No announcement yet.

Greatest/Best Tank - Advancement of Tank Design

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    I chose the Pz III. For its time when introduced it was ground breaking. The torsion bar suspension has since become a world standard. You can't really tell the difference between a Pz III's suspension and most modern tanks. The double bogie road wheel with return rollers is a standard.
    The crew layout became a norm for over a decade. Giving the vehicle several machineguns (the early ones had two coaxial plus a useful hull mounted one) was a smart move that in modern tanks is copied to a degree with several external MG for engaging soft targets. The armament was not spectacular but efficent and capable with both an HE and AP round.
    Overall, it was a serious advance in the mid to late 30's.

    Significant advancement: T34, Panther. The T34 for its armor arrangement and drive train (rear driven). Otherwise, it was a pretty poor design. The suspension was nothing great. Crew layout was poor. Access was not well thought out with the front hatch for the driver and large single hatch on the turret.
    The Panther made all the improvements that the T34 should have had.

    Average advancement: The M 4 Sherman. It brings standardization and interchangability to tank design for the first time. The choice of a large standard size turret ring makes it possible to keep the vehicle competitive far better than other contemporaries. Ease of maintenance and access is unmatched. The engagement system for the gunner is something that has since become a standard too. A wide view periscope capable of allowing a rough fast lay and then a decent gunsight for final lay.
    Interchangable engines, tracks, suspension, all make the Sherman significant in allowing for a really upgradable tank for the first time.

    Little or no significance: The rest of the vehicles listed.
    Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
    Thanks TAG. At the moment, I have distributed the points as follows for your name here:

    'Champion' tank with 10 points: PzKpfw III

    Significant advancement ... (9) T-34, Panther
    Advancement in a few areas ... (6) M4 Medium

    Based on your post, I attempted to place the remainder that you had grouped together as a single bunch, in these two brackets that are left:

    Represented reasonable but unremarkable progress (3)
    Represented no worthwhile progress ... (0)

    However, your wording "Little or no significance" made that difficult so in the end, I decided to 'temporarily' give all of the following tanks the 'default'* half points score:

    Matilda II
    Somua S-35
    Char B-1 bis
    PzKpfw 38(t)
    PzKpfw IV
    Tiger I
    Tiger II
    M 13-40
    Type 97
    M3 Medium

    .... which is a very blunt instrument indeed. I can leave them like this if you want but if you're not totally happy with that, could you please indicate which brackets you want these tanks to go into.

    *Edit: The method of 'default' scoring for unplaced tanks has since been amended. These tanks will now be given an average of the scores derived from those members who have voted for them or placed them. If anyone is unsure how this works or would like clarification, please do not hesitate to ask me.
    Hi there, TAG

    After re-reading the thread, I have distributed the remaining 20 tanks for you against the four available brackets, as per below:

    Significant advancement for its time and quite influential (9 points) T-34, Panther

    Advancement in a few areas but not particularly influential (6 points) M4 Medium

    Represented reasonable but unremarkable progress (3 points) Matilda II, Crusader, Churchill, Valentine, Cromwell, Somua S-35, Char B-1 bis, PzKpfw 38(t), PzKpfw IV

    Represented no worthwhile progress in any area at all (0 points) Tiger I, Tiger II, M 13/40, Type 97, BT-5/7, KV-1, IS-2, M3 Medium

    As I'm pretty sure that at least a few of these placings will not meet with your approval, could you please advise me ASAP (i.e. before the polls close) what adjustments you would like to have made. You will likely want to move some tanks up or down a bracket. Or, as an alternative if you agree, I can just use average scores (from all the other members) for all the tanks in the third and fourth brackets?
    In the meantime, the above is what has been entered on the spreadsheet for you.


    Edit: TAG - having received no reply from you as of 3 August, I have decided to go with the 'average scores' option for all tanks except PzKpfw III, Panther, T-34 and M4 Medium (the only ones you have given specific ratings for). This will offer a more representative result.
    Last edited by panther3485; 03 Aug 12, 12:14.
    "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
    Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.


    • #47
      Originally posted by Senorankka View Post
      Thank you for welcoming and noticing me about T-34. I would rate T-34 as Significant advancement for its time and quite influential. Sloped armour and inspiration to T-44/45 and other late T-class tanks.
      Hi Senorankka,

      Thank you for completing your Level 2 voting in this poll, and the Transportability & Deployment poll.
      As you have not offered ratings for the other 10 polls, I will be using the averages of the other Level 2 voters to determine your scores in those polls.
      "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
      Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.


      • #48
        Final Scores for 'Advancement of Tank Design'

        Final Scores for the 'Advancement of Tank Design' poll:

        1st - T-34 (9.5)
        2nd - Panther (9)
        3rd - BT-5/7 (7.8)
        Equal 4th - PzKpfw III and Tiger I (7.4)
        5th - M4 Medium (7.3)
        6th - Churchill (6.5)
        7th - Tiger II (6.3)
        8th - PzKpfw IV (6.2)
        9th - IS-2 (5.5)
        10th - Somua S-35 (5.4)
        Equal 11th - Char B-1 bis and KV-1
        12th - M3 Medium (3.8)
        13th - Type 97 (3.5)
        14th - Matilda II (3)
        Equal 15th - Cromwell and PzKpfw 38(t) (2.8)
        16th - Valentine (2.3)
        17th - Crusader (1.8)
        18th - M 13-40 (1)


        No surprise at all with the #1 tank here. IMO, not really up for debate. Many of the rest could be, although I'm thinking that once you get down past, say about 11th place on this list it becomes relatively meaningless anyway, more so than for most of the other polls.
        Last edited by panther3485; 12 Aug 12, 07:34.
        "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
        Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.


        • #49
          Two surprises for me on that list - the BT-5/7 finishing as high as it did, but what was really a bloated Panther with no advances at all, the Tiger II, finishing 7th with 6.3 points. The myth lives.


          • #50
            My guess is that with the Panther, some folks are thinking purely in terms of its overall design and what that represented as a 'step forward'; and pretty much ignoring the physical shortcomings the tank had in reality. The criterion does allow them to do that, if they interpret it that way.

            As for the BT, this started off as an unashamed copy (with minor modifications) of an American design purchased from the USA so IMO the Soviets don't really deserve points for innovation with that particular tank.
            Last edited by panther3485; 13 Aug 12, 06:58.
            "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
            Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.


            Latest Topics