What is Your favourite plane from world war 2?

[kiwimac]

Bronze,

Actually I disagree with you . Tank warfare (any warfare really) is first and foremost about getting the enemy before he gets you and if you can do that before the bugger can see you, more power to you.

The latter German PkW were excellent and far superior to the Russian / British / US ones. Their biggest problem was that they could not produce enough of them or of the diesel to fuel them.

There needs to be a distinction made, ISTM, between a tank that was easy to mass-produce (T-34 + variants) and tanks that were technically superior (German PkWs.)

Kiwimac

[bronzewhaler82]

you ALWAYS disagree with me!

I really have run out of enthusiasm for this topic - i'm here to talk about warplanes - Plan_d is correct - I'm correct - who cares? we've both got our opinions and lets stick to them - i don't know enough about tanks to make a huge effort debating this(unlike Plan-D apparently )...but that doesn't mean i don't know enough to say i'm right

[cheddar cheese]

i'm here to talk about warplanes

ys, me too, ive been a bit lost with all this tank talk

[Gemhorse]

I'm certainly no authority on tanks, - or aircraft, but I read to learn and find your gentlemen's forum very interesting and varied...The thing about the tanks and WWII that strikes me, the Germans did have exceptional mechanical & technical ability, and since they started the War and overun such vast territory, by the time they got into Russia they had acquired significant tactical skill - Like Air Aces, they had Tank Aces too, and what little I've read indicates they Knew their stuff - Both in North Africa and Russia, the re-supply lines eventually stuffed the Germans, and they were also out-numbered eventually - Outa these conflicts it was recognised that the German tanks, the Tiger and Panther, were exceptional weapons with heavy armour and firepower, the tank losses per se reflect that - the tactics they used were born out of years of front-line 'tooth & nail' fighting. The Russian ' Josef Stalin' rounded-turret did help but it was also an enormous 'morale-booster' for their troops, and by then they had plenty- I don't think the Germans ever recovered from Napoleon's mistake of fighting the Russian winter, that they repeated- They fought on but the loss of morale and crimes of the Einsatzgruppen haunted them, and all the firepower & armour couldn't change the fact that their High Command let them down as well...[ that's my two cents worth...]

[cheddar cheese]

and find your gentlemen's forum very interesting and varied

ha, were not toffs if thats what youre impyling

[Gemhorse]

No such thing! You'd get a bit pissed if I referred to you in less polite terms - I simply believe treat those as you like to be treated...

[plan_D]

You can stop going on about the King Tiger anyway because I never liked it, the Panther was still superior to the T-34 of any variant. You have enough given knowledge that has probably been forced down your throat to think the T-34 was better. I've read books praising the T-34 all the way through with great foundation but it won't convince me that they are superior to the late German tanks.

The Panther, Tiger, and King Tiger could see, shoot and kill the T-34 before the T-34 in open field. In dense forest the Tigers and Panthers would still be at the advantage because the T-34s would have to get close, you can't hide a 30 tonne tank charging through the forest.

The only disadvantage in battle for the Tiger was its slow moving gun, this could easily be solved by turning the whole tank since it was 1:1 (width:length) meaning it was very manuverable on the spot and could turn the whole tank faster than the gun. And face its frontal armour to its enemy.

I could easily defend the T-34, and I could defend it much better than you. But if you want to praise Soviet tanks to their fullest praise the IS-2 and IS-3 because they were good, and they could finally match the Germans one on one.

On your "you don't know unless you were there", look at Kursk, the Germans were attacking across soft, unstable ground at dug in Soviet positions with inferior numbers this is two disadvantages straight away. Still, they managed to get across and push through the lines all the way to the back until the Soviet reserves plugged the holes and pushed them back. With the loss ratio in their favour.

Actually late war, Soviet commanders were very good they had the right tactics to beat the Germans, and mostly it was at their own game in the name of 'Deep Battle' which resembled the German blitzkreig.

Another battle took place with 8 Tigers, and 15 IS-2s that were in a recently captured village. The Tiger commander (A very good one, an ace) told his unit to stay and only him and one other Tiger would go over because of the road, it was too thin. The leader fired at the first IS-2 at 900m and ripped its turret off, the second Tiger then fired at another and punched a hole through its rear before charging in, and ordering his others to follow. This is another example of Soviet inferiority, the Germans captured the village, this was due to radio contact between tanks that the Soviets did not have. If they had contact they would have known where the Germans would have come from and might have stood a chance.

And another thing, although I can praise the T-34 which I have done previously, the T-34/76 had a cramped two man turret which meant the Commander was the gunner, this was ridiculous as the gunning was a full time job in itself. Trying to aim and fire the gun while giving flag signals to other tanks in the unit (if the lead tank) would have been impossible. Yes, I did say flag signals they didn't have radios, not all of them anyway.
Even some tanks in Stalingrad didn't have optics, the gunner had to simply guess by looking down the barrel.

When I find a decent link I'll give it to you, until then you'll just have to trust me passing on what I've read in countless books.

[Gemhorse]

The book in particular that I read about all this was called ' Panzer Aces' if I recall, which like most folk, 'coloured' my view of the conflict a little - It's hard not to respect the professionalism of those men when in reading about it all, it's wasn't a case of 'tradesmen blaming tools' that they lost - They were exceptional tacticians, taking each conflict as it came, in the circumstances they came upon it....It's worth a read - One can allow the glory of winning the war to pump-up the prestige of their tank...

[plan_D]

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/profiles.htm

That is done by a German, and he is the nephew of a Panzer Ace in World War 2. Very good site, and all you would need to know about German tanks. It even has a section on captured T-34s, and quotes from Heinz Guderian and other leads on Panzer warfare.

http://www.battlefield.ru/map.html

This is Russian, very good, obviously a lot of praise for the T-34, not very well written but they are Russian after all.

www.wwiivehicles.com

This is a collection of all the tanks, not all have pictures but a very good site for people like you who think they know and might be interested in learning more.

[Gemhorse]

Many thanks for those , I'll check them out - I'm always keen to learn more...

[bronzewhaler82]

Originally Posted by plan_D

You have enough given knowledge that has probably been forced down your throat.

Y'know its funny...thats exactly what i was thinking about you...

[plan_D]

How could you come to that conclusion when I'm going against common thought. Where as you are just repeating what is said by others.

On one final note, the three main principles for a good tank in World War 2, brought to light by both German and Soviet tank experts; firepower, armour and manuverability.

The Panther beat the T-34/76 on firepower and armour. It was slightly defeated on manuverability.

The Tiger beat the T-34/76 on firepower and armour. Beaten on manuverability.

The King Tiger beat the T-34/76 on firepower and armour. Beaten on manuverability.

2 to 1 on every occasion.

Another thing...between 1941 and 1945 the Soviet Union lost 83,500 AFVs on the Eastern Front. The Germans lost 25,584 on all fronts. This should clearly show German supremacy not only in weapons but in skill.

Between 1941 and 1945 Germany produced 23,759 tanks, while the Soviet Union produced 72,231 this shows that numbers were the winning factor. Also shows how quickly the Soviet Union could produce weapons compared to their refined and complicated enemies which were being bombed day and night by Allied bomber streams.

[bronzewhaler82]

Yes wonderful...what a great bunch the Germans were...shame they lost the war really eh?

[plan_D]

German technology was far superior to the rest of the worlds, it was inferior numbers that lost them the war.

[bronzewhaler82]