 | 
06-24-2008, 07:42 AM
|
#1 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 250
| Best/favorite WW2 Light tank
Well - light tanks are rarely discussed - people usually just drool over a shiny Tiger (myself included  ). But the light were essential to armoured warfare - not only for recon - but also to fill in the gaps in the "poorer" armies.
Anyway - my choice is the Pzkw II - a mediocre machine that managed to hold its own against vastly superior tanks in France, Africa and Russia. Its followed closely by the Stuart (infantry-mower) and Pzkw 38(t) (the reasons Juha mentions).
Last edited by Danielmellbin : 06-25-2008 at 06:57 AM.
| 
|  | |
06-25-2008, 06:55 AM
|
#2 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki
Posts: 467
Country:  | I voted for
M24
and PzKw 38(t) a light tank which was able to substitute medium PzKw III in many German PzDs up to 1942. ie light tank with firepower of a medium tank in 1939-40 with a good mobility and reasonable protection.
Juha | |
| | |
06-25-2008, 07:01 AM
|
#3 | | Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 74
Country:  | I vote T-70. Because no T-80. | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 04:41 AM
|
#4 | | Member
Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Vila Real
Posts: 87
Country:  | For me it's the Pzkw II | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 04:57 AM
|
#5 | | Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008 Location: carbon canyon
Posts: 154
Country:  | had a look see,and went for the m24.i think he looks good.yours,starling.
__________________
fair and balanced,just like fox news. | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 01:26 PM
|
#6 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 139
Country:  | Panzer 38(t) for me. The best light tank at the beginning of the war and capable up until 1942.
M24 is probably the best performance wise but it came too late and was kind of anachronistic anyways. | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 02:44 PM
|
#7 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,568
| Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer, no doubt about it.
__________________  We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 02:54 PM
|
#8 | | Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Bradenville, PA
Posts: 17
Country: | I just love the look of the Chaffe. Also it was a fast little bugger and did ok in the various battlefields.
Last edited by Th!rdeye : 06-26-2008 at 03:15 PM.
| |
| | |
06-26-2008, 02:58 PM
|
#9 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,568
| The thing about the M24 Chaffee is that it weighes more than any other light tank and is close to the Panzer IV in weight actually, and the Panzer IV is both far better armed & armoured, and so is the Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer which infact is 3 tons lighter than the M24 Chaffee.
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 03:36 PM
|
#10 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki
Posts: 467
Country: | Soren
JgPz 38(t) wasn't a light tank as its designation shows. A different kind of animal. A compact and effective A/T vehicle, I agree but the poll is on light tanks. | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 05:39 PM
|
#11 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,568
| Eerr, it's lighter than the Chaffee by some 3 tons Juha...
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 07:07 PM
|
#12 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 250
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Soren  Eerr, it's lighter than the Chaffee by some 3 tons Juha... | Yea - but its not a light tank - its not even a "tank"... Its a selfpropelled antitankgun... | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 07:24 PM
|
#13 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,568
| Sorry Daniel but it is a tank, anything that is armoured, rides on tracks and carries a gun is a tank. There's a reason it's called a Jagd panzer 
As defined a tank is an armoured fighting vechicle on tracks, nothing more.
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 07:26 PM
|
#14 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 250
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Soren Sorry Daniel but it is a tank, anything that is tracked and with armour & a gun is a tank. There's a reason it's called a Jagd panzer
As defined a tank is an armoured fighting vechicle on tracks, nothing more. | true - whence the brackets I put on tank | |
| | |
06-26-2008, 07:35 PM
|
#15 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,568
| Well then I don't see how it doesn't qualify if the Chaffee does ?
The Hetzer is lighter than the Chaffee you know, by some 3 tons.
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:52 PM. | | |
