Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: l0newolf on August 18, 2009, 01:03:46 PM
-
pictures say a thousand words so...........
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Su152_2.jpg
Need i say more? :aok :salute
-
Yes you do. Like, what makes it a good addition?
-
Yes you do. Like, what makes it a good addition?
:rofl :rofl
-
it would make a good addition because it would be easyer to take down bases if one of the airfeilds has no ords
it would also be better than the tiger or at least compete with it :salute
-
Armor front 75 mm (2.95 in)
side 60 mm (2.36 in)
roof 20 mm (.78 in)
Primary armament 152 mm ML-20S gun-howitzer, with 20 rounds
Secondary armament 12.7 mm DShK machine-gun (optional)
Engine 12-cyl. 4-stroke diesel model V-2K
600 hp (450 kW)
Power/weight 13 hp/tonne
Suspension torsion bar
Operational range 330 km (205 mi)
Speed 43 km/h (27 mph)
It only has 20 rounds and the turret does not turn, you must turn the tank in order to aim the gun.
The gun is big but the armor is moderate.
Id say not a match for the tiger in this game, and defiantly not for the firefly.
TT
-
Well depending on how you look at it, it may be better than the tiger. In a fair, out in the open fight, I'd bet on the tiger. But this isn't going to give the tiger a fair fight. She is going to pick the tigers off at long range. That is how I'd do it, and I bet that's how most would do it. This would make a formidable tank hunter in my opinion.
-
It also says on that wiki page it has a very slow reload time due to the wieght of the shells. basically if you miss your screwed.
-
That is true unless you stay out of the other tank's range. If you can kill him from 4k and he can kill you at 3k, then you win even if you miss on your first 2 shots.
-
About the only real use I can see for this is as a spawn camper or town/strat bombardment. The fixed gun is going to be a HUGE disadvantage in any sort of vehicle-on-vehicle engagment--Nemisis, I don't think you're considering just HOW much of a difference that's going to make, especially since none of our tanks are capable of turning in place as many could historically. If the target's on the move, as TT said you have one shot to range and lead him. And good luck keeping your gun on him if he's actually maneuvering, especially with the slow reload time.
-
I was thinking more of an ambush type situation. A plane flys over low and slow, see's where the tanks are headed, and the SU152 hits them with it's 152mm cannon. I'm not saying this is a tank you want to fight in. I think any tank we have would own it in a fight. But if the knights are attacking a town, then some of these guys hide in the town, and start killing off the other guys.
But if you are saying it has absolutely no travers, and not a limited travers then you are right. I am assuming it can travers it's gun something like 30degrees.
-
phooey on the ugly and porcine turret-less SU/JSU-152 I say! The lovely and svelte KV-2/2b has a turret that carries that whopper 152mm howitzer.
:rock :pray :x :pray :x :rock :x :rock :pray
I'll let ya'll wiki-it yourselves
-
Yes you do. Like, what makes it a good addition?
He never said he wanted it added....
wrongway
-
I'd be surprised if any tank with a fixed turrent is ever added to this game.
-
I'd be surprised if any tank with a fixed turrent is ever added to this game.
Me too, since the only tanks I'm aware of that have fixed turrets are the Somua and Char-B, both Frog surrender chariots.
Actually both were pretty well armored but had the bespoke fatal flaw.
I like, otoh, the idea of adding SU-100, SU-76, and SU-152 to the game. And what about the badassed JagdPanzer V? One of the beauties of "turretless" is that you don't have a turret ring to trap shot - something the excellent Panther designed away but that many allied tanks possess.
-
Me too, since the only tanks I'm aware of that have fixed turrets are the Somua and Char-B, both Frog surrender chariots.
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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...
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.