Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: 1Nicolas on April 15, 2011, 05:19:43 PM
-
M-10!!!!!
Armament info:
90mm Main Battery!
50cal mount
Please,don't make it a tank that costs money :pray
It can beat a tiger and panther head on!
Armour thickness:
2.3 in.
-
M-10!!!!!
Armament info:
90mm Main Battery!
50cal mount
Please,don't make it a tank that costs money :pray
It can beat a tiger and panther head on!
Armour thickness:
2.3 in.
You knocked off my thread subject, Its all good :D +1
-
Which M-10 are you talking about, cause it sure ain't this one:
(http://gunpoint-3d.com/images/view/m10.f.jpg)
Or even this one:
(http://arcaneafvs.com/m10/M10_01.JPG)
Maybe the M-36 Jackson, but that armor sounds a little heavy:
(http://www.wwiivehicles.com/usa/tank-destroyers/m36-gun-motor-carriage/m36-gun-motor-carriage-01.png)
-
how about a StuG III or a M26 Pershing first...?
but +1 to the M10
*waits for bar to stumble in*
(sorry bar!) M18! :noid
-
M-10!!!!!
Armament info:
90mm Main Battery!
50cal mount
Please,don't make it a tank that costs money :pray
It can beat a tiger and panther head on!
Armour thickness:
2.3 in.
go read that wikipedia article again...the 90mm main gun was on the m-36, not the m-10.
-
I'm sure that BAR will take the M-18 over that any day.
-
im still wishing for the 105mm sherman with HEAT rounds.
-
keep wishin.
-
im still wishing for the 105mm sherman with HEAT rounds.
Even if you only get 3-5 HEAT rounds, and a whole boat load of HE rounds? It isnt like the US Army went tank hunting with a 105 howitzer.
-
Even if you only get 3-5 HEAT rounds, and a whole boat load of HE rounds? It isnt like the US Army went tank hunting with a 105 howitzer.
and its not like we hand panzers fighting panzer and tigers fighting tigers in ww2. so whats your point?
-
and its not like we hand panzers fighting panzer and tigers fighting tigers in ww2. so whats your point?
The point is that ammo loadouts would be based on what the vehicles were given historically and not made up just so you can have some tank with a big cannon. So the point that SmokinLoon is trying to convey is that despite what you may think, the 105mm Sherman was not a tank killer and the ammo load out will reflect that and would not make it the ideal choice for tank on tank engagements.
Yes, there were cases of T-34s fighting other T-34s, Shermans fighting Shermans, etc in World War II and was far more common than one would think.
Flakpanzer T-34(r)
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/flakt34_s.jpg)
T-34/76
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/fot06.jpg)
Sherman tank used by the 5th Paratroop Jager Division during the Battle of the Bulge
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/cpm4.jpg)
A Firefly that was captured and used by the Germans during the Battle of Normandy
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/firefly_3.jpg)
SU-85 pressed into German service
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/cpsu85_1.jpg)
Stug III pressed into service with the 5th Guards Armored Brigade
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/sovstug.jpg)
This is a photo of the British captured Panther tank "Cuckoo" that was pressed into service by I think the 4th Battalion of 6th Coldstream Guards Tank Brigade sometime in late 1944.
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/cuckoo_1.jpg)
The Soviets were so fond of using captured German tanks that they would even press captured German mechanics into service to keep the captured tanks running.
This is from an advisory put out by the Red Army about captured tanks.
"It is suggested to the Red Army to use such German tanks as StuG III and Pz IV due to their relability and availability of spare parts. The new German Panther and Tiger can be used until they broken down without trying to repair them. They have bad engines, transmission and suspension."
As you can see, your claim of panzers fighting panzers, tigers fighting tigers didn't happen during World War II is clearly incorrect as I showed that it did happen and happened between other various types as well, like Sherman vs Sherman, T-34 vs. T-34, etc.
ack-ack
-
The point is that ammo loadouts would be based on what the vehicles were given historically and not made up just so you can have some tank with a big cannon. So the point that SmokinLoon is trying to convey is that despite what you may think, the 105mm Sherman was not a tank killer and the ammo load out will reflect that and would not make it the ideal choice for tank on tank engagements.
ack-ack
ok? and does anything you just said make me wish for it to be added any more less? nope.
we all have things we wish were added, Bar's is the m18. skorpions is the stugIII, nicolus's is the m10. and mine is the 105 sherman.
-
ok? and does anything you just said make me wish for it to be added any more less? nope.
we all have things we wish were added, Bar's is the m18. skorpions is the stugIII, nicolus's is the m10. and mine is the 105 sherman.
you know, its not neccisarily all in the gun. sometimes bigger isnt better-105mm would fit under that. it had a low velocity 105mm gun and a glacially slow turret traverse speed.
wed be better off with a sheet metal box with a 37mm.
-
ok? and does anything you just said make me wish for it to be added any more less? nope.
we all have things we wish were added, Bar's is the m18. skorpions is the stugIII, nicolus's is the m10. and mine is the 105 sherman.
and mine's the Short Sunderland. :bolt:
-
ok? and does anything you just said make me wish for it to be added any more less? nope.
we all have things we wish were added, Bar's is the m18. skorpions is the stugIII, nicolus's is the m10. and mine is the 105 sherman.
Why do you want 105 Sherman so bad?
Just use the M475's HE and calliope.
-
Why do you want 105 Sherman so bad?
Just use the M475's HE and calliope.
cuz de 105 is da kewl shiz...it wud devistate evrthing it hit
he wants the big boom because he has trouble hitting anything but buildings with a 75mm... :rolleyes:
-
cuz de 105 is da kewl shiz...it wud devistate evrthing it hit
he wants the big boom because he has trouble hitting anything but buildings with a 75mm... :rolleyes:
:lol
maybe c0z 105 is better bec0z its bigger
-
Why do you want 105 Sherman so bad?
Just use the M475's HE and calliope.
Not enough compensation? :D
-
Why do you want 105 Sherman so bad?
Just use the M475's HE and calliope.
dont like the calliope.
plus i like the "mobile artillery" aspect of the 105.
Not enough compensation? :D
side by side, the 105s barrel is actually shorter than the 76, so that "compensation" joke just failed.
-
you know, its not neccisarily all in the gun. sometimes bigger isnt better-105mm would fit under that. it had a low velocity 105mm gun and a glacially slow turret traverse speed.
wed be better off with a sheet metal box with a 37mm.
The 105 mm Sherman tank had the same hydraulic controls as every other Sherman, how do I know I rebuilt the 105 gunned Sherman at the Texas Military Forces Museum while full time with the guard.
-
The 105 mm Sherman tank had the same hydraulic controls as every other Sherman, how do I know I rebuilt the 105 gunned Sherman at the Texas Military Forces Museum while full time with the guard.
sir, i envy you. :salute
-
dont like the calliope.
I WATS MAY BIGG GUNZZZZ! LIKE I CNA BE ALLZ HA U GOTZ PNWZ
FIXED
-
FIXED
you really like to fix on being annoying dont you?
i can hear the squeak starting up already...
-
you really like to fix on being annoying dont you?
i can hear the squeak starting up already...
ur like 13 right?
-
ur like 13 right?
try 15.
your 12, im sure of that since you told me in the con thread. but if your gonna post dont sent the thread off topic.
naaa im only 12
no 105mm no m18.
:noid stug 3 first :noid
-
Isn't that up to HTC there Adolf?
-
try 15.
your 12, im sure of that since you told me in the con thread. but if your gonna post dont sent the thread off topic.
no 105mm no m18.
:noid stug 3 first :noid
BS I BES BE GETTIN MA M18 OR ME AND HT GONE FIGHT :neener:
-
BS I BES BE GETTIN MA M18 OR ME AND HT GONE FIGHT :neener:
:noid StuG III. i wanna watch you fight with HT :lol
id still like the M10 as a gap filler
-
:noid StuG III. i wanna watch you fight with HT :lol
id still like the M10 as a gap filler
Lol <Waits till' hitech shows up in here>
-
Squeakerfest in here aint it. :eek:
-
Squeakerfest in here aint it. :eek:
its not nice to make fun of simpler minded people
-
I'm sure that BAR will take the M-18 over that any day.
RIGHT HERE! :x
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,311253.0.html
-
its not nice to make fun of simpler minded people
well the fact that some of these kids have access to the internet is probably what worries me the most.
-
and mine's the Short Sunderland. :bolt:
you and me both!
-
(http://www.aqua-fish.net/imgs/fish2/orangestriped-squeaker-profile.jpg)
-
the M 10 gets my vote 1+
also this variant of the M-10 should be brought in. 17pdr SP Achilles
Type self-propelled anti-tank gun
Place of origin United Kingdom
Production history
Manufacturer converted by Royal Arsenal, Woolwich
Number built 1,100
Specifications
Weight 29.6 tonnes (65,000 lb)
Length 7.01 m (23 ft 8¼ in) including gun
5.97 m (19 ft 7 in) excluding gun
Width 3.05 m (10 ft)
Height 2.57 m (8 ft 2 in)
Crew 5 (Commander, 3 gun crew, driver)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armour 9 to 57.2 mm (0.3 to 2.3 in)
Primary
armament Ordnance QF 17 pounder (76.2 mm)
50 rounds
Secondary
armament .50 cal Browning M2HB machine gun (AA Configuration)
420 rounds
Bren light machine gun[1]
Engine General Motors 6046 Twin Diesel 6-71
375 hp (276 kW)
Power/weight 12.5 hp/tonne
Suspension Vertical Volute Spring Suspension (VVSS)
Operational range 300 km (186 mi)
Speed 51 km/h (32 mph)
Unlike the Americans, who saw the M10 as a tank hunter, the British viewed the Achilles as a mobile anti-tank gun.
Perhaps the most successful action of the Achilles was conducted by B troop, 245th Battery, 62nd Anti-Tank Regiment, Royal Artillery attached to the Hamilton Light Infantry during Operation Charnwood. A mixed German force of Mark IVs and Panthers from the 12th SS Panzer Division attempted to retake the town of Buron. The eight Achilles of B troop had set up in an orchard looking south towards Abbaye d'Ardenne and were ideally placed when the Panzers began their counter-attack. In the brief action, 13 German tanks were knocked out and the attack fell apart.
both should be added
-
the M 10 gets my vote 1+
also this variant of the M-10 should be brought in. 17pdr SP Achilles
Type self-propelled anti-tank gun
Place of origin United Kingdom
Production history
Manufacturer converted by Royal Arsenal, Woolwich
Number built 1,100
Specifications
Weight 29.6 tonnes (65,000 lb)
Length 7.01 m (23 ft 8¼ in) including gun
5.97 m (19 ft 7 in) excluding gun
Width 3.05 m (10 ft)
Height 2.57 m (8 ft 2 in)
Crew 5 (Commander, 3 gun crew, driver)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armour 9 to 57.2 mm (0.3 to 2.3 in)
Primary
armament Ordnance QF 17 pounder (76.2 mm)
50 rounds
Secondary
armament .50 cal Browning M2HB machine gun (AA Configuration)
420 rounds
Bren light machine gun[1]
Engine General Motors 6046 Twin Diesel 6-71
375 hp (276 kW)
Power/weight 12.5 hp/tonne
Suspension Vertical Volute Spring Suspension (VVSS)
Operational range 300 km (186 mi)
Speed 51 km/h (32 mph)
Unlike the Americans, who saw the M10 as a tank hunter, the British viewed the Achilles as a mobile anti-tank gun.
Perhaps the most successful action of the Achilles was conducted by B troop, 245th Battery, 62nd Anti-Tank Regiment, Royal Artillery attached to the Hamilton Light Infantry during Operation Charnwood. A mixed German force of Mark IVs and Panthers from the 12th SS Panzer Division attempted to retake the town of Buron. The eight Achilles of B troop had set up in an orchard looking south towards Abbaye d'Ardenne and were ideally placed when the Panzers began their counter-attack. In the brief action, 13 German tanks were knocked out and the attack fell apart.
both should be added
all the M-10 is is an M4/76 or a firefly with a soft turret bud... at least the M-18 creates a new dynamic to GVing
-
all the M-10 is is an M4/76 or a firefly with a soft turret bud... at least the M-18 creates a new dynamic to GVing
:aok
-
Maybe the kids need this?
(http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/wong/noodleex/tank1.jpg)
-
Maybe the kids need this?
(http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/wong/noodleex/tank1.jpg)
:huh
-
Maybe the kids need this?
(http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/wong/noodleex/tank1.jpg)
:x me want!
-
:x me want!
if you finish your chicken nuggets you can play with the toy. :D
-
if you finish your chicken nuggets you can play with the toy. :D
i really dont wanna say anything to that :rofl :bolt:
switch chicken nuggets and toy sum... :aok :ahand :bolt:
-
QUAH!
-
QUAH!
QUAH!!!
M-18 :noid
-
The point is that ammo loadouts would be based on what the vehicles were given historically and not made up just so you can have some tank with a big cannon. So the point that SmokinLoon is trying to convey is that despite what you may think, the 105mm Sherman was not a tank killer and the ammo load out will reflect that and would not make it the ideal choice for tank on tank engagements.
Yes, there were cases of T-34s fighting other T-34s, Shermans fighting Shermans, etc in World War II and was far more common than one would think.
Flakpanzer T-34(r)
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/flakt34_s.jpg)
T-34/76
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/fot06.jpg)
Sherman tank used by the 5th Paratroop Jager Division during the Battle of the Bulge
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/cpm4.jpg)
A Firefly that was captured and used by the Germans during the Battle of Normandy
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/firefly_3.jpg)
SU-85 pressed into German service
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/cpsu85_1.jpg)
Stug III pressed into service with the 5th Guards Armored Brigade
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/sovstug.jpg)
This is a photo of the British captured Panther tank "Cuckoo" that was pressed into service by I think the 4th Battalion of 6th Coldstream Guards Tank Brigade sometime in late 1944.
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/cuckoo_1.jpg)
The Soviets were so fond of using captured German tanks that they would even press captured German mechanics into service to keep the captured tanks running.
This is from an advisory put out by the Red Army about captured tanks.
As you can see, your claim of panzers fighting panzers, tigers fighting tigers didn't happen during World War II is clearly incorrect as I showed that it did happen and happened between other various types as well, like Sherman vs Sherman, T-34 vs. T-34, etc.
ack-ack
I just found the gunsight that the Sherman M4 105 used was the M38 variant, it had a fixed 1.4 zoom, you wont be hunting any tanks with that kind of zoom OR the 10 second (at best) reload rate. ;) I'd leave the HEAT rounds home and let your buddy in the 76mm M4 do the tank hunting. Also, with the reload rate and ammo available of the M4 75mm HE (and rockets), you'd be hard pressed to match the total damage out put.
-
try 15.
:noid stug 3 first :noid
Still a squeaker.
-
I would love to have tank destroyers but i think your talking about something called the hellcat and it was armed with a long barreled 76mm gun which could still punch through a panther's armor and it could also go 60 mph. The drawback was it had only 1 inch thick armor.