The Superior King Tiger

In article ,
Scott Ferrin wrote:

And if you want a real test of Russian armour, send them to take
Washington DC and see if *that* passes the giggle test.

I always thought it would be a kick if the USSR ever tried an air
assault or landing on the US. IF they think there's a lot of guns in
the Middle East. . .

The fun part would be when the commanders realize that a few hundred
*thousand* US civilians would qualify as "snipers" in the Soviet armed
forces.

We have people who buy mile-range rifles for *fun*.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

In article ,
Greg Hennessy wrote:

On Sat, 08 May 2004 04:06:39 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

Then there was the seldom-mentioned Krupp P1000 Rat. One THOUSAND tons.
Two 280mm main guns. Or the P1500 variant with an 800mm mortar(!) and a
couple of 150mm cannons... (I still have trouble believing that they
were really thinking of building something like this, even early in the
war).

Quite, think of all the fist fights at allied airbases, typhoon and jug
pilots going at it hammer and tongs, to try and decide who'd have the
pleasure of plugging it.

8 x 60lb RPs or 8 x HVARS delivered at a suitable angle is really
going to mess up someones day.

The problem was that the thing had enough armor on it to shrug off most
light/medium rockets, and would certainly have been tailed closely by a
flock of AAA in the "Whirlwind" category. Of course, it was big enough
to be a target for the Tallboy or Grand Slam bombs. Wouldn't you like
to have some film of *that* little scenario?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

.except that the one nation in the world with the capability of taking
advantage of that paradigm shift is... well, the US, which is currently
redesigning the entire US military to take that jump.

Unfortunately not,the new paradigm shift favors scientificaly and
technologically savvy nations, not the nations with the existing defense
infrastructure.
In other words "advanced nations" will benefit from the paradigm shift,not
"advanced countries".
US has to do much more than preparing population for paradigm change by using
PSYOPs.

(snip)

LOL.... nobody is saying that the Leo's are bad tanks. I haven't
heard
one
person say that at all. They are fine tanks. German's are great (if
somewhat
overzealous) engineers. What we are saying, however, is that the
Leo's
are
totally unproven in combat, and that all final judgements regarding
any
weapons system is contingent upon actual combat experience. The M1
series
has plenty of combat time under it's belt, and has performed, by all
measures, splendidly. It is a combat proven system and is a better
tank
than
the Leopard. It has better armor, excellent targeting systems, and
it
fires
a better round. Period. You need to get over it.

As for it being 'Europe's premere MBT', what do you expect? It is
probably
better than the LeClerc (another parade ground princess), and pigs
will
fly
before the protectionist European governments buy big-ticket items
from
the
USA (and they don't need to; their domestic defense industries are
adequate), but you have to understand that the military just isn't a
priority there in Europe. The military is in fact on the bottom of
their
list. So you cannot expect a nation which takes a 'military-last'
attitude
to produce equipment superior to the USA, which actually may need to
use
the
stuff at some point.

Challenger II?

To most of the EU, buying big-ticket items from the Brits is pretty much
the
same as buying from the USA. Great Britian is not a full EU participant,
and
(smartly) doesn't plan to be anytime soon.

But the Challenger II is another fine, battle-proven piece of hardware.


And anyone who says Russian tanks are garbage outta have his ass
shipped out in an M-1A2 and land on the outskirts of Moscow in 50
degree below zero weather with Mils, Migs, and Sukhois flying
about
and Russian troops armed with ATGWs.

One tank against the entire russian armed forces? Sure, what the
hell....

But seriously, you are just being an idiot now (moreso). The
scenario
you
just described is pretty much EXACTLY what the M1 tank was designed
for.
And
you are also assuming that we would not have achieved air
superiority
before
sending our armor in; which we would havem being that it is the US
tactical
doctorine to only send in ground forces after the air is secured.
And
the
only bigger joke than the Russian army is the Russian air force
(well
maybe
it's tied with their navy). We don't fight wars with just tanks.

No takers?... didn't think so since the M-1A2 is confined to
attacking
puny nations with poor import stripped armor of the FSU crewed by
sand-dwelling conscripts.

LOL... 'confined'... whatever you say. And I'm not so sure that the
modern
Russian tank crews are any better trained than the Iraqi's were. Our
armed
forces are a total and complete overmatch for any other armed force
on
the
globe. Period. It's not even close.

Yeah, you are certainly doing a good job in Iraq just now.


Yeah, we're losing tank battles left and right over there.

I said 'armed forces' vs. other 'armed forces', which is what the Ghost
of
Hitler (aka Robert Arndt) posted as a hypothetical in the first place.
USA
vs. Russia. Or anyone else for that matter; there isn't a country in the
world that can match the US military.

The situation in Iraq is an insurgent force, and quite honestly, if we
weren't so damn concerned about politics and 'collateral damage' we
could
have the insurgency put down in 12 hours. If you don't belive that, then
you
are a fool. And quite frankly, it's really only been a very short time
anyway.

I don't agree. I suppose I must be a fool. Check your words.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=insurgent

in·sur·gent (n-sûrjnt)
adj.
1.. Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a
government.
2.. Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
There is no established authority in Iraq, nor is there any political
leadership, therefore I would not say 'insurgent' is the right word at
all.

'A very short time'? Bwah ha ha ha!

So what would qualify as a long time in your world? Over a year seems
likea
long time to me, and I am sure to the people in Iraq. 12 hours? My ass.

But, as I said, as a military, the US armed forces are second to none by
a
wide margin. You can make all the snide remarks you like, but it won't
change anything. The envy, however, is palpable.

It just may not quite be the time for this accusation. Unless you want to
provoke laughter that is.

Bogged down in Iraq. Publicly exposed as having tortured POWs. Losing
what?
2 soldiers a day, against an enemy which was declared defeated a year ago?

I don't see the grounds for envy there, personally.

I like the way you creatively snip my statements and completely change the
subject. You obviously couldn't win the original argument.

The entire original thread was about old vs. new armor and the US military
in a force on force confrontation with another modern military. I stated
that in such a confrontation, no other nation in the world could match the
overall US capabilities. You must obviouly agree (or not have any response),
because you promptly snipped out all such comments I made, then went on a
rant about a guerilla war in a town in Iraq, where armor and air power are
barely even being used. Then mentioned prisoner torture (I have no idea what
that has to do with tank capabilities).

So either speak directly to the original point, or go burn a flag or
something.

robert arndt twisted the electrons to say:
Better than any mass-produced piece-of-**** Sherman (except the
Firefly British conversion).

Well, if the Sherman Firefly is adequate then surely the M10 Achilles and
the Comet are also adequate? (Though I wouldn't want to be in the
Achilles with the manual traverse only turret.)

Besides which, if the war lasts any longer then the Centurion and the M26
Pershing with their 20-pounder and 90mm guns (respectively) get in the
game ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

"Thomas J. Paladino Jr." wrote in message
...

(snip)

But, as I said, as a military, the US armed forces are second to none
by
a
wide margin. You can make all the snide remarks you like, but it won't
change anything. The envy, however, is palpable.

It just may not quite be the time for this accusation. Unless you want
to
provoke laughter that is.

Bogged down in Iraq. Publicly exposed as having tortured POWs. Losing
what?
2 soldiers a day, against an enemy which was declared defeated a year
ago?

I don't see the grounds for envy there, personally.

I like the way you creatively snip my statements and completely change the
subject.

Glad you liked it.

You obviously couldn't win the original argument.

Obviously not.

The entire original thread was about old vs. new armor and the US military
in a force on force confrontation with another modern military. I stated
that in such a confrontation, no other nation in the world could match the
overall US capabilities. You must obviouly agree (or not have any
response),
because you promptly snipped out all such comments I made, then went on a
rant about a guerilla war in a town in Iraq, where armor and air power are
barely even being used. Then mentioned prisoner torture (I have no idea
what
that has to do with tank capabilities).

How awful that those horrid Iraqis aren't fighting like you want them to
fight.

My point was, that rather than having a tank force that could win a
hypothetical war, or one from the past, maybe we should think about having
armed forces that could effectively fight the wars we are actually in in the
real world.

Of course, that would presuppose a modicum of joined-up thinking amongst the
political leadership, and I know how far away that is from being reality.

Prisoner torture guarantees more resistance. Tanks may not be much help in
Iraq now.

On the Vietnam comparison it is about 1972. Helicopters on roofs soon I
predict.

Sorry you didn't grasp that the first time around. Don't worry about it if
you still don't get it.

J


So either speak directly to the original point, or go burn a flag or
something.

Tut tut! Not my style at all. What a terrible thing to suggest.

On 7 May 2004 14:39:47 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/pz5.htm



Rob


The Nazis lost, get over it.


Al Minyard

On Sat, 8 May 2004 17:29:26 +1000, "L'acrobat" wrote:


"Krztalizer" wrote in message
...
Robert, you win the award for starting the "Most OT post" today. What's
next?
Planning on posting something on Rec.Arts.Needlepoint about nebelwerfers?

Arndt mode on - THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST NEEDLEPOINT WAS CULTURALLY SUPERIOR
TO ALL OTHER FORMS!!!!!! Arndt mode off.

And was done with the Mach 4 version of the nuclear nebelwerfer!!!!!

Al Minyard

On Sat, 8 May 2004 11:19:31 +0100, Moramarth wrote:

In article m, David
E. Powell writes
"robert arndt" wrote in message
. com...
http://www.achtungpanzer.com/pz5.htm

SNIP

Rob

Um, what does this have to do with military aviation? Other than the
military aviation of the Allies hurting German tank production?
Or Allied military aviation hurting German tanks. The answer to the
King Tiger was the rocket-firing Typhoon...

Regards,



Along with the rocket firing P-47s, P-51s, and P-38s

Al Minyard

On Sat, 08 May 2004 16:49:49 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:


The problem was that the thing had enough armor on it to shrug off most
light/medium rockets,

Dunno about the HVAR, but AIR the 60lb RP used by the UK came in two forms,
one with a HE warhead and the other was solid originally intended for tank
killing, but ended up doing sterling work for anti shipping.

and would certainly have been tailed closely by a
flock of AAA in the "Whirlwind" category.

True, however it couldnt be any worse than sending P47s against LW bases.

Of course, it was big enough
to be a target for the Tallboy or Grand Slam bombs.

Slight overkill LOL. Both the US and UK had 2000LB class AP bombs intended
for anti ship use which would have been more than adequate.

Wouldn't you like
to have some film of *that* little scenario?

One assumes that that 12 inch 'tiny tim' RP as used on Okinawa would have
been available for dealing with such eventualities. Of course aiming it
accurately enough would be another matter.




greg



--
"vying with Platt for the largest gap
between capability and self perception"