Alternative History Armoured Fighting Vehicles Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode

cortz#9

Garrison said:
Yeah that was also when premium tanks were better credit earners but less powerful than their tech tree counterparts. Now the game is becoming an alt-tank game, though the vehicles here are way more realistic, except my V1 firing tank. :)
Click to expand...
LOL! I'd like a V-I firing tank but it be quickly removed because it's German but if they made a Russian version we'd be stuck with it forever.

Would love to see some of our designs here go up against the WoT alt AFV's tanks. :cool:

paulo said:
WoT is completely broken in terms of OP and crazy, fictional designs. Also, the mechanics are idiotic.
Like the autoloaders firing each 2s for example...
Click to expand...
I completely agree.
 

cortz#9

Waffenträger mit Wasserfall

Waffentrager Wasserfall.png
 
Last edited:
Claymore

Claymore

Rickshaw said:
Wasserfall needed to be fired vertically from a surveyed launching site, so mobile versions were not possible. It was also command directed and required a dedicated observer to control it in flight...
Click to expand...

Ah, but that is the beauty of AH. Command directed, OK, surveyed sight not so necessary… the word of an ex ground-to-air missile man. 😉
 

Rickshaw

Claymore said:
Ah, but that is the beauty of AH. Command directed, OK, surveyed sight not so necessary… the word of an ex ground-to-air missile man. 😉
Click to expand...
I think the point is that it has to be surveyed so to make it is plain and level... You cannot have that with a mobile launcher...
 
Claymore

Claymore

Rickshaw said:
I think the point is that it has to be surveyed so to make it is plain and level... You cannot have that with a mobile launcher...
Click to expand...

Nope, all fixed (stationary) missile sites are pre-recced so that the engagement envelope is understood and an element of predicted effectiveness can be determined. The nature of mobile SAMs means that this luxury is foregone as their engagements are more unpredictable. A level launch site is not the issue as once fired a missile such as the Wasserfall is under manual command to line of sight (MCLOS) control and independent of its ground orientation. Essentially the controller uses a radio-guidance system via a joystick to follow the target. The system the Germans used was developed from air-launched anti-shipping missiles dropped by aircraft - which were neither fixed nor level. The operator needed only to keep the target in his/her field of view to achieve a hit.

Trust me, I was a missile system Gunnery Instructor. 👍🙂
 
Last edited:

cortz#9

Claymore said:
Nope, all fixed (stationary) missile sites are pre-recced so that the engagement envelope is understood and an element of predicted effectiveness can be determined. The nature of mobile SAMs means that this luxury is foregone as their engagements are more unpredictable. A level launch site is not the issue as once fired a missile such as the Wasserfall is under manual command to line of sight (MCLOS) control and independent of its ground orientation. Essentially the controller uses a radio-guidance system via a joystick to follow the target. The system the Germans used was developed from air-launched anti-shipping missiles dropped by aircraft (which were neither fixed nor level). The operator needed only to keep the target in his/her field of view to achieve a hit.

Trust me, I was a missile system Gunnery Instructor. 👍
Click to expand...
Cooool! :cool:
 

cortz#9

marathag said:
internals don't quite match up like they would need to be
maxresdefault.jpg

23.jpg

Everything is really... snug
SU-76 popped drivetrain over to the side to get room for the driver, who had drivetrain on one side, and fuel tanks on other

12.jpg
su762000s.jpg
7.jpg


doing a front engine T-34 with existing V2 motor is *hard*
Click to expand...
Oh well. I'll try something different next time.
 

Rickshaw

Claymore said:
Nope, all fixed (stationary) missile sites are pre-recced so that the engagement envelope is understood and an element of predicted effectiveness can be determined. The nature of mobile SAMs means that this luxury is foregone as their engagements are more unpredictable. A level launch site is not the issue as once fired a missile such as the Wasserfall is under manual command to line of sight (MCLOS) control and independent of its ground orientation. Essentially the controller uses a radio-guidance system via a joystick to follow the target. The system the Germans used was developed from air-launched anti-shipping missiles dropped by aircraft - which were neither fixed nor level. The operator needed only to keep the target in his/her field of view to achieve a hit.

Trust me, I was a missile system Gunnery Instructor. 👍🙂
Click to expand...
I am only repeating what I was told/read as to the limits of the system. I think it needs two controllers, one for bearing, the other for altitude. The need for the site to be level is more I think to do with the style of launcher adopted.
 

andys

Claymore said:
Although the automobile industry had taken off by 1910-12, there was little to no interest shown by anybody in militarising them. The French were probably the first in 1906 with a serious offering by the CGV company in the modele 1906 but other than being a bit of a novelty, the French military gave them a still ignoring.

View attachment 716563

As WW1 approached the ever-innovative Royal Navy (and the mechanically advanced Royal Naval Air Service in particular) had commissioned several automobile companies to produce some surprisingly advances armoured cars. The Rolls-Royce Armoured Cars of the aptly named "Silver Ghost Squadron" were used for liaison and VIP movement while the basic Rolls Royce Armoured Car Mk I didn't change much right through into WW2. The Lanchester was probably the next most recognisable British Armoured Car after the Rollers.

View attachment 716564

View attachment 716565

View attachment 716566

Note that the first tracked AFV (Little Willie) didn't make an appearance until Sep 1915 - wowing the onlookers with its amazing turn of speed at 2 and a half mph – all this when the RNAS were scooting around the countryside in their armoured cars at 45mph! So yes, definitely wheels over tracks…
Click to expand...
That makes one wonder what WW1 would have been like if one side, or just the British, had deployed significant numbers of armoured cars. Numbers sufficient to get in amongst the Germans and disrupt them, perhaps in a similar manner that Whippet tanks did later in the war. Might it be enough to defeat the Germans and force an end to the war?

On the other hand, if the Germans had used large numbers of armoured cars (and lorries for supporting infantry/artillery) and pulled an early Blitzkrieg, the war would very likely have been over by Christmas? Certainly the race to the sea could have had a very different ending.
 
paulo

paulo

Is that an IR system on top of that alternate Tiger II? And a stereoscopic rangefinder on the turret? The only 'missing' is the smoke grenade launchers... and maybe the external extra fuel tanks a la T-34-85.
Nice tank.
 

cortz#9

paulo said:
Is that an IR system on top of that alternate Tiger II? And a stereoscopic rangefinder on the turret? The only 'missing' is the smoke grenade launchers... and maybe the external extra fuel tanks a la T-34-85.
Nice tank.
Click to expand...
Yes those are an IR and stereoscopics on the turret. I was going to put grenade launchers too but then forgot about them. Oops. :happyblush
 
Reader mode
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top