Alternative History Armoured Fighting Vehicles Part 3
- Thread starter Claymore
- Start date
- Status
I want to see the build of the Panzercat Panzer.
Come on, @Claymore get some cardboard and glue and make the best kitty shrine of all time.
you mean theI want to see the build of the Panzercat Panzer.
Come on, @Claymore get some cardboard and glue and make the best kitty shrine of all time.
internet tradition prescribes cardboard and a hotglue gun
Indeed he did... it was quite humbling, he ran, tail up and trilling as only a daft old Maine Coon can. That’s ma boy!!! 😸
Sadly our car is still WIA so our neighbour kindly gave us a lift to the airport. At least our holiday will give our garage another 4 weeks to hopefully sort things out. 🤞🙄 🤞
I'm wondering if you guys would know of any good high level WWII wargamming books to buy? I'm currently planning a truly massive WWII TL and I wanted to wargame this out to keep things from becoming a cluster fuck of me fucking up things again.
Not books but if you got a couple of thousand of dollars to spare get the Europa series of games.
Edit: Not sure what you mean by Wargaming books?
If Adolf instead of Smitty had asked you the same question the history of the 20th century could've turned out very differently.
Last edited:
What is the TL about? I don't really know much, but I know people who would know where to look.
I know Galvaston Bay used The Operational Art of War computer game for just that on his Pacific War timeline.
At work.
Glad your trip turned out all okay Claymore.
Good luck with your reference hunt Jim Smitty.
So, I thought I'd ask the question here first rather than starting an entire thread and possibly drawing people's ire out in the forums at large.
What do folks think of the various "Wank the 'X'." threads?
My particular wank being presented in the question of , and why I present it here, and is I regards to the venerable Char B-1.
(Also "PHRASING!" )
Given the rosy glasses of hind sight. How might we better this wonder of Gallic mechanismo?
My first thoughts are to its actual design phylosophy. That it is not so much a "Heavy" or "Main" type battle machine but more a 'Stug life' affair with enough space to mount a 'Defensive' turret/Super-cuppola on top?
Thus the main focus being the better development, placing and adjustment of the hull mounted 75. Since this and its use are the main thesis of the vehicle's existence.
That a longer barreled weapon is, perchance, going to need a slightly different hull profile is a given.
Next, we better rationalize the engjne, transmission and other internal ergonomic lay outs.
There was also a larger turret suggested for the vehicle I believe? With French command realizing that the idea that "More crew eases work load" dawning just before the Panzers came over the hills.
Like really? An internal corridor through which to service the engine compartment? Surely these internal places can be better rationalized to the extent of being utilized or done away with?
For now, I can't think of what other things to go over. I mean, the track lay out while 'Old school' was still the vogue on other machines such as the Churchill and such.
Much cheers to all. (^_^)
Glad your trip turned out all okay Claymore.
Good luck with your reference hunt Jim Smitty.
So, I thought I'd ask the question here first rather than starting an entire thread and possibly drawing people's ire out in the forums at large.
What do folks think of the various "Wank the 'X'." threads?
My particular wank being presented in the question of , and why I present it here, and is I regards to the venerable Char B-1.
(Also "PHRASING!"
)Given the rosy glasses of hind sight. How might we better this wonder of Gallic mechanismo?
My first thoughts are to its actual design phylosophy. That it is not so much a "Heavy" or "Main" type battle machine but more a 'Stug life' affair with enough space to mount a 'Defensive' turret/Super-cuppola on top?
Thus the main focus being the better development, placing and adjustment of the hull mounted 75. Since this and its use are the main thesis of the vehicle's existence.
That a longer barreled weapon is, perchance, going to need a slightly different hull profile is a given.
Next, we better rationalize the engjne, transmission and other internal ergonomic lay outs.
There was also a larger turret suggested for the vehicle I believe? With French command realizing that the idea that "More crew eases work load" dawning just before the Panzers came over the hills.
Like really? An internal corridor through which to service the engine compartment? Surely these internal places can be better rationalized to the extent of being utilized or done away with?
For now, I can't think of what other things to go over. I mean, the track lay out while 'Old school' was still the vogue on other machines such as the Churchill and such.
Much cheers to all. (^_^)
I also think a StuG conversion would probably work out best.At work.
Glad your trip turned out all okay Claymore.
Good luck with your reference hunt Jim Smitty.
So, I thought I'd ask the question here first rather than starting an entire thread and possibly drawing people's ire out in the forums at large.
What do folks think of the various "Wank the 'X'." threads?
My particular wank being presented in the question of , and why I present it here, and is I regards to the venerable Char B-1.
(Also "PHRASING!"
Given the rosy glasses of hind sight. How might we better this wonder of Gallic mechanismo?
My first thoughts are to its actual design phylosophy. That it is not so much a "Heavy" or "Main" type battle machine but more a 'Stug life' affair with enough space to mount a 'Defensive' turret/Super-cuppola on top?
Thus the main focus being the better development, placing and adjustment of the hull mounted 75. Since this and its use are the main thesis of the vehicle's existence.
That a longer barreled weapon is, perchance, going to need a slightly different hull profile is a given.
Next, we better rationalize the engjne, transmission and other internal ergonomic lay outs.
There was also a larger turret suggested for the vehicle I believe? With French command realizing that the idea that "More crew eases work load" dawning just before the Panzers came over the hills.
Like really? An internal corridor through which to service the engine compartment? Surely these internal places can be better rationalized to the extent of being utilized or done away with?
For now, I can't think of what other things to go over. I mean, the track lay out while 'Old school' was still the vogue on other machines such as the Churchill and such.
Much cheers to all. (^_^)
As for what I personally think about the "Wank the 'X'." threads I used to like them and found them a good source of inspiration but I soon grew tired of them, I would draw up an alt-designs based on the thread topic and usually get no response at all on the plausibility of the design neither pro nor con comments.
Meanwhile someone would mention putting a bigger gun or engine and the chat would go on and on about why it was a good or bad idea.
The threads got repetitive and boring for me.
Continuing my love affair with AFVs within an East & South East Asian context.
I stumbled upon the use of fifteen Panzer I's during the second Sino - Japanese war by the Nationalist forces, now they were apparently all destroyed or abandoned following the Battle of Nanjing by December 1937. There were a number of faults that made them ill suited for Chinese service,
Is anyone interested in drawing a modified Panzer I that rectified these faults?
Here is a Panzer I in Chinese markings for inspiration.
I stumbled upon the use of fifteen Panzer I's during the second Sino - Japanese war by the Nationalist forces, now they were apparently all destroyed or abandoned following the Battle of Nanjing by December 1937. There were a number of faults that made them ill suited for Chinese service,
- The tanks were very prone to overheating, and temperatures inside the tank could get as high as 60 degrees Celsius in the summer, even with all hatches open.
- Hand and foot levers could hardly be operated as a result of the intense heat, making driving even more hazardous.
- On a march of any length, the front of the tank had to be ventilated by opening the brake adjustment hatch.
- Due to the threat of the electrical equipment overheating, the engine compartment had to be ventilated during long marches.
- Due to the overheating issue, after a long march the gunner could not fire the machine guns when the tank was buttoned-down (IE with all hatches closed).
- Off-road use of the tanks was unimaginable because the tracks were not wide enough for muddy rice fields (especially anywhere north of the Yangtze River). Essentially, the tracks got stuck in the mud, and the tank threw the track. Off-roading on completely dry fields was possible if the driver was careful.
- Even in suitable fields, often the dykes that separated rice fields were around 1.5 meters tall, and the Panzer I had trouble clearing those.
Is anyone interested in drawing a modified Panzer I that rectified these faults?
Here is a Panzer I in Chinese markings for inspiration.
The Germans themselves may have rectified these problems on later models, I don't recall ever reading about any of these issues with the Pz.I's in service with the Afrika Korps although there are no rice paddies in north Africa.Continuing my love affair with AFVs within an East & South East Asian context.
I stumbled upon the use of fifteen Panzer I's during the second Sino - Japanese war by the Nationalist forces, now they were apparently all destroyed or abandoned following the Battle of Nanjing by December 1937. There were a number of faults that made them ill suited for Chinese service,
- The tanks were very prone to overheating, and temperatures inside the tank could get as high as 60 degrees Celsius in the summer, even with all hatches open.
- Hand and foot levers could hardly be operated as a result of the intense heat, making driving even more hazardous.
- On a march of any length, the front of the tank had to be ventilated by opening the brake adjustment hatch.
- Due to the threat of the electrical equipment overheating, the engine compartment had to be ventilated during long marches.
- Due to the overheating issue, after a long march the gunner could not fire the machine guns when the tank was buttoned-down (IE with all hatches closed).
- Off-road use of the tanks was unimaginable because the tracks were not wide enough for muddy rice fields (especially anywhere north of the Yangtze River). Essentially, the tracks got stuck in the mud, and the tank threw the track. Off-roading on completely dry fields was possible if the driver was careful.
- Even in suitable fields, often the dykes that separated rice fields were around 1.5 meters tall, and the Panzer I had trouble clearing those.
Is anyone interested in drawing a modified Panzer I that rectified these faults?
Here is a Panzer I in Chinese markings for inspiration.
- Status