Jump to content

Walter_Sobchak

Members
  • Posts

    721
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Walter_Sobchak

  • Birthday 10/18/1972

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://tankandafvnews.com/

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Grand Rapids MI
  • Interests
    Civilian tank and afv enthusiast. Collects 1/72 scale replicas although terrible at building them. Particular interest in post war US tank engines.

Recent Profile Visitors

600 profile views

Walter_Sobchak's Achievements

Crew

Crew (2/3)

0

Reputation

  1. Or perhaps the lack of "proper formations" has been determined by both sides to be the most appropriate doctrine for the conditions of the battlefield in Ukraine?
  2. Another very accurate documentary film featuring the King Tiger/M47 called "Battle of the Last Panzer." Produced by Italians and filmed in Spain, the quality is obvious. Enjoy.
  3. A careful examination of documentary films such as "Battle of the Bulge" (1965) clearly shows that the King Tiger tank was in fact an improved version of the US M26. Known in US service as the M47, this vehicle was known as the King tiger in German service.
  4. I believe this is the 105mm armed AMX-13 Mle 58. I base this on the information provided by the book "Images of War: AMX-13 Light Tank - The Complete History" by Robinson, Lau, and Gibeau. As far as I know, it is the most comprehensive volume on the AMX-13 available in English.
  5. The concept art in that article looks like it was generated by AI.
  6. That seems right to me. I would think mine clearing vehicles would be a high priority item for Ukraine right now.
  7. I saw this picture in a news story online, and I have to admit I have no idea what this vehicle is.
  8. I guess the section of the video at 15:44 was (possibly) directed at my pedantry in this thread. I will hang my head in shame now.
  9. Yes, but don't they usually use the base designation of the existing variant and then add the "E" suffix? For example, the vehicle we know as the M60A2 started out as M60A1E1, not as M60E2. Another example, the M48A4 started out as the M48A1E3 rather than M48E4. And yes, I know I am venturing into some pretty pedantic territory here. Humor me.
  10. Should I vehemently insist that the proper nomenclature for such a vehicle would be M1A2 (120) HVSS, just to mirror discussions in the Sherman related threads?
  11. M1E3? Why not call it the M1A3? Why does the US Army seem to hate its own classification system and refuse to follow it?
  12. I have followed a bit of this drama and I think The Chieftain struck the right tone here. If anything, I think he was perhaps too fair to Lazerpig. I find Lazerpig's channel to be an unappealing mix of sarcasm, meme humor and sloppy research. Based on his response to the Chieftains video, he is not unlike a US WWII tank destroyer in that he can dish it out but seems unable to take it.
  13. Where there is a will, there is a way. That said, it is hard to imagine tank production taking place at the rate it did in WW2 with current capacity. My only insight into this is based on conversations with my late father who was a program manager at Teledyne Continental/General Dynamics/L3. I list all those companies, but it was the same facility, the tank engine factory built in 1943 in Muskegon MI (a lovely lake side community you should all spend your vacation dollars at) that he worked at (1967-2012). Fortunately, in the 1980's a history of Continental Motors was writen which included a good deal about the tank engine plant. According to it, even at the height of the "tank scare" initiated by the Korean war, the Continental Motors plant at Getty steet never had to go to round the clock production to make all the AV-1790 engines required by the US government, they had that much spare capacity. I remember talking to my father in the later stages of his career. I asked him if the plant would be capable of that level of production again. He said not at all. They old machinery had been taken out (he specifically refered to a machine called the Jackson that could cut a drive shaft) and replaced by newer, robotic machines. These newer machines were far lower volume, but could do multiple operations, which was far more efficient considering that at that point, they were making perhaps one engine a day. So, could they match 1950's levels of production if they wanted to? No, not with existing equipment. But if national needs changed, so would industry. But that said, it is hard to imagine any situation where the US would pump out Sherman tanks at the volume they did in WW2.
  14. Having dabbled in making youtube videos a bit myself, I can certainly vouch for this. One can be right 98% of the time, but dammit, the times one is 2% wrong are just....painful.
  15. How did they arrive at the designation M10? Last vehicle was the M8 Buford. Was there an M9 that I missed? I ask partly in jest, vehicle designations have seldom made sense. Anyhow, lets all hope this new vehicle is better than it appears.
×
×
  • Create New...