Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Best Commanders Tank - Europe 12/44-5/45

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
    The T-44 never saw action, so we will never know how good it might have been, therefore not an option on this poll. If you do consider the T-44 a front runner, you may as well go Centurion, which was at least in the front lines in May 45.
    190 were built before the war ended. That the Russians didn't rush them into service like the British did with the Comet or the US did with the M26, is neither here nor there. It could have been used, it simply wasn't.

    We're considering the M26 here and less than 300 were finished by the end of the war and less than 200 of those, considerably less, saw combat.
    Last edited by T. A. Gardner; 08 Dec 16, 17:23.

    Comment


    • #17
      Commander's tank, right?

      Make mine a Pershing.
      I almost said Tiger II, it is roomy and thus has space for a Commander's extra radios and other gear. It is very well protected and has the long-range weapon to get some snipping in if your unit is having issues.
      However, it is slow, HUGE, and any vehicle with reliability issues is less than desirable... unless you want to command your company/battalion from a Jeep.


      Yes, Pershing. Good mobility and the rock-solid ability to defend itself if caught be surprise are paramount. That 90mm is just as good, if not better, than the 88, and unless you are srrounded by Shermans it does not stick out like an Ox in a herd of ponies.

      Sorry Panther, you are just a little too thin-skinned.

      As for the T-44, sorry, its Russian. That means noisy, cramped, too limited in its flexibility and a crappy view when buttoned-up.

      As for the rest.... your kidding, right?
      "Why is the Rum gone?"

      -Captain Jack

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
        Commander's tank, right?
        From my understanding of what Nick intended in these polls, "Commander" means senior commanders such as Generals, Field Marshalls etc, as well as the senior military bean-counters and bureaucrats. In other words, not the individual Tank Commander as such.
        "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

        Comment


        • #19
          Often times the Panzer Battalion Commander would be in a special radio tank to coordinate with higher HQ. The Tanks in the Companies would be on a different frequency. Basically there were two different radios and a map table in the Commander's tank.

          Pruitt
          Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

          Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

          by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

          Comment


          • #20
            Yes Panther 34/85 that is our definition. The commander will most likely stand behind a desk surrounded by Staff and communication guys.
            If in the field he will sit in a fast reliable vehicle with radio equipment or, thinking of Rommel as a division commander here, sitting in a recce Aircraft like the Fi Storch
            One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.

            Comment


            • #21
              I'm with TAG and will elaborate after a few zees - it's 2315 local time.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                190 were built before the war ended. That the Russians didn't rush them into service like the British did with the Comet or the US did with the M26, is neither here nor there. It could have been used, it simply wasn't.

                We're considering the M26 here and less than 300 were finished by the end of the war and less than 200 of those, considerably less, saw combat.
                The fact remains the the Pershing is a known quantity, while the T-44 is not.

                The only real flaw of the Pershing was mobility, ie an engine designed for the much lighter M4A3, and drive train issues.

                OTOH, we know nothing about the combat performance of the T-44, only that it was a theoretical improvement over the T-34.

                If you are going to include the T-44, you may as well choose the Centurion which was at least sent to the front lines in attempt to find combat at the end of WW2. The T-44 may have had an edge in armour over the Centurion 1, countered by the Centurions more powerful 17pdr mark VII, which had accurate apds and decent HE by this stage of the war. Centurions were also as agile as a Comet and had the cross country of a Churchill. Its Meteor engine and drive train were proven pieces of engineering. Its only issue was that it had a thimble for a fuel tank.

                Centurion vs T-44 is not much of a contest, but neither are truly relevant in this poll, since neither saw action.
                How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                Comment


                • #23
                  As a commanders tank in Europe 44-45? The Sherman. It may be a generation behind, but in it's favour:

                  1. No teething problems. It's a weapons system that has been battle-tested and all the possible kinks worked out.
                  2. Good number of variants to fill multiple roles.
                  3. Excellent maintenance logistics and ease of repair
                  4. Available in better numbers overall than any other tank except the T34 series.

                  As a commander in this setting and time period I want as many units as I can field that are going to be as easy to maintain as possible on my drive east.
                  BoRG
                  "... and that was the last time they called me Freakboy Moses"

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I'm going Comet in this one, for much the same reasons as Don Juan.
                    Originally posted by Don Juan View Post
                    "Comet - basically 80% of a Panther, but with rock solid reliability. ... "
                    "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
                      I'm going Comet in this one, for much the same reasons as Don Juan.
                      Yup! Me too, good all round. I saw the Swedish cross country trials and the Sherman couldn't hack it. So, that the Sherman was used in huge numbers and up-graded with many variants, I would still want a tank that can do almost everything well but with the most important areas done very well, such as reliability, manouverability, armament, speed and range.

                      And if having variants is one of the most important things, then the list should have been cut down to the Churchill and Sherman.

                      Paul
                      Last edited by Dibble201Bty; 09 Dec 16, 14:46.
                      ‘Tis said his form is tiny, yet
                      All human ills he can subdue,
                      Or with a bauble or medal
                      Can win mans heart for you;
                      And many a blessing know to stew
                      To make a megloamaniac bright;
                      Give honour to the dainty Corse,
                      The Pixie is a little shite.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Dibble201Bty View Post
                        Yup! Me too, good all round. I saw the Swedish cross country trials and the Sherman couldn't hack it. So, that the Sherman was used in huge numbers and up-graded with many variants, I would still want a tank that can do almost everything well but with the most important areas done very well, such as reliability, manouverability, armament, speed and range.

                        And if having variants is one of the most important things, then the list should have been cut down to the Churchill and Sherman.

                        Paul

                        As far as Commanders tanks are concerned, Churchills and Shermans are the only two viable options imho.

                        I will be doing a series of polls using a specific tank variant during specific campaigns.
                        How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                        Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

                          As far as Commanders tanks are concerned, Churchills and Shermans are the only two viable options imho.

                          I will be doing a series of polls using a specific tank variant during specific campaigns.
                          We all know that the only real Victorinox tank of WWII was the Churchill.

                          Paul
                          ‘Tis said his form is tiny, yet
                          All human ills he can subdue,
                          Or with a bauble or medal
                          Can win mans heart for you;
                          And many a blessing know to stew
                          To make a megloamaniac bright;
                          Give honour to the dainty Corse,
                          The Pixie is a little shite.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                            Commander's tank, right?

                            Make mine a Pershing.
                            They were pretty unreliable and underpowered during the brief period they were fielded in Europe. Might not be the best choice for a commander who wants to live until VE day.
                            Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                              Centurion vs T-44 is not much of a contest, but neither are truly relevant in this poll, since neither saw action.
                              You're right. The T-44, particularly with the 100mm gun makes it no contest. The Centurion Mk 1 was by comparison, under armored, and under gunned... badly. The hull armor is just 76mm. The turret is 152 on the face so slightly better than the 120 of a T-44, but the T44 is smaller and much better shaped ballistically.
                              The Soviet 100mm is hands down a better all-around gun than the 17 pdr, particularly at longer ranges.

                              The Centurion really doesn't start to get good until the Mk 5 and it's the Mk 13 that really is the quality model. But, those are well past 1945 in introduction.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                                Commander's tank, right?

                                Make mine a Pershing.
                                I almost said Tiger II, it is roomy and thus has space for a Commander's extra radios and other gear. It is very well protected and has the long-range weapon to get some snipping in if your unit is having issues.
                                However, it is slow, HUGE, and any vehicle with reliability issues is less than desirable... unless you want to command your company/battalion from a Jeep.


                                Yes, Pershing. Good mobility and the rock-solid ability to defend itself if caught be surprise are paramount. That 90mm is just as good, if not better, than the 88, and unless you are srrounded by Shermans it does not stick out like an Ox in a herd of ponies.

                                Sorry Panther, you are just a little too thin-skinned.

                                As for the T-44, sorry, its Russian. That means noisy, cramped, too limited in its flexibility and a crappy view when buttoned-up.

                                As for the rest.... your kidding, right?
                                The Pershing suffered from automotive issues. The direct opposite of what makes the Sherman my choice. German heavies suffered for the same reason.

                                Nothing has really changed on the ground during the last months of the war. So if the Sherman was the best choice in November, why would it not be in December?

                                Like I said, I love the Comet, but it just doesn't matter at the point it was introduced.

                                As the war drew to an end, anti armor became less important. And that 75mm looks better and better............

                                The Sherman is the best choice. The logistics chain already exists. No reason to shake it all up and re-invent the wheel at the end of the line.
                                ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                                BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                                BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X