZ662
That's all the info I need; thanks greatly. :D
Now, to find images... :noid
M3 destroyer
(http://www.robertsarmory.com/natbat13.jpg)
M18 Hellcat
(http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/tb_hellcattank-lg.jpg)
M10 Wolverine (model, but real pics I found didn't show the open top)
Open top on a tank turret... not such a smart idea...
(http://tanxheaven.com/fedcol/m10mod/DSCN0276.jpg)
M26 Pershing, too late of an arrival to have a serious effect on WW2.
(http://www.geocities.com/lablekills11/usmt-M26-Pershing-3rdArmy.jpg)