Who says the Allies can't make monster tanks

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Showing developer posts only. Show all posts in this thread.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
Belton Cooper is...I want to say an idiot, but that would be unfair. But his book was ghost-written about 50 years after the events took place and covers a lot of stuff not in his area of expertise. It has lots of errors and he freely mixes his speculation with facts, it's a bad source.

In your case it is sadly allied fanboy rhetoric. As I said about leaving out critical information, you proved me right. SCARING the crews into surrendering and KNOCKING OUT a tank are two completely different things. Since you seem to know this, I suspect you are simply trolling and trying to confuse forumites.

A tank is just as lost if the crew abandons it due to scary smoke as it is if it explodes into tiny pieces.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
Yes, that's true, but you know what I mean - it's effectively dead until/unless it's recovered later, it's a mission kill. Indeed, if it's not recovered you might not just lose your tanks, the enemy might put them into their own service. I don't think Zinegata wanted to say that Shermans could know out KTs easily, he was replying to a post wondering about any documented cases of KTs being knocked out.
 
Last edited:

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
The Churchill design, which evolved out of similar earlier designs, was finalized in 1940 and the tank was in service in mid-41. The Tiger was first fielded in late '42. The Churchill was in no possible way a response to the Tiger. Much as I like Churchills, it was far larger than it needed to be, under-engined, prone to breakdowns, and had too small a turret and hence gun for its size.

Even as someone who is fond of the Churchill tank, I feel that Zinegata is spot on to say the British tank design was poor and the whole Cruiser/Infantry tank split was a bad idea. I might say the Cromwell and Comet were decent before the Centurion though, even if they were still called Cruisers.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
At least in the early war, though, weren't British tanks fairly competitive in terms of basic design, but let down by flaws in tactics (and I've got similar thoughts on the Cromwell and Comet - maybe if they hadn't started three-quarters of their tank names with the letter C I'd be able to remember them from each other)? My recollection is terrible, and I don't think this is important enough to go and dig something up, but I have something in my head of the Germans finding both the Matildas (which I'm fairly sure did well against German tanks until the German armour out-grew the Matilda's gun) and Crusaders (in the early desert war) troublesome.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the British tanks were best-in-class or anything like that. Just that they weren't so bad as to completely ignore any thoughts by the Brits re German tanks (which, when they captured, they took off and tested and the like relative to their tanks - much like the Soviets, Germans, US and everyone else did)

Individual tanks were, well, functional, I guess. The Matilda 2 enjoyed some fame because early on it was armoured enough that most German tank and AT weapons were ineffective against it. On the downside, it was slow and had a gun that rapidly became obsolete with no HE shell. The Crusader didn't really shine in any area. It was pretty fast I suppose? But it had the same poor gun without the Matilda's useful armour - plus it had to face tougher German tanks, and was unreliable. It was largely phased out once Grants and Shermans became available.

Some of these problems were simply caused by rushed design - Britain was understandably a bit panicked by the war's outbreak and surprising German success, and they wanted to get their tanks in the field ASAP. But a larger problem was the overall design philosophy of splitting tanks into Infantry and Cruiser tanks, the former being well-armoured but slow and not very well armed against tanks, and the latter being faster but not terribly well armed or armoured and often lacking HE shells, rather than having a more generalist Medium tank and optional Heavies. It was a philosophy that probably would have worked well in a repeat of WWI's Western front - Infantry and Infantry tanks force a breakthrough of enemy lines, Cruiser tanks exploit the breakthrough, tank vs tank combat is rare (that is, rarer than WWII - it was actually rather uncommon). It did not work out well and Cruisers eventually evolved to be more like Mediums/Universals.

Linky to the test Poh mentioned. Not related to my post, but an interesting read if you are into tanks.

Edit:
You are not wrong per se. They were, as you noted, extremely slow, which made rapid re-deployment (hence reaction in general) difficult, but they were pretty much impervious to anything the Germans threw at them, until desperation had them deploy the 88mm anti aircraft gun.

Slight contention: The 88 was always meant to be dual-use and engage ground targets too - the Flak 36 carriage was specially designed to be able to engage ground targets even in travel mode so it could be used without deploying, it was a planned use rather than a desperate act.
 
Last edited:

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
I know its name and what it means, but a name does not cover every intended purpose. If it wasn't designed to engage land targets, why was the gun depressable to the point that it could? Even if we assume you are correct and it was developed purely as an AA gun and its use in engaging land targets came as a total surprise to the Germans, you yourself say it was used as an AT gun in the SCW and that the Flak 88 36 was made to engage ground targets and had AP ammo - so it was hardly a last ditch desperate effort that saw it used in an AT role in 1940.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
I stated already that I found Coopers writings questionable of some sort after my first readings. lol
But after all if a man like him:

was biased towards the enemies tank designs must have a reason somehow.
From what I read, I doubt that he was "biased" towards german tank designs, he just was not very happy with the ones he had to use back then.
...

Army number of that SOV Army(!) that has only Lend-Lease Shermans. Locations, Commander etc..
That would lead to a discussion and would not just look like a trying to desperately make GER tanks look bad.

I'm not terrible invested in your conversation with Zinegata, but I'm going to post a couple of things that might interest you/others. For Cooper's book, here is a review on it at amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com/Death-Traps-S...?ie=UTF8&filterBy=addOneStar&showViewpoints=0
Death Traps, a poorly written memoir by Belton Y. Cooper promises much, but delivers little. Cooper served as an ordnance lieutenant in the 3rd Armor Division (3AD), acting as a liaison officer between the Combat Commands and the Division Maintenance Battalion. One of the first rules of memoir writing is to focus on events of which the author has direct experience; instead, Cooper is constantly discussing high-level or distant events of which he was not a witness. Consequently, the book is riddled with mistakes and falsehoods. Furthermore, the author puts his main effort into an over-simplified indictment of the American Sherman tank as a "death trap" that delayed eventual victory in the Second World War.
Cooper's indictment of the Sherman tank's inferiority compared to the heavier German Panther and Tiger tanks ignores many important facts. First, the Sherman was designed for mass production and this allowed the Allies to enjoy a 4-1 superiority in numbers. Second, fewer than 50% of the German armor in France in 1944 were Tigers or Panthers. Third, if the German tanks were as deadly as Cooper claims, why did the Germans lose 1,500 tanks in Normandy against about 1,700 Allied tanks? Indeed, Cooper claims that the 3AD lost 648 Shermans in the war, but the division claimed to have destroyed 1,023 German tanks. Clearly, there was no great kill-ratio in the German favor, and the Allies could afford to trade tank-for-tank. Finally, if the Sherman was such a "death trap," why did the US Army use it later in Korea or the Israelis use it in the 1967 War?
There are a great number of mistakes in this book, beginning with Cooper's ridiculous claim that General Patton was responsible for delaying the M-26 heavy tank program. Cooper claims that Patton was at a tank demonstration at Tidworth Downs in January 1944 and that, "Patton...insisted that we should downgrade the M26 heavy tank and concentrate on the M4....This turned out to be one of the most disastrous decisions of World War II, and its effect upon the upcoming battle for Western Europe was catastrophic." Actually, Patton was in Algiers and Italy for most of January 1944, only arriving back in Scotland on 26 January. In fact, it was General McNair of Ground Forces Command, back in the US, who delayed the M-26 program. Cooper sees the M-26 as the panacea for all the US Army's shortcomings and even claims that the American offensive in November 1944, "would have succeeded if we had had the Pershing" and the resulting American breakthrough could have forestalled the Ardennes offensive and "the war could have ended five months earlier." This is just sheer nonsense and ignores the logistical and weather problems that doomed that offensive.
Cooper continually discusses events he did not witness and in fact, only about one-third of the book covers his own experiences. Instead of discussing maintenance operations in detail, Cooper opines about everything from U-Boats, to V-2 rockets, to strategic bombing, to the July 20th Plot. He falsely states that, "the British had secured a model of the German enigma decoding machine and were using it to decode German messages." Cooper writes, "not until July 25, the night before the Saint-Lo breakthrough, was Rommel able to secure the release of the panzer divisions in reserve in the Pas de Clais area." Actually, Rommel was wounded on 17 July and in a hospital on July 25th. In another chapter, Cooper writes that, "the British had bombed the city [Darmstadt] during a night raid in February," and "more than 40,000 died in this inferno." Actually, the RAF bombed Darmstadt on 11 September 1944, killing about 12,000. Dresden was bombed on 13 February 1945, killing about 40,000. Obviously, the author has confused cities and raids.
Even where Cooper is dealing with issues closer to his own experience, he tends to exaggerate or deliver incorrect information. He describes the VII Corps as an "armor corps," but it was not. Cooper's description of a counterattack by the German Panzer Lehr division is totally inaccurate; he states that, "July 11 became one of the most critical in the battle of Normandy. The Germans launched a massive counterattack along the Saint-Lo- Saint Jean de Daye highway..." In fact, one under strength German division attacked three US divisions. The Americans lost only 100 casualties, while the Germans suffered 25% armor losses. The Official history calls this attack "a dismal and costly failure." Cooper wrote that, "Combat Command A...put up a terrific defense in the vicinity of Saint Jean de Daye..." but actually it was CCB, since CCA in reserve. On another occasion, Cooper claims that his unit received the 60,000th Sherman produced, but official records indicate that only 49,234 of all models were built. Cooper claims that the 3rd Armored Division had 17,000 soldiers, but the authorized strength was about 14,500. Can't this guy remember anything correctly?
Cooper's description of the death of MGN Rose is virtually plagiarized from the official history and a number of articles in ARMOR magazine in the past decade reveal that Rose was an extreme risk-taker. Reading "Death Traps," the uninitiated may actually believe that the US Army was badly defeated in Europe. Cooper even claims that, as the 3rd Armored Division approached the Elbe River in the last days of the war that, "with our division spread out and opposed by three new divisions, our situation was critical." If anybody's situation was critical in April 1945, it was Germany's. Actually, the 3rd Armored Division had one key weakness not noted by Cooper, namely the shortage of infantry. The division had a poor ratio of 2:1 between tanks and infantry, and this deficiency often required the 3AD to borrow an infantry RCT from other units. While the much-maligned Sherman tank was far from perfect, it did the job it was designed for, a fact that is missed by this author.

Why am I posting some guy's review? The reviewer is R. A Forczyk:
ABOUT ME
A graduate of the University of Notre Dame, University of Virginia and the University of Maryland.

Retired after 20 years as an armor and military intelligence officer. Served in the 2nd ID, 4th ID and 29th ID(L).

Author of nineteen historical volumes for Osprey. Primary interests are Eastern Front WW2, Napoleonics, American Revolution and Roman warfare.

As a reviewer, I try to assess the value of each volume for its contribution to military history. I attach particular emphasis to solid research, effectively-argued theses and supporting maps/appendices.

There's also a tank blog here that goes into more detail about the problems with Death traps. You could fact check Death traps in more detail if you like, but I'm happy with calling it a poor source.

And why Korner seems unlikely:
http://tankarchives.blogspot.se/2014/05/cheating-at-statistics-7-korner-conjurer.html
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
Your conclusion doesn't match what you're posting - They used it as an AT/anti-bunker gun in the SCW. They gave it a carriage, sights, and ammo better suited to shooting at tanks - it was clearly planned to be used against ground targets too. Ergo their use against Matildas was exactly what they were meant to be used for, not a desperate act.

You are also quoting your own first source very selectively, the opening paragraph states "It was primarily an anti-aircraft gun adaptable to general artillery use where it performed with distinction, from the start to the very end of the war, against ground targets and in the anti-tank role.". The same page keeps using the term "88-mm Dual-Purpose Gun"

"The German 8.8 cm gun was introduced in 1934 as the standard mobile AA gun"
Let's quote the whole passage:
"The German 8.8 cm gun was introduced in 1934 as the standard mobile AA gun. It was then known as the 8.8-cm. Flak 18. In 1936, during the Spanish War, it proved a very effective weapon against tanks, which were at that time relatively lightly armored. In order to develop still further this dual-purpose employment, the Germans produced armor-piercing ammunition for the weapon, a telescopic sight suitable for the engagement of ground targets, and a more mobile carriage. An HE shell with a percussion fuse was also produced so that the weapon could, when necessary, be employed in a field artillery role. The improved equipment was ready in time for the Battle of France, when it proved itself capable of dealing with the heavier French tanks, against which the then standard AT gun, the 3.7-cm (1.45-in) PAK was relatively ineffective. The next step was to provide the gun with a new carriage, from which the gun could engage tanks without being taken off its wheels, and to fit a shield. Still more recently, a self-propelled mount has been reported and while there is no precise information as to its design, it appears that from this mount the gun can readily take on ground, but not air, targets."

None of this mentioned what the designers were thinking when they developed it, so as I said it's possible it was designed as a purely anti-air gun and it was happy chance it was able to be used against ground targets, but at the very least it was being developed as a dual purpose gun before the battles in France where as a powerful dual purpose gun it would be the logial choice to engage any heavily armoured allied tanks that were encountered.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
No you didn't, you said it was always meant to be a DP gun. There is no "possible" in your post.

You said, and i quote :

And then in my 2nd post:
I know its name and what it means, but a name does not cover every intended purpose. If it wasn't designed to engage land targets, why was the gun depressable to the point that it could? Even if we assume you are correct and it was developed purely as an AA gun and its use in engaging land targets came as a total surprise to the Germans, you yourself say it was used as an AT gun in the SCW and that the Flak 88 36 was made to engage ground targets and had AP ammo - so it was hardly a last ditch desperate effort that saw it used in an AT role in 1940.

As you can see, I revised my answer to say that while I could not prove it had been designed as a dual purpose gun it was certainly known to be such by France and so its use in the AT role there was part of its intended purpose. I admit that my first post said it was "always meant to be dual use", which I have not proven, but I did mentioned both France and the Flak 36 by which point it certainly was dual purpose - your own posted source agrees with this. And while I cannot prove that it was designed as a dual purpose gun, you have posted nothing to prove it was intended purely as an AA gun either (all an AA gun really is is an artillery piece that can be well-elevated and possibly fires higher velocity shells) and in either case it is moot as it was certainly such by the battles in France which was what our original posts were about.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
Well, unless i can march its designer to your doorstep, or find the original design documents, provided with a clear breakdown on what the gun was intended to do, its impossible to prove :)

ok.. how about this.. prior to (and by all accounts during) the SCW, which led to the Flak 18 eventually being upgraded to the Flak 36, there were no AP rounds for it... It didn't need any, for the simple fact that... gah, i give up... :)

It hardly needed AP rounds to engage bunkers or the light tanks used at that point - and the fact that it DID engage ground targets without them and apparently did a good job rather proves it :) I agree it's hard to prove the designer's intent though, which is why I conceded that I could not - but it seems more likely to me that a weapons designer in 1928, when air power was not so prevalent, might have given some thought as to what other things could be done with a great big artillery piece the army would be hauling about if it happened there were no planes around rather than its ability to engage ground targets being a happy accident.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
That said, and as SM nicely points out, and riffing from your point about design philosophy, they were a bit slow to get a strong AT gun on a tank built for it, and most of their WW2 tanks weren't terribly reliable at best, and dodgy at worst (just had some thoughts about this, but that's for another thread).

In fairness, the Brits did see the upcoming need for more powerful AT guns and worked towards getting the 17 pounder AT gun into service ASAP - the problem was none of their existing tanks could fit it. Luckily one of the neat things about the Sherman was the wide turret ring, and so the Firefly was born. I'm not actually convinced the Firefly was needed, but it was certainly an ingenious solution that was enthusiastically embraced. And it looked good.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
@DArkrenown
What I meant with my last statement about him was, that a men who earned quite some medals in the War for fighting against the Germans, can hardly be seen as "biased" towards german tank designs, imo he just seems to be not very ha

Did he? I didn't have the impression he had seen much combat or earn any non-standard medals. He was "a liaison officer for the division's armor repair units", not a combat soldier- although he apparently once led a tank column somewhere but it didn't see any action.

And if GER had planned it to be used primary as AT, they would have deployed them right away behind Pz formations, not attach them to HQ for AA support and call them in after unsuccessful fighting.

First up, I have at no point said they were to be used primarily as AT, let's not make stuff up. Secondly, it was fairly common German practice to set up their AT back a bit and have their own tanks "flee" past them to draw enemy armour into a... death trap. That's kind of the point of muiltipurpose guns - you set them up to do one task, but if you need them to do another you call them up and tell them to do that instead. But pretty much every site me and Placid linked agree it was seen as a multi-purpose gun by the time of the battle for France - the only point we disagree on is if the 88 was designed as a multipurpose gun or if it evolved into one, it certainly was in 1940.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
The key factor involving the Flak 88 is who actually manned the guns and which group was responsible for them that determine their role on the battlefield.

Is it? If you like the PzIII then I assume you're also a StuGIII fan - an armoured fighting vehicle, an assault gun, and a tank destroyer which destroyed the most allied tanks of any German AFV. Crewed by artillery men though.

The short answer is that I don't recall ever the Flaks being standard policy in the Wehrmacht to liberally use such equipment solely for AT purposes and not assigned as such in the order of battle.
Here's a German instructional paper on anti-tank tactics:
http://tankarchives.blogspot.se/2013/12/german-anti-tank-tactics.html
3. Tactics of Russian tanks

Russians have two main ways of using tanks:
1. Tanks are used as armoured guns (especially on flat ground). The tanks open fire from 1500 meters.
Countermeasures: it is pointless to open fire from light and medium AT guns, the StuG, the PzIII, or the PzIV (with the 75 L/43 gun). At this distance, tanks can only be destroyed by the 88 mm AA gun, artillery guns, heavy AT guns (AT gun model 1941 and 7.62 cm caliber guns, from a distance of no more than 1300 meters).

Infantry, and accompanying heavy weapons, when fired upon, must remain in the trenches, hide themselves, and cease all movement.

The Flak 88 is just listed as one of the normal AT weapons to use without any undue fuss.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
Come on, he didn't "fight"?
He might not have shoot the enemy himself -wich we don't know- but he seems to have done all he could to defeat the Germans, no?
At least he was awarded:

Your argument keeps jumping back and forth. When you say:
And I also wrote that we need to read other sources to get a better picture of that engagement..
What I meant with my last statement about him was, that a men who earned quite some medals in the War for fighting against the Germans, can hardly be seen as "biased" towards german tank designs, imo he just seems to be not very happy with the ones he had to use back then. If he used his book to point that out in a -imho- wrong manner is a different thing.

I read that as you implying he won some impressive medals and/or had extensive combat experience to lend weight to his opinions. When I question what medals and combat experience he had and the answer is "Some 'I was there' medals" and "Little to none" then you change your tune and say they have no bearing and I shouldn't question them. If he has no outstanding achievements or qualifications then his opinions are no more valuable than any other US serviceman - and if you assume he believes the facts in his book, plenty of which are provably wrong or untrue, you see his opinions are based on false information and are fairly worthless in a serious discussion - and this, I assume, is why Zinegata just dismisses any argument citing him.

Afaik his tank divisions was the one wich had the most casualities from all US tank divisions.
Thats maybe a reason for his attitude when writing his book that much after the ww2.

That's probably part of it, and his job was to survey knocked out US armour and decide what to repair or write off. So he saw a lot of knocked out Shermans without seeing the battles that went with them - his division knocked out a lot more German tanks than they lost.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
The STug comparison is bad since they were made artillery only because the panzer arm lacked the resources to handle them. The role they were supposed to play would have been the same whichever branch Unlike 88's, they were always supposed to shoot ground targets so the move from shooting fortifications to shooting tanks wasn't a big jump.

The resource you post comes after the battle of France.

Ever since WW2, the Allies have been "posing the Axis bear" in order to make the Allies look like the underdogs of WW2 as opposed to the near guaranteed victors who were hit with a few sucker punches.

1) I wasn't playing the StuG card as a ace that would prove every point - I just wanted to point out that "who crewed 88s" also wasn't a ace itself. I'm assuming without checking, that 88s continued to be manned by the same people throughout the war while they were more and more seen as multipurpose guns.

2) I know, I quoted a bit about fighting Russian tanks :) I didn't think the poster I was replying too was only interested in that period since he mentioned not recalling the Flaks ever being used in the AT role as standard.

3) Pretty much - it just makes a much better story that way. Plus anyone who messed something up finds it a lot easier to blame the problem on enemy brilliance that that were eventually able to overcome rather than admiring they did something dumb but were able to recover.

Quit arguing and use saved time to make us a DD!

Can't :p Podcat's gotta make the next one.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
I don't want to take anything away from Cooper's service to his country, but his medals are irreverent to anything beyond his personal service. If you read your own link you can see the bronze star can be awarded for heroism, but also for "acts of merit, or meritorious service in a combat zone" - so unless you have his medal citation I expect it was simply for doing a good job as a mechanic in a combat zone - it adds nothing to his quality as a source. Cooper WAS biased towards German tanks - he believed the Sherman was a "death trap" which was "tragically and vastly inferior" to German armour - this is the entire point of this book, but this is not supported by evidence. His book is also the source of the oft quoted, and entirely wrong, idea that it took five Shermans to knock out a Panther.

And you see, quotes like his unit destroyed more than it lost are pure fantasy until you can add some numbers/sources to back that up.

Do you even read my posts? I earlier linked you to R. A Forczyk's review of "Death traps" which said:
"Indeed, Cooper claims that the 3AD lost 648 Shermans in the war, but the division claimed to have destroyed 1,023 German tanks. Clearly, there was no great kill-ratio in the German favor, and the Allies could afford to trade tank-for-tank."
Admittedly he has not cited his source there, but I have no reason to doubt his claim without evidence against it and it ties in with his study that "Overall, US armor destroyed more German tanks than German tanks destroyed US tanks, by a factor of about 3:2" - if you want to fact check him, go ahead.

E.g. I've seen statements recently were people posted that "The Ronson" was never a big problem as that was not a design flaw, because it was -rightly so- much better when wet stowage was introduced. Nonetheless that nickname was given by its own crews for a reason. Now some people argue about that it was never a "big problem" if at all because of wet stowage later and the losses were minimum because of it and the tank wask was better on a strategcial scope anyway and this and that..

The ronson myth has been widely debunked (The ronson nickname is attributed to the slogan “lights every time”. The slogan was launched post-war, and thus could not influence the nickname.). The Sherman was not more flammable than its peers once their crews stopped packing extra shells all through the fighting compartment - and once Wet racks were introduced it was the least flammable of its peers.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
And taking here Coopers numbers as true too is intersting at the same time. Well at least that fit in your picture, right?
You have no reason of doubt? Ah ok, then I've just a reason of doubt. Fine, we're done here then. :D
Seriously, go forward and state the source, claiming Forczyk as a source while he did't state his source is..

You find a source on how many German tanks 3AD destroyed then - how many tanks they lost is only relevant if we know how many tanks they destroyed too. You want me to take Cooper's opinions as facts despite the huge errors that have been shown to be in his book, while you refuse to believe Forczyk's, a historian with multiple books which have not been widely debunked like Cooper's, numbers despite not having any proof they are wrong.

Walter Sobchak
You know he's the same person who I linked to earlier saying Death traps is an awful source, right?
http://tanksandafv.blogspot.se/2014/02/debunking-death-traps-part-1.html
him saying critics of Cooper go too far in some areas hardly proves Cooper's worth listening to.

Just scroll down to the end. It seems the slogan was used at least in a similar way before the war in US.

Ok, perhaps the slogan was used - now prove the Sherman was more flammable than its peers for any reason other than crews mis-storing ammo.

There's a lot of nonsense at the start of your post that I'm not going to address except to again ask you not to pretend I have said things I haven't.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
I've honestly entirely lost track of what you are trying to say. The 88 was used in an AT and artillery role throughout the war and had a new carriage and AP ammo developed to make it even more effective in that role - it's absurd to claim otherwise. The fact that it was used as a multirole gun is indisputable (Jentz even has a book dedicated to its AT role) - if the designer intended this is unknown, but personally I find that fact that even the original carriage depressed enough to shoot land targets telling. The PAK43 wasn't a waste of resources, it was a specialised AT version of the 88 on a more mobile towed carriage with a lower profile, but it existing doesn't mean the flak version wasn't also used for AT work.
 

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
See the profile difference? If we continue further, placing such a big gun system onto tracks makes it have a worse profile because there is a difference between something purposefully designed to do a job, like a real "tank destroyer", and something being forced to do a job with declining fortunes and lack of equipment purposefully built available to do it.

Still not sure what point your are trying to make. I said one of the benefits of the PAK43 over the Flak88 was a lower profile and so you post a lot of pictures showing this to be the case, but in a tone that suggestions you are somehow disproving my argument by posting lots of images that agree with what I said. There's no argument that a specialised AT gun is more useful in the AT role than a multipurpose AA gun, but that in no way proves the flak 88 wasn't constantly used in an AT role throughout WWII and even in the SCW. You can believe each and every occasion was a freak accident despite multiple sources showing the Germans thought its AT use was perfectly normal if you like though, I've said enough on this subject.
 
Last edited:

Darkrenown

Star marshal
142 Badges
Jan 8, 2002
24.761
16.975
no
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Lost Empire - Immortals
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Rome Gold
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Ancient Space
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • East India Company
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
designing a tank thats overweight and exceeds the designparameters has never been a good idea. True no one knows how the VK3002DB or a lighter Panther may have fared. You say we should be cautious not to be a victim of hindsight bias. However you arrive at a conclusion that a 30 ton-ish tank wouldnt be enough even though it was what the german army wanted and thought they needed, also you guess that it could have been a greater failure, that would have been a rather slim chance considering the Panthers problems.

Remember, his criteria is you have to prove any other tank would have won at Kursk (which pre-supposes Kursk was winnable for the Germans at all) - there's not much point engaging.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.