If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12407
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby Mike » Wed 1 Feb 2017 07:16

Killertomato wrote:
GARGEAN wrote:Well, without ATGM under any bush and AT-planes a.k.a. panic-buttons 24/20/20 with extremely low speed might be pretty funny.


That depends on how planes would be implemented. I doubt Maus would respond too well to an A-36 dropping 1000 lb through the roof...

Or for that matter some aircraft rockets or even smaller bombs. Roof armor is ~60mm at the most.


60mm on the top of the turret, 100mm over top were the driver sits, from side to side and 50mm over the rest of the hull.

According to WT. :P

Also tanks in those days didn't have anti-spalling liners so a big HE shell would make a mess, no?
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby Killertomato » Wed 1 Feb 2017 07:20

Mike wrote:
Also tanks in those days didn't have anti-spalling liners so a big HE shell would make a mess, no?



Depends on how big the HE shell is. I don't think 105 HE would do much. 155mm or 203mm? Those boys are probably soup.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12407
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby Mike » Wed 1 Feb 2017 07:39

Killertomato wrote:
Mike wrote:
Also tanks in those days didn't have anti-spalling liners so a big HE shell would make a mess, no?



Depends on how big the HE shell is. I don't think 105 HE would do much. 155mm or 203mm? Those boys are probably soup.


So a Tiny Tim to the side of the turret would be a pretty bad day for the crew.
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby Killertomato » Wed 1 Feb 2017 07:43

Mike wrote:
So a Tiny Tim to the side of the turret would be a pretty bad day for the crew.


Given that the Tiny Tim's warhead was 150 lb semi-armor-piercing... That's a safe bet.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby FrangibleCover » Wed 1 Feb 2017 09:42

Mike wrote:
Killertomato wrote:
GARGEAN wrote:Well, without ATGM under any bush and AT-planes a.k.a. panic-buttons 24/20/20 with extremely low speed might be pretty funny.

That depends on how planes would be implemented. I doubt Maus would respond too well to an A-36 dropping 1000 lb through the roof...

Or for that matter some aircraft rockets or even smaller bombs. Roof armor is ~60mm at the most.

60mm on the top of the turret, 100mm over top were the driver sits, from side to side and 50mm over the rest of the hull.

According to WT. :P

Also tanks in those days didn't have anti-spalling liners so a big HE shell would make a mess, no?

If we're taking into account spalling then Britain has ground solutions ready to go: 2 cards of Churchill AVREs in the vehicle tab are nice but the actual damage will be dealt by the two prototype cards of Gurkhas '45 with Sterlings, a Burney gun and a Bren. They'll be pretty much analogous to Legion '90.

Everyone else probably has stuff too but that's what I feel half-qualified to comment on. I guess if Gurkhas are the new-old Legion '90 then Canada gets a FIST team and a regular squad with the Burney gun that costs exactly the same amount as the shock squad for no reason :D ?

Killertomato wrote:
Mike wrote:
So a Tiny Tim to the side of the turret would be a pretty bad day for the crew.

Given that the Tiny Tim's warhead was 150 lb semi-armor-piercing... That's a safe bet.

The 60lb RP-3 was enough to cause the crew to have a bad day so your bet gets increasingly safe. Problem is that it was very difficult to get an RP-3 on target so I can't imagine the Tiny Tim would have more success with fewer projectiles per aircraft.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
Darkmil
Brigadier
Posts: 3025
Joined: Mon 29 Oct 2012 15:17
Location: Massy
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby Darkmil » Wed 1 Feb 2017 14:39

Killertomato wrote:*
Darkmil wrote:http://home.arcor.de/thuernagel/sf14-e.htm
I believe that qualify as a range-finder, right ? (It's not but it was used as so, and it seems with some decent results results, as it was nonetheless used like a telemeter thanks to the fact it was stereospscopic)


Certainly there were rangefinders- they've been on battleships since before WWI. I just haven't heard of their being in use, or at least common use, in armored vehicles until at least the T29 with the 'ears.'

Well this specific one equipped all Artillerie vehicles (which the Nashorn was considered one of, there is a mount for this SF14 just to right of the gun in Nashorns and Hummels), and of course open-topped vehicles can use them more easily.
And some Tanks crew even used it.
For instance :
Image

@Xeno : Sure, aces don't win war, yet they can make tactic difference. And let's remember that according to the RAF (or was it the USAF ?) 90% of air kills are made by 10% of the pilot (Now that I write it, I'm not sure about this number being a 100%, take it with a pinch of salt), I guess such figures must exists for tanks. So they do not play an insignificant role in the war (while alone they cannot do anything incorporated it's a different matter)
Image

Sub_Zero12
First Sergeant
Posts: 203
Joined: Sat 26 Jan 2013 02:33
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby Sub_Zero12 » Wed 1 Feb 2017 20:52

Drones


F-22

YF-23


Comanche


A-12

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby FrangibleCover » Wed 1 Feb 2017 22:56

Sub_Zero12 wrote:Drones
F-22
YF-23
Comanche
A-12

A-6F with inexplicable AMRAAMs
A/F-117X with slightly more explicable AMRAAMs
F-14E in one of its many forms, for maximum butthurt carrying the Hughes/Raytheon/McDoDo proposal for the AIM-152 which is functionally an AMRAAM with 4x the range and an IR seeker for increased terminal accuracy.

Basically the American Marine deck is going to be as cancerous as the Army deck will be :lol:
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby Killertomato » Wed 1 Feb 2017 23:29

Darkmil wrote:Well this specific one equipped all Artillerie vehicles (which the Nashorn was considered one of, there is a mount for this SF14 just to right of the gun in Nashorns and Hummels), and of course open-topped vehicles can use them more easily.
And some Tanks crew even used it.
For instance :


I read up on those things. Apparently, they're not that good at actually finding ranges- they enhance your depth perception but you still need to be an extremely skilled gunner to make proper use of it. As long as you know the size of the tanks you're shooting at, the stadimetric marks inside the scope would probably do just as well.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
Darkmil
Brigadier
Posts: 3025
Joined: Mon 29 Oct 2012 15:17
Location: Massy
Contact:

Re: If the timeline was extended to 1997, what prototypes would become suddenly available?

Postby Darkmil » Wed 1 Feb 2017 23:45

Killertomato wrote:I read up on those things. Apparently, they're not that good at actually finding ranges- they enhance your depth perception but you still need to be an extremely skilled gunner to make proper use of it. As long as you know the size of the tanks you're shooting at, the stadimetric marks inside the scope would probably do just as well.

They are a bit better than sights from what I understand and it seems there are a lot of controversy about whether or not they were useful. Some claims they were near as performant as bar telemeters and some says that under no circumstance they could be useful for finding range. The closest thing I have found to a consensus is the fact that a trained crew (It seems Nashorns' and Hummels' crew were trained for that) could use it as so with decent results.
Last edited by Darkmil on Thu 2 Feb 2017 07:09, edited 1 time in total.
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cinor and 17 guests