Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: iron650 on July 18, 2011, 09:11:59 AM
-
The Churchill was a British tank. The Churchill served in the Second Battle of El Alamein, Italy, Dieppe Raid, and Normandy. The Churchill was less prone to catching fire than the M4. The Churchills (8) at the Second Battle of El Alamein had no major damage while under anti-tank fire.
Specs (Overview of them):
Weight: 38.5 tons
Length: 24ft 5in
Width: 10ft 8in
Height: 8ft 2in
Crew: 5 (Commander, gunner, loader/radio operator, driver, co driver/hull gunner)
Armor: 16mm to 102mm (the Mk VII supposedly had 152mm in front)
Armament: QF 2pdr (early), QF 6pdr (mid), 75mm (late)
Engine: Bedford horizontally opposed twin-six petrol engine 350 hp
Power/weight: 9.1hp/tonne
Transmission: Merritt-Brown 4 speed constant mesh epicyclic gearbox
Suspension: coiled spring
Range: 100mi
Speed 15mph
Steering: triple differential steering in gearbox
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Churchill_IV.jpg)
The Churchill would be an interesting addition. The Churchill could be one of the British tanks we lack. The churchill can have different gun loadout as an option (like the M4 and rockets.) The Churchill would need the armor to be tweaked for the EW, MW, and LW models.
-
I would be in more favor to add the Comet Tank with the Churchill, both would be interesting additions - as the Comet is fast with a decent gun, where Churchill is a "work horse".
Churchill Mk IV with 6 pounder gun (84 rounds)
Churchill Mk VII with 75mm gun
Churchill Mk VIII with 95mm Howitzer (I want to say under 50 rounds?)
Churchill AVRE would be an interesting addition but most likely perked, its mortar would be devistating on towns, however extremely low reload time. Not even sure if this would be used against tanks (other then blowing a track off?)
-
I would be in more favor to add the Comet Tank with the Churchill, both would be interesting additions - as the Comet is fast with a decent gun, where Churchill is a "work horse".
Churchill Mk IV with 6 pounder gun (84 rounds)
Churchill Mk VII with 75mm gun
Churchill Mk VIII with 95mm Howitzer (I want to say under 50 rounds?)
Churchill AVRE would be an interesting addition but most likely perked, its mortar would be devistating on towns, however extremely low reload time. Not even sure if this would be used against tanks (other then blowing a track off?)
That thing is a monster. It was reloaded not from inside the turret, but from one of the hull positions through the hatch. Keep in mind, the Churchill tank is slower than a 7 year itch. If we do get it, I say add it with the 6 Pdr gun and give it some of the HV AP ammo.
-
That thing is a monster. It was reloaded not from inside the turret, but from one of the hull positions through the hatch. Keep in mind, the Churchill tank is slower than a 7 year itch. If we do get it, I say add it with the 6 Pdr gun and give it some of the HV AP ammo.
well like most tanks, the Churchill would be close to the Panzer 4's Eny depending on its loadout, however yes at 15mph it would be painfully slow however I would see it used in favor of the Panzer 4 never the less.
Comet would be just awesome at 32mph and 77mm gun - it would be a perk tank no doubt, but something to combat our current perk tanks.
-
Churchhill would be a great addition, but which one first?
-
Churchhill would be a great addition, but which one first?
personally I vote for the Churchill for its variety configuration vs the Comet which was pretty much a tank killer.
-
I found something on the Comet: "This is not to discount the achievements of the Comet, but this tank only arrived as the Rhine was being crossed and saw limited action."
-
Churchill AVRE would be an interesting addition but most likely perked, its mortar would be devistating on towns, however extremely low reload time. Not even sure if this would be used against tanks (other then blowing a track off?)
You mean the one with the 290mm gun? yeah, you could (probably) use it agaist tanks. 8" is used against GV's, and its only a 200mm gun or so. The 290mm is something close to an 11.6" gun.
-
seeing as we appear to be going GV crazy we might aswell have a decent British one. :aok
-
seeing as we appear to be going GV crazy we might aswell have a decent British one. :aok
Wierd isn't it. I find myself oddly excited about new GV's as well ans I don't know why :rolleyes:
new gv system? I actually use the hull and coax mgs now
-
You mean the one with the 290mm gun? yeah, you could (probably) use it agaist tanks. 8" is used against GV's, and its only a 200mm gun or so. The 290mm is something close to an 11.6" gun.
Were not talking about the same thing here, the Petard is a Spigot mortar, not an actual 11.6 inch shell. Here's some more info below - and Yeah it would disable a tank but its useless trying to get that close unless you were facing a phone number guy. ->
A petard mortar was the demolition weapon fitted to the Churchill AVRE tank. It was a mortar of a 290 mm bore, known to its crews as the "flying dustbin" due to the characteristics of its projectile: an unaerodynamic 20 kg charge which could be fired up to 100 m. This was sufficient to demolish many bunkers and earthworks and even disable a Tiger tank.
-
+1
-
+1 for AVRE version :D
ZE TOWNS VILL DIE!
-
+1 for AVRE version :D
ZE TOWNS VILL DIE!
YES and its not overkill do to the fact it doesn't have a Anti Tank armament.
-
How about the regular ones with the 2pdr, 6pdr, and 75mm?
-
thats 1 ugly fother mucker
-
How about the regular ones with the 2pdr, 6pdr, and 75mm?
2lber would be very weak, almost impossible to kill something in the MA. It could punch through 48mm of armor IIRC.
6lber would be a bit weaker than the M4(75) for penetration
75mm would be about the same.
-
2lber would be very weak, almost impossible to kill something in the MA. It could punch through 48mm of armor IIRC.
6lber would be a bit weaker than the M4(75) for penetration
75mm would be about the same.
tsk tsk tsk..... you are wrong on 2 counts, or right on only 1 of 3 counts, you're call. :D The 6 Pdr was actually better than the 75mm, especially with the HV ammo, fire rate was very close the same. And the 75mm on the Churchill is the EXACT same gun/ammo found on the Sherman M4A1/M4A3 75mm, so no difference there what-so-ever. ;) And yes, the Churchill with the 2 Pdr (40mm) would be like arming the M4A3 with the M8's 37mm.
Armor wouldnt be much different that the Panzer IV or Sherman, it'd be slower though.
-
ROQF 75mm is a bored out 6lber. Not a US gun, but it does use the same amunition. ROF would be a bit slower I think, but I'm not sure.
And it would be worse than an M4 with a 37mm. The US 37mm was great for a gun of its caliber. I can't think of anything that can match it. Quick online check, compared it to ingame data from KwK 40, M3 75mm, M1 76mm guns and it was close (within a few mm) to ingame data.
Says the 2lber was capable of 61mm at 500yds, from which I would guess it was capable of around 68mm or so at 0 yds. At combat ranges, it would be near useless.
-
The Churchill gets a :rock from me! +1
-
In a switch from my usual dry technical appeal based on merit, historical accuracy, blah blah blah...
I WANT THE AVRE WITH THE PETARD MORTAR REALLY, REALLLLLLLYYY BAD. :O
If you ever played Company of Heroes you know what I mean.
Perk it, uber perk it, make it only available from certain fields, hose the reload time, whatever cruelty is needed.
There are probably other rides (air/ground/water/underwater :x) that are more deserving to be added first but from a purely "fun" perspective it would be hard to top the AVRE.
-
:aok
flak
-
2lber would be very weak, almost impossible to kill something in the MA. It could punch through 48mm of armor IIRC.
6lber would be a bit weaker than the M4(75) for penetration
75mm would be about the same.
They came at different times so the EW, MW, and LW is covered.
-
Well yeah, but HTC could spend their time better than to model the 2lber. The 6lber would be at least USEABLE in the MA. Churchill Mk II variants would probably see the lowest sortie numbers of all GV's once the "new" wears off.
-
Well yeah, but HTC could spend their time better than to model the 2lber. The 6lber would be at least USEABLE in the MA. Churchill Mk II variants would probably see the lowest sortie numbers of all GV's once the "new" wears off.
Depends, if HTC does an early war models with Crusader tanks, Panzer 3 then most would be all over the Churchill for its Armor.
-
Would be perked for its armor. Consider that the T-34 is nearly invincible to the crusader, panzer III E, M3 stuart, BT-7, and the result is that the T-34 gives you the most bang for your buck as far as tanks. Panzer III H is only on the list because we need SOMETHING to counter it. The Ausf. L would be better in the MA, especially if it got HVAP, and would be useable in place of the H for special events.
-
Would be perked for its armor. Consider that the T-34 is nearly invincible to the crusader, panzer III E, M3 stuart, BT-7, and the result is that the T-34 gives you the most bang for your buck as far as tanks. Panzer III H is only on the list because we need SOMETHING to counter it. The Ausf. L would be better in the MA, especially if it got HVAP, and would be useable in place of the H for special events.
Like all things, Early war and Mid war would have its perk rides - Imagine the Tiger being available in 1942 would classify it under mid war - there wasn't an AT gun able to penetrate its front armor period.
-
the QF 6pdr could be used on a bunch of british chassis, and the M3, and the Tsetse. the armour penetration would make it useful in even LW. probably the best bang-for-coading-buck gun we havent got yet :aok
-
the QF 6pdr could be used on a bunch of british chassis, and the M3, and the Tsetse. the armour penetration would make it useful in even LW. probably the best bang-for-coading-buck gun we havent got yet :aok
Somehow I think the GVers would be horrified if getting a vehicle they asked for opened the way for the 'Tsetse' to be added.
-
Somehow I think the GVers would be horrified if getting a vehicle they asked for opened the way for the 'Tsetse' to be added.
The Tse-Tse? :D Anyone know what a tse-tse is??? It makes perfect sense once ya find out. :)
-
good point :) although I think the tsetse would be much less effective than the iL2 in AH for tank-worrying.
-
good point :) although I think the tsetse would be much less effective than the iL2 in AH for tank-worrying.
Dunno. The armor penetration on the Mollins 57mm is a bloody lot higher. It would punch through the top armor of most tanks with ease, even striking at a shallow angle.
-
the QF 6pdr could be used on a bunch of british chassis, and the M3, and the Tsetse. the armour penetration would make it useful in even LW. probably the best bang-for-coading-buck gun we havent got yet :aok
Shut up, last thing we need is more aerial crap to kill us tankers :noid.
-
if you're willing to concede to the wirble being perked, I'll consider it ;)
-
Get better at avoiding flack fire. I killed 3 flackers in an Il-2 three days ago. I swooped in and killed them in the middle of 4 wirbs, 2 osties, and an M16.
Flackers are EASILY avoided unless they have uncommon skill level. I vulched two planes today (yeah, I know, I was bored) on a flack covered runway today and made it back to base without so much as a ping.
-
What!!! The 75mm gun was not a bored out 57mm/6lber.
-
Get better at avoiding flack fire. I killed 3 flackers in an Il-2 three days ago. I swooped in and killed them in the middle of 4 wirbs, 2 osties, and an M16.
Flackers are EASILY avoided unless they have uncommon skill level. I vulched two planes today (yeah, I know, I was bored) on a flack covered runway today and made it back to base without so much as a ping.
fair enough, I'll keep pushing for the Tsetse then. and dont tell me to shut up. :rolleyes:
-
The Churchill has lots of frontal armor but not much on the side. (16mm for the MKIV) Well we can add the MkII and MkIII for early and midwar. Then we can add the Cromwell for late war.
-
What!!! The 75mm gun was not a bored out 57mm/6lber.
ROQF 75mm was indeed a bored out ROQF 6lber. ROQF stand for "Royal Ordnance Quick Firing" in case you're wondering.
-
Get better at avoiding flack fire. I killed 3 flackers in an Il-2 three days ago. I swooped in and killed them in the middle of 4 wirbs, 2 osties, and an M16.
Flackers are EASILY avoided unless they have uncommon skill level. I vulched two planes today (yeah, I know, I was bored) on a flack covered runway today and made it back to base without so much as a ping.
Right. Time for a full on advocation of adding the Mosquito FB.Mk XVIII 'Tse-tse' to AH.
The attitude you show in this thread only screams for the fans of, you know, aerial crap in a flight sim to push back.
-
This is a thread about GV's. Don't read it if you don't wan to hear a pro-GV, anit-tankbuster attitude in here.
No offense sir, but did you expect the tankers to be overjoyed at the suggestion of what would be possibley the most devestating GV killer if added?
Tsetse added at some undetermined time? yes. tsetse added before we get an effective counter to aircraft hellbent on killing us? no.
-
The US 75mm was a progression from the French 75mm of WWI, The US modified it to the 75mm M1897 field gun then to the M3 tank gun. The U.S. version of the 57mm/6pounder, classified as substitute standard under the designation 57 mm Gun M1, was based on the 6 pounder Mk 2 but with a longer barrel.
-
The AVRE 290mm Petard Mortar. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/290mm_Petard_with_ammunition.jpg/220px-290mm_Petard_with_ammunition.jpg