Who Loves the King Tiger...... -1 reply

Please wait...

Driver

Tomorrow Comes Today

50 XP

29th January 2004

0 Uploads

823 Posts

0 Threads

#91 14 years ago

Hey, I saw this Pz4 with its rear armor sloped in a 90* circular way. Anyone got any info on it? I only saw one picture. Its whole rear part of the chassis was reformed.




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#92 14 years ago

Beast of WarThe Tiger II ausf B that is in FH is a fantasy unit.....it never existed like that. The real Tiger ausf B or "King Tiger" was a cumbersome mobile bunker, but then made out of soft steel.....yes, soft steel. It's only protection came from that soft steel was very thick, and was positioned at a well sloped angle. The armour was supposed to be of much better quality, but when the "King Tigers" were manifactured the nessesary alloys for good quality armour steel were not available anymore...... The Maybach 230 engine and transmission was allready too weak for the Tiger I, and made that tank unreliable, in the Tiger II ausf B it was a disaster and the "king Tiger" could not move too far before breaking down and needing repairs. That is rediculous in the middle of a battle......and that is why these things didn't move that far and the term "bunker" instead of tank is well suited. On top of that the Tiger II ausf B swallowed such rediculous amounts of fuel, no army in the world, including the Americans could have kept them running.......let alone the germans that had only a few drops left......what was left of the luftwaffe already was held on the ground, because of lack of fuel..... Btw : The Tiger II ausf B or "King Tiger" had no connection to the Tiger tank at all, in fact it was based on the Panther tank...... Here is the hard reality for those that still believe in German propaganda, myths and fairytales : ( note that some holes - white cirles or numbers - are just lowly Russian regimental infantry 57 mm field guns.....there is not one KT in the pictures here that was hit by an aircraft....not one KT......all the work of simple infantry regimental field guns, ordinary heavy artillery, and SU mobile assault guns...... i think the pics speak for themselves ) Sorry if you are crying now.......but someone had to tell you Santa Claus didn't really exist neither....... :D

Beast of War its posts like this why your considered the forum idiot. God you piss me off with your half researched posts. Please get a damm clue. Im getting really tired of the bulls**t you keep trying to feed the noobs.

First, regarding the Tiger II's armor.

IT WAS NOT SOFT STEEL If it had been soft steel it would ahve been much more easily penetrated.

The Tiger I ausf E used nickel and chrome to achieve an ideal Brinell hardness test rating of about 250 and was known for its resiliency. If hit too hard the armor would flex and give a little to absorb some of the energy.

By the time the Tiger II was produced nickel and chome were in very short supply. The Tiger II's armor was manufactured using a new technique using Boron and Vanadium. The armor was stiffer and rejected initial penetration as well as the Tiger's armor but was less resilient. Meaning it didnt flex as well and was more prone to breaking and shattering if hit by a large enough round.

Also according to Belton Coopers book "Deathtraps:The Survival of an American Armored Division" Mr. Cooper had the opportunity to inspect some Tigers from a Mechanical Engineers perspective. One of the things he noticed was that on the Tiger the edges of the armor plates and joints were angle ground to form a channel and the channel was then filled with welding rod. With the Tiger II welding rod was in short supply so to conserve material the edges were not angle ground and the weld was in a zig zag pattern back and forth over the edge to tack it together.

No one has ever questioned the ability to penetrate a Tiger II's side armor why do you keep bringing it up like it was some big deal? All these shots you keep showing look to be side shots.

Now as for reliability

As has been mentioned so many dammed times that Im tired of repeating it to you the first 50 Tiger I's were the unreliable models when it had the original 650hp Maybach. The surviving first 50 models were also retrofitted with the 700ho Maybachs.

With the 700hp Maybach the reliability of the Tiger I was not a problem if maintained properly and not used to tow other vehicles.

The Tiger II used a improved version of the Tiger I ausf E's drivetrain so that even though it was heavier it was as fast as a Tiger I on level ground andIF MAINTAINED PROPERLY WAS RELIABLE IF NOT USED TO TOW OTHER VEHICLES

I think its high time you stick to what you know, god only knows what that may be. You know what you can do with Santa Claus.




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#93 14 years ago
DriverHey, I saw this Pz4 with its rear armor sloped in a 90* circular way. Anyone got any info on it? I only saw one picture. Its whole rear part of the chassis was reformed.

It was a experimental hydraulic drive version and was never produced.




[tR]Mad Mac

Aerospace Engineering FTW!

50 XP

19th May 2004

0 Uploads

1,242 Posts

0 Threads

#94 14 years ago

Hey, isnt there a sticky about being respectful towards other members?

Oh yeah- here it is: http://www.gamingforums.com/showthread.php?t=111234




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#95 14 years ago

Anlushac11

Beast of War its posts like this why your considered the forum idiot. God you piss me the f%^k off with your dumb%% half researched posts. Please pull your head out of your f-ing a%% and get a damm clue. Im getting realy tired of the bulls**t you keep trying to feed the noobs, everyone else here knows you dont know your a**hole from a hole in the ground.

First, regarding the Tiger II's armor.

IT WAS NOT SOFT STEEL YOU IMBECILE If it had been soft steel it would ahve been much more easily penetrated.

The Tiger I ausf E used nickel and chrome to achieve an ideal Brinell hardness test rating of about 250 and was known for its resiliency. If hit too hard the armor would flex and give a little to absorb some of the energy.

By the time the Tiger II was produced nickel and chome were in very short supply. The Tiger II's armor was manufactured using a new technique using Boron and Vanadium. The armor was stiffer and rejected initial penetration as well as the Tiger's armor but was less resilient. Meaning it didnt flex as well and was more prone to breaking and shattering if hit by a large enough round.

Also according to Belton Coopers book "Deathtraps:The Survival of an American Armored Division" Mr. Cooper had the opportunity to inspect some Tigers from a Mechanical Engineers perspective. One of the things he noticed was that on the Tiger the edges of the armor plates and joints were angle ground to form a channel and the channel was then filled with welding rod. With the Tiger II welding rod was in short supply so to conserve material the edges were not angle ground and the weld was in a zig zag pattern back and forth over the edge to tack it together.

No one has ever questioned the ability to penetrate a Tiger II's side armor why do you keep bringing it up like it was some big deal? All these shots you keep showing look to be side shots.

Now as for reliability

As has been mentioned so many dammed times that Im tired of repeating it to you the first 50 Tiger I's were the unreliable models when it had the original 650hp Maybach. The surviving first 50 models were also retrofitted with the 700ho Maybachs.

With the 700hp Maybach the reliability of the Tiger I was not a problem if maintained properly and not used to tow other vehicles.

The Tiger II used a improved version of the Tiger I ausf E's drivetrain so that even though it was heavier it was as fast as a Tiger I on level ground andIF MAINTAINED PROPERLY WAS RELIABLE IF NOT USED TO TOW OTHER VEHICLES

I think its high time you stick to what you know, god only knows what that may be. Take take your Santa Claus and shove it up your...well Im sure even you get the idea.

I'm no fool......maybe people like you are believing units were really produced exactly by design specifications. You forget Germanies industries were in ashes when these units were produced, special armour treatment couldn't be done anymore and needed alloys were no longer available.....it is a miracle they were produced at all.....

Maybe you'd better study what the real King Tigers were like that were encountered in the field, after they were destroyed by ordinary field cannons. That shouldn't have happened if the armour wasn't crap metal, it was too thick for that and it was well sloped, and you know it.

I read your claim the Russians used special thungsten core munitions in tests after the war on KT.....wich is bullshit. They did armour testing in 1944, when the first ones were captured and they wanted to know what they were up against......and they weren't very impressed, that i can tell you.




Driver

Tomorrow Comes Today

50 XP

29th January 2004

0 Uploads

823 Posts

0 Threads

#96 14 years ago

Interesting.




Lobo

All your base are belong to FH

50 XP

27th April 2003

0 Uploads

6,883 Posts

0 Threads

#97 14 years ago

Wow, our two tanks experts arguing about the KT, let's sit down to see the show :Popcorn:




Driver

Tomorrow Comes Today

50 XP

29th January 2004

0 Uploads

823 Posts

0 Threads

#98 14 years ago

I got my quniznos sub and beer. I wanna hear more. Bitch, bitch, bitch!!!




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#99 14 years ago
LoboWow, our two tanks experts arguing about the KT, let's sit down to see the show :Popcorn:

Well, not me.......it won't change the FH KT anyway ( for wich i am happy, i want no crap tank ) and to convince the religious KT lovers of reality......hmmm.....even if the factory workers were still alive that manufactured the Tiger II ausf B ( read : manufactured, not designed ) they just wouldn't believe them.....probably most parts were assembled/manifactured in that stage of the war by sabotaging forced labourers/slave workers anyways.......really adds to the quality of the product :lol:

Realism is something diffrent then "what if"

For whatever reason would the Russians today lie about what they encountered in 1944 when cutting away armour on captured KT's and do laberatory research on it, and conduct firing tests ? They won the war didn't they ?




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#100 14 years ago

Beast of WarI'm no fool......maybe people like you are believing units were really produced exactly by design specifications. You forget Germanies industries were in ashes when these units were produced.....it is a miracle they were produced at all.....

Maybe you'd better study what the real King Tigers were like that were encountered in the field, after they were destroyed by ordinary cannons.

I read your claim the Russians used special thungsten core munitions in tests after the war on KT.....wich is bullshit. They did armour testing in 1944, when the first ones were captured and they wanted to know what they were up against......and they weren't very impressed, that i can tell you.

Yes you are.

Germanys industry was not as hard hit by Allied bombers as everyone liked to think. What crippled Germany was a lack of resources not production facilities.

Define ordinary cannons. US 756MM M1A1? Brit 17lbr? Soviet 122mm D-25? Soviet 85mm S-53?

firing what ammo? Only US TD's had the HVAP ammo til early '45 and Brits APDS rounds were in short supply most of the war.

Since your such an expert you also know that Russians had problems with hardened AP ballistic caps that had a tendancy to bounce off rather than penetrate. This problem was corrected til late 1944.

You would also know that the special APDS "Arrowhead" rounds which had excellent penetration were also so inaccurate that the Soviets often had to close to 100m to hit anything.

And you would know that the Soviets were developing new ammo that was intended to defeat the Tiger II's frontal armor and was also intended to defeat the new US M26 Pershing and the new Brit Centurion, both of which would be the basis of the wests MBT for the next roughly 30 years.

And I think the Kubinka tests you throw forth so much are bullshit. that tank was used as a target on the firing range and northing more. 63 hits by rounds of all different sizes? The first several hits would have invalidated other hits to test the strength of the armor.

Poking several holes in it and then saying "hey look a piece here cracked so it must be crap armor" says nothing except either it was being used as target practice or the testers were idiots.

AND FOR THE RECORD I AM NOT A TIGER II LOVER, I AM A PANTHER LOVER. I am concerned because I feel BoW is throwing out crap and disinformation about the Tiger II and it needs to be corrected to tell teh real story. It was not a Super tank, the llatest in a series of chess moves against Soviet and Western tanks like the Pershing and Centurion.