Comets instead of Shermans.

How many Cromwells lasted more than 5 minutes in Tank vs tank engaments with german heavies anyway? Villers Bocage comes to mind...

A question you have to ask about that is 'how well would another Tiger have fared in this situation' - taken by surprise, hemmed in.....
 
One way you might just get it is if development time and resources weren't wasted on designs that never got anywhere.

Peter Beale's 'Death by Design' lists the following which took up design time and effort.

A23, A26 and A43 based on the Churchill
A33, A37, A38 and A39 Assault Tanks
A28, A29, A31, A32 and A35 based on the Centaur/Cromwell series

So, drop the Assault tanks (if you really want one, base it on your A41 Centurion), anything based on the Churchill, use the Cromwell as an interim measure and shoot TOG.

For the gun -

http://www.wwiiequipment.com/index....er-anti-tank-gun&catid=40:anti-tank&Itemid=58

The Ordnance Board was also asked to provide solutions for 80, 90 and 100mm, the board recommended a 20lb shot of 3.45" calibre, the same as the 25pdr but a piece more like the 3.7" AA gun, this requirement was dropped in March 1940.


For an engine, well the 500hp Thornycroft RY12 keeps popping up as a possible tank engine from the late 1920's all the way to 1939. I've never seem anything to say why it wasn't used operationally.
 
For an engine, well the 500hp Thornycroft RY12 keeps popping up as a possible tank engine from the late 1920's all the way to 1939. I've never seem anything to say why it wasn't used operationally.
Neither have I. I would guess cost, all else being equal it had to be more expensive than the far less powerful Liberties. That, plus worries over de-navalising it and a feeling they didn't need that much power might explain it.

Shame really as I can't find anything else really wrong with it.
 
A Tiger in that situation

A question you have to ask about that is 'how well would another Tiger have fared in this situation' - taken by surprise, hemmed in.....

So you're thinking about a full company of tigers, leading the advanced elements of a PzD, being ambushed by a lone IS2 with only a couple other IS2 in the proximity for support. I'd say the first Tiger buys it, the second one takes out the IS2, the rest of the unit moves forward. The trouble with VB was that the shots from the 75mm gun in the Cromwells bounced back, not that they were unable to hit the front of MW Tiger...
Is there any tank in service in the world in 1944 that will survive a direct hit, at close range, by an 88L56? A Ferdinand?
 

Sior

Banned
So you're thinking about a full company of tigers, leading the advanced elements of a PzD, being ambushed by a lone IS2 with only a couple other IS2 in the proximity for support. I'd say the first Tiger buys it, the second one takes out the IS2, the rest of the unit moves forward. The trouble with VB was that the shots from the 75mm gun in the Cromwells bounced back, not that they were unable to hit the front of MW Tiger...
Is there any tank in service in the world in 1944 that will survive a direct hit, at close range, by an 88L56? A Ferdinand?

Ferdinand frontal armour 200mm
Black Prince Frontal Armour 154mm
 
Ferdinand frontal armour 200mm
Black Prince Frontal Armour 154mm

Like I said before...
If you could have one in 44, and if the Tiger I in front of you had only PzGr39 and not PzGr40 you would likely kill it. Even with tungsten PzGr40 the frontal armour of the Black prince would likely survive hits from over 500m away...

Of course by the time the black prince would have made it to the front it would face Tiger II whose 88L71 could kill it from over 1500m with tugsten rounds and from over 1000m with standart rounds. The ferdinand, with it's battleship armour and that gun was in deed tank killer supreme, when it worked.
 
Is there any tank in service in the world in 1944 that will survive a direct hit, at close range, by an 88L56? A Ferdinand?

Didn't the Jumbo Sherman have 6" frontal armor? Though I'm not sure if it was in service in 1944.
 
Jumbo sherman

Proper name M4A3E2. Hull 100mm, turret front 150mm, still with the 75mm gun, a few refitted with 76mm guns. At 42 tons one wonders what they had against the Pershing...
 
...500hp Thornycroft RY12 keeps popping up as a possible tank engine from the late 1920's all the way to 1939. I've never seem anything to say why it wasn't used operationally.
Designed for CMBs, I wonder if it was just too large.:eek:
 
I don't know anything about tanks, but I know something of engines. The Napier Lion 3-bank engine of 24 litres was never considered as a tank engine. Was it only because it was for airplanes, boats and cars?
 
Top