Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Favourite WW2 Soviet tracked TD/SP/Assault

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

  • Favourite WW2 Soviet tracked TD/SP/Assault

    Hi guys,

    This emerged from the previous poll/discussion on our favourite Soviet Heavy tank (and prior to that, our favourite Soviet light tank) and we wanted to 'keep the ball rolling' because we've had some enjoyable discussion on these (thanks Emil, for the ideas and others for contributing).

    At first, I was going to ask you all what your favourite WW2 Soviet tracked 'tank destroyer' was but realized that, depending on the parameters of the definition, this might narrow the range of choice too much. Besides, a number of vehicles not strictly intended as 'tank destroyers' per se did function as such when occasion demanded, in some cases to extremely good effect.

    So, what I've decided to do is include the range of best known fully tracked tank destroyers, assault gun/howitzers etc and allow you guys to pick your favourites from a wider range. Hopefully, this should both enrich and increase the scope of discussion.

    I reassure you all, that if you are going to pick a 'favourite' based on what you like, there will be no nit-picking from me as to the whys and wherefores - 'favourite' means just that, for whatever reason you fancy; cool looks, character, 'meanness', cleverness, majesty or whatever.

    If you want to nominate one of these vehicles as 'best' (in its particular class or outright), then I would certainly welcome that but I'd also be hoping for some sort of reasonable argument to be presented, as to why you think it's the best. It doesn't have to be based purely on anti-tank performance either; general usefulness in assault is of equal validity. Please feel free to choose your own criteria.

    Then again, for those of you who want to simply vote and say nothing at all, that's fine too but I hope we can persuade you to join the discussion later, perhaps?

    Note: I have enabled multiple choices, so you can vote for more than one if you want.


    Best to all,
    panther3485
    30
    KV-2
    3.33%
    1
    SU-76
    10.00%
    3
    SU-85
    20.00%
    6
    SU-100
    23.33%
    7
    SU-122
    0.00%
    0
    SU-152
    10.00%
    3
    ISU-122
    3.33%
    1
    ISU-152
    30.00%
    9

    The poll is expired.

    Last edited by panther3485; 30 Jan 08, 10:08.
    "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!)

  • #2
    You actually listened to Scott's anal wankery (JK Scott, one love) and listed the KV-2? Isn't one of the defining differences b/w an SPG and a TANK is a movable turret? Oh well, I voted for the SU-85 because it was more nimble then the really big heavies and had a lesser loading time (didn't it?).

    Comment


    • #3
      I voted both for the SU-85 and the SU-100, 85 because it was formidable when it reached units and smaller caliber means shorter reload time (but at the same time most rounds have worse penetration capabilitys) while the SU-100 got my vote because the bigger gun with betther penetration

      and they both got my vote because they look so good!
      http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y29...ussianppsh.jpg
      www.reenactor.se

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Emil_G View Post
        "You actually listened to Scott's anal wankery (JK Scott, one love) and listed the KV-2?"
        Call me an anal wanker too, if you like (in effect you have anyway). I don't need to 'listen to Scott', I'm more than capable of making up my own mind, based on my knowledge and understanding of the subject.

        If you don't like the KV-2 being there, don't vote for it. Too easy.


        Originally posted by Emil_G View Post
        "Isn't one of the defining differences b/w an SPG and a TANK is a movable turret?"
        No. If you look at the history of the tank, there have been some serving designs that did not have rotating turrets (the WW1 British rhomboidals come immediately to mind, for example.) Intended battlefield role is an important factor, just as much as (sometimes more than) certain details of physical structure, such as the presence or absence of a rotating turret. That said, almost all tanks after WW1 did have turrets, but that doesn't mean that all turreted AFVs are tanks. Some tank destroyers and IFVs, as well as a good number of SP guns, also have fully rotating turrets. This feature is by no means a reliable indicator of the class of an AFV. The KV-2 is described as a 'heavy tank' or 'heavy assault tank' in almost all references I've seen, and I believe was referred to as such at the time, so you were not wrong if you intended to allow it to be included in a poll on heavy tanks. However, it was - in terms of its intended battlefield role - a turreted heavy assault howitzer (in other words, in practice arguably closer to being an SP than a tank proper), which does kinda put it in a 'grey' area where the true class of the vehicle can be debated. For this reason, I thought it fair to allow its inclusion here, for those of a mind to see it as such. I admit, a last minute decision and I hesitated before doing it - sorry if it annoyed you.

        OK, time for me to exit 'anal wanker' mode.


        Originally posted by Emil_G View Post
        "Oh well, I voted for the SU-85 because it was more nimble then the really big heavies and had a lesser loading time (didn't it?)."
        A fine choice, mate. Very effective TD, nice low silhouette, fast and nimble, adequate ammo loadout and reasonable rate of fire. Served in good numbers, too.
        Last edited by panther3485; 30 Jan 08, 11:33.
        "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


        • #5
          Originally posted by ThomasM View Post
          "I voted both for the SU-85 and the SU-100, 85 because it was formidable when it reached units and smaller caliber means shorter reload time (but at the same time most rounds have worse penetration capabilitys) while the SU-100 got my vote because the bigger gun with betther penetration

          and they both got my vote because they look so good!"
          Both sound choices, mate and I do agree about the looks as well.
          "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


          • #6
            I went for the SU-100 because it was one of the best TD's of the war ( an honourable mention for the SU-85 as well ).

            I also voted for the ISU 152 - a vicious looking piece of machinery with a formidable armament for the support role.

            Both excellent modelling subjects as well.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by MAGNA View Post
              I went for the SU-100 because it was one of the best TD's of the war ( an honourable mention for the SU-85 as well ).

              I also voted for the ISU 152 - a vicious looking piece of machinery with a formidable armament for the support role.

              Both excellent modelling subjects as well.
              Yep, sound reasoning there mate. (And they do make great models, as you say.)
              "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


              • #8
                I voted as MAGNA did, and for the same reasons. Plus you gotta love putting a gun originally designed for naval purposes getting put into a TD as in the SU-100.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Oh yeah the ISU-152 is a mean looking beast to... but the SU-85/100 are more my favorite when it comes to looks and shape, and the longer reload time on the ISU-152 really put it down on my list.
                  http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y29...ussianppsh.jpg
                  www.reenactor.se

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Let me add that, Battlefront shitted all over these in Theatre of War. Some thought the T-34 was shafted in CMBB - well these got shafted in Theater of War.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I took the SU-85 because it looks great and it was the first WWII model I ever built.

                      I'm sure it was one of the first to die in the "Fireworks Wars" of the late 1970's also.

                      Cheer's
                      It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.-George S. Patton

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Emil_G View Post
                        Let me add that, Battlefront shitted all over these in Theatre of War. Some thought the T-34 was shafted in CMBB - well these got shafted in Theater of War.

                        Sorry can you explain that a little better? -Shafted?
                        http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y29...ussianppsh.jpg
                        www.reenactor.se

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Sorry my Svenska friend, I'm using too much Ameircan slang. "Shafted" means - screwed, as in getting the "shaft". What I meant was that I thought these SPG's were undermodeled in Theatre of War - they die too easily and don't kill efficiently.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I keep getting mixed up here. I know what the SU-76, SU-85, and SU-100 are so don't worry about them.

                            I get mixed up with the SU-122 and SU-152 as opposed to ISU-122 and ISU-152. Are the SU's just the earlier models or is there something else I need to know ?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              ISU's were based on the chassis of the Iosif Stalin tank, hence the "I".

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X