Why are the tracks on the P26 different on the side view compared to the front?
Alternative History Armoured Fighting Vehicles Part 3
- Thread starter Claymore
- Start date
- Status
Why are the tracks on the P26 different on the side view compared to the front?
Last edited:
The Germans were putting too much weight on their tanks thru ought the war. Here I was inspired the Skorpion G. which was a TD made from a Panther chassis armed with a 12.cm gun, was wondering what variants might have sprung up from the Pz.III/IV had it gone into production.
I was trying to do what the Germans might have done and the Germans didn't always make the wisest of decisions.
The tracks on the side came from the VK3002DB but I didn't have a front view pic so I used the front view tracks from a T-34 since the VK was a copy of the T-34.
The idea here is that the Germans chaired the plans for the VK3002 DB with the Italians when they learned the Italians wanted to make a copy of the T-34 of their own.
That tank would definetly had the size. Now if you could get right of that horrible gun... (seriously, Japan had the worst light AAA of the war...)
It's what the Japanese had. They did develop some 37mm cannons but these weren't developed until around 1942.
There were also some 20mm guns developed for use in aircraft but I'm not sure which would be the best gun for this AFV.
You could try the Type 99 20mm gun used in various aircraft. Much better ROF (better than the Oerlikon 20mm!), and has a belt fed version.
Wasn't the Type 99 based one of the shorter Oerlikon cases? So the trade off was it was lighter gun and higher ROF (with same HE), but less velocity and as such effective range?
Last edited:
Yes, but imho it's still a better ground-based mobile AA gun than the 25mm, specially if one uses the belt-fed model, since usually terrain masking (hills, forests, etc) lower the maximum detection range anyway.
It may not be overweight but its crew is not long for this world with so little protection.
The germans didn't have time to design new tank chassis, hence making do with the Panther and PzIV. They tried with the E series, but by then it was far too late.
And that design started all the way back in 1937. And had so many problems and delays, less than 500 were built...
The 1937 date really is misleading. The VK 3001 (H), 3601 (H), 4501 (H) and Tiger II are so different in design or even intended use that they were pretty much restarting from scratch at every iteration. 3001 was just initially meant to be an uparmored BW (Pz IV's class), which became a potential alternative to the Pz IV. 3601 was to be an adaptation of the design to have more armor and a 105mm howitzer then salvaged to get a high velocity 75 instead, but it had to use a completely new powertrain and a vastly revised hull and turret shape.
4501 is the first tank really designed for high penetration tank busting/breakthrough and has yet more mods, and development only started in early/mid 1941, and Tiger II dev only started in late 41/1942, and even then lost its old roots altogether as the hull was instead unified in design with the Panther, thus actually inheriting from a different family.
Thus 2 years of development is actually quite fine for such a big endeavor. And when you account for all the pre-1942 developments I mentionned and what had been done for other German tank families, and what had gone to the drawing stage before being cancelled in 42-44, the reality is that Germany actually developped new designs every 2 years on average, and that for sometimes 3 families simultaneously. Germany's failure to introduce new chassis has more to do with changing requirements/priorities than actual inabilities, and when you look at the neverending story of extremely similar "new Pz IV" chassis proposed in 4 years, they could easily have just picked one of the earlier offers.
Last edited:
ZSU 57-2 SPAAG. Has two 57mm autocannons.
What kind of armor penetration can we get with this weapon (rate of fire of 70 rpm sustained and 120 rpm cyclic)? Enough to take out a Cold War Era MBT?
RamscoopRaider
Donor
Armor penetration of the 57mm S-60 with UBR-281 APCBC, 96mm at 1000m, 106mm at 500m, going to go with no outside the side arc. A proper 57mm AT gun with a sabot round, the 6 pounder does 160mm and 140mm, so still going to say no
Even if you get 10 shots off in a matter of 5-6 seconds and they all hit the same general area?
Also could you fit twin bofors 40mm autocannons in either a Stug III or Hetzer hull (let's say Germany, and if so, would there be any benefits to such a design?
- Status