What's the most aesthetic tank of WWII and why it's

File: comey.jpg (115KB, 500x323px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 500x323px

>>34692374
because its not.

File: Beauty.jpg (36KB, 619x272px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 619x272px

That's a curious way of spelling "Sonderkraftfahrzeug 173 Panzerjäger V Jagdpanther".

>>34692374
The Wehraboos coming out of the woodwork today.

File: stalin 2.jpg (56KB, 767x419px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 767x419px

i think the IS-2 looks great. Especially after the 1944 mod

>>34692384
There's a comet for sale online for roughly over 400k

File: t-34-85-1.jpg (112KB, 3000x1926px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 3000x1926px

>>34692374
>tiger 2
>implying

File: 1475948775907.jpg (227KB, 999x749px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 999x749px

>>34692536

File: kv-2.png (263KB, 569x292px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 569x292px

Slopped turrets are for women and capitalist pigdogs

Square is most aesthetic shape

File: Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-299-1805-16,_Nordfrankreich,_Panzer_VI_(Tiger_I).2.jpg (144KB, 481x435px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 481x435px

>>34692560
agreed. Sloped armor is for pussies
Real, T H I C C armor don't need to be sloped.
also square is indeed the most aesthetic shape

File: kruppstahl-3.png (45KB, 330x241px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 330x241px

>>34692552
>an HE shell did this

File: orvydas-stridsvagn2.jpg (171KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 800x600px

>>34692570
steel is a beautiful thing...

File: AESTHETIC.jpg (2MB, 4712x2776px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4712x2776px

>>34692374
Close match between Sherman E8 and Panther.

File: Hiroshima.jpg (441KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

441KB, 2000x1000px

>>34692570
>Oh gee, so you're telling me a large high explosive device could destroy almost anything?
(of course pic related was done with an armour piercing round)

>>34692552
It's not supposed to be welded

>>34692624
>not welding the engine cover directly onto the tank.

It's very clearly Panzer IV. Crusader is also pretty sexual.

File: asd795.jpg (107KB, 605x799px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 605x799px

Ha-go is aesthetically cutest light tank

File: Panzer IV variations.jpg (978KB, 1200x1642px) Image search: [Google]

978KB, 1200x1642px

>>34692659
good choice

>>34692727
What's the thing on the bottom right?
PZ IV with an odd turret and what looks like the leFH 18. Is it some late war assault gun variant?

>>34692745
Heuschrecke 10

File: bobmber-harris2.jpg (39KB, 400x417px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 400x417px

>>34692479
Woodwork, you say?

>>34692613
only correct answer

File: StuG.jpg (484KB, 1600x1120px) Image search: [Google]

484KB, 1600x1120px

>>34692374
fuck off pleb, StuG is /k/'s favorite tank.

>>34695245
Wittman took out 5 t-34s in A ROW with that shortbarreled 75mm ALL alone

He drove over a hill and spotted them, and the T-34 spotted him, than he retreated into cover and waited for them to go over the slope, as the first came he took the shot, and the second came and he took another down, than 3 at the same time and he managed to get into cover again, positioning in a flank and taking out the other 3 by surprise.

Russian crews were incredibly bad and untrained.

File: 1450717043238.jpg (138KB, 1024x656px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1024x656px

>>34692568

>>34695394
>still believing anything about Wittman
Michael Wittman and his crew were 100% propaganda, and everyone knew it. The Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Swords and Oak Leaves was only awarded for extreme personal bravery and going above and beyond the call of duty. Everyone on Wittman's crew got one. How the fuck does a radio operator go above and beyond the call of duty? A loader? They were simply idolized for the sake of propaganda. And everyone back then knew it, almost all of the germans who still had a brain. How do you not know it?

File: 3mLydMU.jpg (42KB, 600x494px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 600x494px

>>34692448
>That
>A tank

>>34696558
Please... That is closer to a tank than a Puma is, and look at this fucker>>34694390

>>34696612
Hadn't seen the whole thread before REEEEE'ing. But yeah, fuck war thunder kids.

>>34692374
I agree. Got a stiffy when I touched pic related

>>34696187
Read a book pls

File: id_ferret_700_03.jpg (71KB, 504x396px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 504x396px

I do like the Ferret. Just a simple little armored car.

>>34692570
>an HE shell
more like 200 until you finally had some results

File: 1484246996209.jpg (60KB, 195x293px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 195x293px

>>34692552
>stalin's answer to shitty welds was that they aren't supposed to survive that long

File: Tiger 2.jpg (108KB, 640x336px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 640x336px

Sadly tanks don't win wars, but airplanes do.
Germany realized this too late. They should've focused on mass producing jet fighters and have had the first atomic bomb. The atomic bomb was the only wonder weapon for germany which could've turned the tide even when Soviets were entering the German border. If they had a few nukes and blast Moscow (killing stalin) and London into oblivion it would've had a devastating affect and it would seen the soviet army completely confused and create tremendous motivations for the Germans. They would have weld the borders and take back territory while producing more nukes for England and Amerika.

File: adolf-hitler-in-landsberg-prison-07.jpg (48KB, 500x773px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x773px

>>34699404
Stalin was an absolute brute and the fact Roosevelt and Churchill cooperate with him shows the sheer amount of and total moral hypocrisy of these western powers, and than they have the guts to say they were the good guys and even still today they hold on to this image while marxism has taken over their society through the backdoor and their own women are standing on top of them and witness their own rights being taken awhile while all the same becoming minorities in their own nations, they still hold up their heads in arrogance and will not admit they fought on the wrong side in ww2. Such a people deserve to die out. Atleast the Germans died with dignity, you will die drowning in your own shit with not even a shot fired. Enjoy your faith fags!

>>34692891
Do it again bomber harris!

>>34701474
>melting 200k people alive
>joking about it

File: o-MANATEES-900.jpg (143KB, 900x599px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 900x599px

>>34701594
Do it again Bomber Harris

>>34701432
Artillery wins wars ever since 1700's.

Before operation desert storm USAF claimed that they've destroyed 90% of Iraqi Army. Then the 90% of Iraqi army was destroyed by ground troops, most of them being killed by artillery fire.

>>34695394

When a tank is and it's crew get commended, the entire crew gets commended. Are you stupid? They wouldn't just award it to the commander or gunner you moron.

>>34701448
>/Pol/ screed because some hilariously unsourced quote about tank armour welds.

When the Soviets were churning out tanks behind the Urals, their priorities were to get as many out as they could, because believe it or not, a tank with shoddy welds is better than no tank at all, this meant cutting corners wherever they could get away with it.
Planners looked at battlefield statistics and saw that the vast majority of vehicles would written off under 1000kms and within 6 months, so making any part of the vehicle last longer was wasted effort that could be better spent elsewhere.
Compare this to the Germans who at the same time designed the Panther with a final drive that would die in 150km and gun recoil mount that was rated for thousands of firings despite the number typically being in the hundreds for actual combat vehicles.

>>34692479
Slavaboo pls go
>>>WT

File: DcffmrB.jpg (54KB, 498x498px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 498x498px

>>34701474
>>34701594
>>34701663

>>34701594
Neocommies are very edgy

File: Jadgpanther.jpg (241KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1920x1080px

>>34696558
This thread is implicitly about all armored vehicles of WWII. Or do you think we should have a specific thread about "the most aesthetic Tank Destroyer", a specific thread about "the most aesthetic Self-Propelled Gun", a specific thread about "the most aesthetic Infantry Combat Vehicle" ? This is pure pedantry.

>>34701594
They deserved it

>>34702412
No they didn't

File: great tank.png (325KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 500x375px

everyone's wrong
KRUPP KUGELPANZER master tankrace

File: Churchill.jpg (24KB, 550x332px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 550x332px

you guys have shit taste

>>34702435
Not enough nazis died in berlin
Germany is rightful french/english/american territory

>>34702435
Germans aren't people, anon

Also, Dresden was a false-flag carried out by Hitler.

>>34702608
>>34702616
Can't stop laughing haha XD

File: beast tank of the war.jpg (69KB, 650x332px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 650x332px

>>34692448
>no turret
>asthetic

File: Hetzer_lesany.jpg (365KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 1024x768px

>>34702233
Hetzer is cuter, also it wins by not being a unicorn that armchair generals fap over worthlessly.

>>34702626
You should drop by /his/ more, a lot of "muh dresden never happened"/Kraut conspiracy" treads lately.
Its fucking hilarious to watch people rage in threads which are basically a "The Holocaust never happened(not /pol/ here btw)"-logic tread but flipped on its head.

>>34702655
I'm here enough haha, it's just not funny, regardless if the victims were killed by Nazis or firebombs.

>>34701594
Maybe they shouldn't have been on the losing side

>>34701594
damn those numbers are more inflated than the weimar deustchemark

>>34702986
Kek

>>34701786
Do it again Bomber Harris

File: IMG_3565.gif (2MB, 1064x734px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1064x734px

>>34701594

>>34702412
No, they deserved worse. The fact that Germany is still a country means we must do it again, but even faster and harder.

>>34701766
I don't even Russia, faggot. USA all the way.

>>34703052
>says the Allies commited warcrimes
>That means he automatically denies Axis warcrimes
You're a bright one, aren't you?

>>34703150
?

File: trotsky.jpg (11KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 259x194px

>>34703150
dresden was a huge communications and rail center, but let's just ignore that inconvenient fact.

File: AMX 13.jpg (82KB, 784x541px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 784x541px

Is 1946 still considered WW2 ?

File: Screenshot_2017-07-30-18-18-07-920_org.wikipedia.png (246KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1080x1920px

>>34703548
I know some bombing was necessary, but just see pic related...

File: 1498768008240.jpg (50KB, 508x604px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 508x604px

>>34701594
>200k
I wish. Off by an order of magnitude.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-30-18-50-38-924_org.wikipedia.png (592KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

592KB, 1080x1920px

>>34703707
It were more than 200k.

>>34703642
What's your point? No point bombing the infrastructure if you can't hamper it's repair and operation afterwards.

>>34703926
For the entire bombing campaign, yeah, but not Dresden alone, dumbass.

File: myhusband.jpg (142KB, 444x435px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 444x435px

>ywn kill as many nazis as this guy
>ywn trigger as many wehraboos as this guy
>ywn still be doing it 80 years later after your death
>ywn be as sexy while doing it as this guy
why even live desu

>>34703985
Who was talking about Dresden?
>>34703970
So thats your excuse for deliberately targeting civilians, including elderly and children, in populated areas with incendiary munitions?
>>34704016
So am I a wehraboo for pointing out bombing civilians is wrong regardless of who the perpetrator is?

>>34704032
>nazi germany
>people

File: Privately-owned_M18-Hellcat_Museum-of-the-American-GI2007-open-house_reenactment[1].jpg (424KB, 900x461px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 900x461px

Awwww shit nigga, back the fuck up, it's a motherfucking HELLCAT.

What's tougher than a tank? How about a vehicle called on by Allied Command exclusively to hunt down and kill the toughest tanks Hitler could field.

A war vehicle so formidable that the lunatics who drove it didn't even want a ceiling inside their turret so they could operate the gun faster.

File: tv-8.jpg (126KB, 1016x627px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1016x627px

>>34701594
>>34702435
>>34702626
>>34702655
>>34702685
>>34703150
>>34703642
>>34703926
>>34704032
Cancel the second attack on Dresden, Arthur, the real place where it needs to be done again is this very thread!

>>34704124
>that tank
>rain drop, round top, waiting for the nukes to pop

>>34701432
>Mass producing jet fighters
Well done, now the western allies will do the same, but they can make more, they have more aircrews, better usage of pilots (not flying them until they die) and their engines don't shit the bed after 12 hours use.
>Nukes
Nope. Germany was never close to producing the bomb. There were competing groups of scientists, conducting small experiments, with limited budgets and a flaws method (all that messing about with heavy water)

The Germans were incapable of pulling off their own version of the Manhattan project.

>>34704032
>Who was talking about Dresden,
Everyone, until you chipped in. The bomber Harris meme is specifically about Dresden, some yard said '200k were melted' we pointed that was wrong, then you chipped in with even more wrong.

>Does it justify targeting war material
Yes. It does. No point bombing factories and infrastructure if you leave the work force alone, it was a global, industrial war, we've not had to fight one since.

>>34704073
>>34704232
Hihi, dehumanising people is cool, hihi, civilians are 'war material', they have to die, hihi, look how edgy I am!

File: post-83889-1252606094.jpg (28KB, 450x265px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 450x265px

>>34692504
this is the correct answer

File: DphzQFp.jpg (75KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 960x960px

>>34704356

>>34704106
a vehicle so tough that it's turret could be penetrated by .30cal ap

>>34704379
>Allowing your vehicle get shot at in the first place

That's what the big fucking gun is for anon.

>>34704369
Kek
https://youtu.be/iwcgzcHFSTA

>>34704356
But an ammunition press would be war material yes? I machine for rifling barrels would be the same? So why not someone who fits fuzes into shells. There is no practically difference.

You don't seem to realise that given the technology of the day, there was no practical means of targeting a country's infrastructure and ability to wage war whilst guaranteeing no civilian casualties. You're viewing this from a modern perspective and holding it to the standards of today.

And again, what is the point of targeting a factory if the factory workers, their homes, their shops, are left completely untouched? You seem to just think that war shouldn't have involved killing at all. If we took your flaws logic to an extreme you'd be arguing that the allies should have only ever shot to wound axis troops.

No, the lines between civilian and soldier were blurred back then. A munitions worker was just as damaging to the allied military as a Landser was.

File: BBC.jpg (180KB, 1280x718px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1280x718px

>>34692560
>that stubby little pencil thin comie pepe
Here's a real gun.
BIG
BRITISH
CANON

>>34704423
>Blanket, nooo! EEHEEE!! TCHAMOONYEAH!

File: Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1979-025-19A,_Koeln,_Kinderleichen_nach_Luftangriff.jpg (86KB, 573x800px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 573x800px

>>34704434
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II
USA:
>Also, both the U.S. Government and its Army Air Forces commanders were reluctant to bomb enemy cities and towns indiscriminately. They claimed that by using the B-17 and the Norden bombsight, the USAAF should be able to carry out "precision bombing" on locations vital to the German war machine: factories, naval bases, shipyards, railroad yards, railroad junctions, power plants, steel mills, airfields, etc.

UK:
>In October 1943, Harris urged the government to be honest with the public regarding the purpose of the bombing campaign. To Harris, his complete success at Hamburg confirmed the validity and necessity of his methods, and he urged that:

>the aim of the Combined Bomber Offensive...should be unambiguously stated [as] the destruction of German cities, the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilized life throughout Germany.[158][159]


>... the destruction of houses, public utilities, transport and lives, the creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale, and the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing, are accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy. They are not by-products of attempts to hit factories.[160]

Yes, it is completely valid to attack industry in war, and collateral damage is unavoidable, but the deliberate bombing of residential areas is simply inhumane and not necessary for the war, as the civilians a) often didn't work in the war industry and b) if they were workers they were unproductive without a factory.

File: 420tankscopes yukari.gif (1MB, 482x516px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 482x516px

Crossposting from CAD General
>seriously considering building a kind of tank for the civilian market autismos to buy
Tanks cost too much and getting spare parts for them is a total shitshow when production ceased around 50 years ago. But I want to own something LIKE a tank, even if it's just for fucking around. Could I combine enough COTS tech to make a tank that's easily and cheaply maintained but is still fun to drive through the foothills? Obvious issue is budget, but lets put that aside for the dreaming.

The thing would have to be far lighter than any other tank just for fuel saving measures (a normal car maxes out at 2 tons or so, even a light APC has trouble getting under 10, this thing should max out at 5 at most) and would likely have only rudimentary armor as a result; I'd say that vertical sidewalls would make sense to max out on internal volume. Of course that's not great for protection but what the hell, right? Nobody's ever going to shoot AP ammo at this thing. The engine bay would have to be large and as accessible as possible so adventurous owners would swap in other kinds of engines and try them out. I'd think a inline-6 turbodiesel of the larger persuasion would be a good starting off point, with more than enough space for a V12 TD.

Would it have a turret? Would it have a gun? Likely only some sort of oversized flare launcher as used on ships or something, just so people don't have to file for Destructive Device paperwork. Or maybe a huge flamethrower. This part may be sold separately if paperwork becomes necessary.

The tracks. Steel is a no-go, way too heavy. Perhaps those all-rubber tracks that are used on small excavators could be used? They seem light and cheap enough.

I'd guess that three to four roadwheels per side should be enough when dealing with such a light weight.

File: panhard.jpg (118KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 600x400px

>>34704656

Why not try a VBL ? it's an pretty uncommon, easy to maintain and can tank more than a Hummer. Plus it got that weird look that you either love or hate.

Yes it's not a fucking tank, i know, but you ask alot anon.

Wtf, britain
I thought you won the war?
Where is your empire :-DDD

>>34704709
That thing has military grade armor. No way it's cheap. It's also not tracked, which would be my big deal.

>>34704758
http://www.atv.com/blog/2016/04/polaris-rampage-prototype-looks-mad-max-inspired.html

>>34704768
>that roadwheel section
What is this, 1920? Did they just take that piece 1:1 from an excavator? I'd have reckoned some simple roadwheels with torsion bar suspension would be way cheaper and easier.
Nevertheless, that's very cool. If they ever release it to the public in a cheap version without all the extra stuff like amphibious, it'd likely be a ball.

File: funtrak.jpg (254KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 1920x1080px

>>34704656
For about 8000 dollahs, it could be yours

File: 44M_Tas.jpg (62KB, 700x554px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 700x554px

Best WW2 tank aesthetics?

Gentlemen, I present to you: WW2 Hungarian tank development.

File: 44m_tas.jpg (67KB, 580x427px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 580x427px

I like to think that in some alternate timeline Austria-Hungary survived and the KuK Panzertruppen is equipped with these.

>>34704527
>German civilians in the latter half of the war probably didn't even work in war industry
Patently false.
>Can't work in a factory that has been bombed
But they can speed up the repair process and negate having to train new workers.
>Crippling a countries ability to fight by flooding it's cities with evacuees, disrupting it's civilian workforce, placing strains on the civilian workforce is inhumane and not necassary for the war effort
It is ENTIRELY necassary for the war effort. Like I said, you're viewing this from a modern standpoint; world war two was an industrial war involving the all the citizens of its participant countries. It absolutely is necassary to target workers in militarilly important industrial sectors. War is inhumane full stop. Tough. Don't start wars then.

You're being far too sentimental about this friend.

File: tmp_15500-Panzer-VII_Lowe-600237733.png (326KB, 960x312px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 960x312px

>>34692374
You're almost on the right track OP.

File: smug.jpg (88KB, 435x658px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 435x658px

>>34692891
DO IT AGAIN HARRIS!

In all seriousness was WW2 just most eye pleasing war

File: 1499722836916.jpg (40KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x480px

>>34704900

>>34705814
A fucking napkin drawing!

>>34704434
>>34705416

Couldn't this same logic be used to legitimize the murder jewish/slavic etc. civilians as enemy personnel? After all, they would resist german occupiers, sabotage equipment, sometimes shoot back etc.

File: 563530_519825114736312_1839942541_n.jpg (63KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 720x540px

you're all wrong

>>34706048
Except those people were in already captured land, working for Germany. Killing civilians for being jews or slavs as they did is not harming the enemy. If anything, it's harming themselves. On top of that, their plans for the slavs and jews lasted long after the war, when there was no more enemy to fight. It was just genocide for the sake of genocide.

>>34692479
>like the aesthetic of a German tank
>Wehraboo
kys

File: Handler.jpg (32KB, 450x300px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 450x300px

Meep meep

File: pastalavista.jpg (23KB, 485x491px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 485x491px

>>34708158
>funiculi funicla plays with rapidly increasing speed

>>34702461
>the auto bounce tank

File: Dresden.jpg (4MB, 3975x5000px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3975x5000px

>>34701594
Get red pilled son

File: we291ln.jpg (34KB, 518x280px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 518x280px

>>34709209
Cute, let me drop some real redpills on you.

>>34704150
Western jets were 5 years behind German jets, even with captured examples to reverse engineer the f86 sabre hardly out performed German designs that would have flown in 1946


Also didn't regarding germanies nuclear program, had the Nazis been convinced about the necessity of nuclear weapons before the war started theres no reason they couldn't have had bombs a few months before America

>>34704985
Looks like a panther and a Strv 42 offspring

>>34709624
>nuh uh! German technology was the best! Because I say so!

I think we can objectively agree that German armor in WWII looked overall better than that of their opponents.

Exception goes to the Sherman, Hellcat Cromwell, and Churchill, which also looked badass.

>>34701432
Literally the only use a completely hypothetical Nazi nuclear weapon would have would be to turn Poland and eastern France into walls of radioactive hell to keep the allies out of Germany.

File: T28(3).jpg (116KB, 1024x616px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1024x616px

>>34702233
In all fairness A) the Jagdpanther still isn't a tank, and B) we've definitely had dedicated "most aesthetic [insert desired type of AFV here]" threads in the past.

That being said, you're all fucking wrong and the correct answer is the Super-Heavy Tank T28.

>>34704527
>but the deliberate bombing of residential areas is simply inhumane and not necessary for the war, as the civilians a) often didn't work in the war industry and b) if they were workers they were unproductive without a factory.

>I don't know what "Total War" means, the post

The only good Nazi is a dead Nazi; kill 'em in their homes or kill their families so they give up and die on the front lines, it's all the same.

>>34705002
>Psst. Hey kid, want to but some HEAT-FS?

>>34706048
Well no. Unless the Jews were all secretly working in allied war industry inside if Germany whilst also being slave labour for German war industry (quite often).
Most of the Slavs that they encountered genuinely had nothing to do with the Soviet war effort, they only went off and join the partisans because the Germans went off on murder sprees like a bunch of asshats, rather than recruiting these people against Stalin, a man many of them despised.

File: 1496273485624.png (264KB, 864x722px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 864x722px

>>34708436

>>34709624
>Western jets were 5 years behind
Aside from that inconvenient shit engine problem the Nazis had, eh? You realise that if the allies ever thought jets were going to necassary for them to win the war, they'd have put more effort into it. And as I said, they had better manufacturing capacity, more aircrews, better training, better pilot usage etc etc

>Germans could have had the bomb months before the US
No, theybsimy couldn't. They didn't have the ability to put in the amount of effort and resources required for it. They weren't even pursuing it correctly. They incorrectly assumed you couldn't use graphite as a moderator, so they were forced to use heavy water and deuterium, a much harder, more hazardous process.
Not to articularly pro-intillectuals, they'd driven many away before the war started.
The state didn't even work in a way that would have allowed a project like Manhattan to occur. In Nazi Germany agencies competed with each other, there was very little cooperation.

>>34710418
They'd make a city impassible for maybe a week, maybe a month, people didn't understand radiation (well, the troops didn't and they wouldn't have been told anyway). Maybe if they could smuggle a several ton bomb into a bridgehead it'd come in handy?
Really though, they'd not have had enough nuclear weapons to stop themselves from being a assraped.

File: 2079-m18-cover560.jpg (138KB, 560x434px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 560x434px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIaIW4MiNG0

File: M36 Jackson (1).jpg (932KB, 1728x3072px) Image search: [Google]

932KB, 1728x3072px

>>34710624
>One of the worst tank destroyer designs of the war

>>34710441
>I'll be there 3 weeks after the next slowest thing.

>>34710605
Would have been interesting to put one in the Reichstag and wire it to the front door. When the Russians come a-knockin, the earth starts a-rockin.

>>34710650
>Implying any other superheavy tank designs of the war could do any better.

File: girl_and_car_004_01212014.jpg (243KB, 615x749px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 615x749px

>>34710638
not if you wanna go FAST

weeeeeeeeeeee!

>>34710731
is she a streetworker from 40ss?

>>34710764
Obviously not.

File: traps.jpg (22KB, 258x400px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 258x400px

>>34697121
So, you say that every book is right?

>>34710638
>worst
In what way? Their combat record doesn't agree.

>>34710638
The Hellcat was the most effective American tank destroyer of World War II. It had a higher kill to loss ratio than any tank or tank destroyer fielded by American forces in World War II

File: Fotothek df ps 0000047 Eine Mutter über dem Kinderwagen ihrer Zwillinge im Tode-1.jpg (260KB, 783x800px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 783x800px

>>34710456
I know what Total War means, I still think it wasn't necessary to kill civilians in cold blood (you know, like the Nazis did)

They could have bombed factories, railways and the like only and still made enough of a difference (see the oil bombing campaign - almost no civilian casualties) but no, one has to deliberately bomb city centres and create firestorms to kill innocents (and no, not every German was a Nazi, not even close)

They should have rounded up the true Nazis after the war (which happened rarely), but instead it often hit pic related

File: m10 gun motor carriage.jpg (465KB, 1847x1222px) Image search: [Google]

465KB, 1847x1222px

>>34692479
this faggot ruined half the thread

>>34704016
>le evil nazi die nazi scum!! xdd!!
>lets side with communists to fight against evil naziss XDD

you deserve everything that is coming to you in this day and age.

>>34704712
this
Who really benefited from the Germans losing world war 2?
China didn't, they became communist.
Japan didn't, they lost their empire
USA didn't, they were more racist than Germany at the time and after the 1960s they lost their country
South America didn't, they turned into crap ever since 1950s onwards. Before that, South America had super high living standards, almost on par with Europe
South Africa didn't, the British betrayed them after world war 2
All the blacks didn't win either, their lives in Africa are miserable, and they live in subhuman conditions, has capitalism or western society ever been productive for them? They belong in nature and live natural tribal lifestyles, that's where they are happiest, so they didn't win either.
The Indians? Capitalism hasn't treated them well either, their country has turned into a sewage and they can try as hard they want, they'll never reach 1st world conditions, their people are incompatible, they're not made for it
Australia ? Also didn't benefit, Europeans will become minorities there too just 1 century after the loss
Germany losing ww2 has thrown the world into total imbalance
the "Natural World Order" has shifted into the "New World Order"
The only people who won in world war 2 was a small minority with common interests

>>34711463
>>34711469
>Nazis weren't evil
>>>/pol/
No need to be a Stormfag to disagree with the Bomber Harris bullshit

>>34711506
research history

>>34711508
I'm German, two of my relatives were murdered by the Nazis, one was killed by Allied terror bombing, one fell defending Silesia, I have no need for revisionist history lessons from some Han Chinese Stormfaggot who thinks he knows the true story.

File: IMG_20170731_014745.jpg (1MB, 2688x1512px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2688x1512px

Sweet, a tank bread.
Tiger I was pretty nice.
Rate this model I just built tonight.

>>34711508

[_] not rekt
[_] rekt
[x] Turannosaurus rekt

>>34711522
thank you

>>34711522
Terrible analogy, your relatives were murdered by "allies" not "nazis". France and Britain declared war on Germany first and not the other way around. Why didn't they declare war on the USSR by the way, they also invaded Poland and shortly thereafter they invaded neutral Finland. They didn't declare war because they weren't fighting war for moral or ethnic reasons, but for purely economical, racial and geopolitical reasons.

>>34711522
And don't call me Chinese. My grand uncle was Dutch and so am I and he proudly fought in the Dutch Waffen SS on the eastern front against the bolshevist scum. At least I'm not an somebody who feels obliged to accept the allied propaganda and perspective. You Germans are totally brainwashed today.

>>34711577
>murdered by "allies" not "nazis".
Read up on Aktion T4
>for purely economical, racial and geopolitical reasons.
No shit, that doesn't excuse any of the atrocities the Nazis did to the Germans and Europeans, so they were still clearly the bad guys, also gonna need a source on that "racial" thing
>>34711594
Had the Soviets invaded I'd get why you would be proud but considering what the SS did and what they fought for I have nothing but disgust and hatred for volunteers in the SS.
>brainwashed
"Lol OK the Nazis murdered my family members for opposition to the party but that's alright the Nazis were actually the good guys."

File: IMG_20170731_122036[1].jpg (2MB, 4208x2368px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4208x2368px

>>34711534
drives fast behind you
>nothing personal kid

>>34711534
it's smol

File: german revolution.png (198KB, 320x1177px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 320x1177px

>>34711611
The USSR was planning to invade Europe. Everyone knew this. They had full-scale war production long before the war even started.
The Soviet generals even publicly acknowledged it. Why do you think the Soviet Union also invaded Finland right after Poland?

Hitlers plan of attack was that of a pre-emptive strike. If he had waited any longer, the USSR would have overrun Europe before 1942. Britain would have gladly given the complete of mainland Europe to the USSR if it meant that Germany was defeated. Britain has for centuries divided mainland Europe.

Aktion T4 was purely logical at the time. Eugenics was socially accepted by most scientists around the world. The United States started sterilizing and euthanizing criminals and the incurable and mentally deficient. Nobody looked at it as morally wrong. It was the common sense thing to do during those times. Eugenics was scientific consensus all around the world, just like "global warming" is today. What the German government installed was nothing out of the ordinary. American scientists and doctors even applauded it.

There are many documents and writings saying that the German people had to be eradicated, published long before the war. The Hooton plan for example, and also from many Jewish authors such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany_Must_Perish!

File: cdff5fdb9ca67b77d9fc5b073fb2f510.png (84KB, 1238x479px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 1238x479px

>>34711611
>>34711678

>>34711678
>The USSR was planning to invade Europe
Source
>Aktion T4 was purely logical
Strange that my relative was never in a hospital or treated before 1933 but was suddenly considered mental after he marched along with an Anti-Nazi organization, isn't it?
>Jews participated in the 1918 uprisings, that means every of the millions of european jews, including children, are guilty and must be murdered
Find the flaw by yourself

Spout your bullshit on >>>/pol/

>>34711594
>I'm Dutch
Oh good, in that case your opinion is.... IRRELEVANT!!!

>>34711678
And? So what if they were? If they truly were they should have been allowed to, they'd have been roundly defeated by a united Europe.

>>34710441
>No turret
>Tank
See, I can play this game, too.

>>34710673
>implying superheavies were ever even remotely close to a good concept past ww1

>>34711469
Every non-germanic or anglo person in the entire world. Also:
France got their country back
The US, UK, Soviet Union, and basically all major allied fighters had massive economic growth
The US and Soviet Union became global superpowers
Korea, the Philippines, China, and everyone who was or would have been occupied by Japan were saved from certain genocide and torture.
Please go back to your containment board.

>>34704985
Patrician taste my friend.

>>34702652
This, if Germany in ww2 produced more 10.000 of those TD war was won in one week.

It's:
Fast
Lower Profile
Decent Gun to kill any slav shit
Great Fuel economy
It's a qt
And it can ambush better than any cat

>>34711703
>Source
Soviet 1920 invasion of Poland, you mong.

>>34713150
Poland =|= all of Europe, also it was "a little" unrealistic for a 1940 SU to defeat militarized Poland, Germany, France and likely the UK, considering how bad they fucked up in Barbarossa, Finland, and in fact, 1920 in Poland.

File: 1496944692974.jpg (74KB, 800x792px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 800x792px

>>34711210
Problem really is the whole Eye for an Eye mentality probably played a large part in it.

Plus as the Anon said it was a state of Total War and terror tactics on the civil population isn't a bad idea if you want them to give in.

War is fucked lad.

File: jagdtas.jpg (236KB, 1600x1280px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 1600x1280px

>>34709791

It does and it's not a bad thing.

The proposed tank destroyer variant was even more arousing.

>>34713488
>War is fucked lad
I think I know that, it just rustles my jimmies when some clowns act like it is/was perfectly fine and just to do such bombings... though most of these are likely shitposts

>>34697165
Not the most comfortable to drive though.

Steering wheel is at a wonky angle, seat is terrible, visibility even when opened up is marginal.
The preselective transmission is nice though, and it can have a decent ride.

File: ps531-19 marjatta.jpg (350KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 1280x960px

>>34695394
Pyh.
That's nazi propaganda. Corporal Olof Lagus (gunner of Lieutenant Mauri Sartio's StuG "Marjatta") destroyed 4 T-34/85's in 1-2 minute period with his StuG 40 G.

Now that's a record!

File: zrínyi on the move.jpg (250KB, 1920x1174px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 1920x1174px

>>34713640

Breddy gud. Fug gommies.

File: 43mzrinyi.jpg (455KB, 1000x600px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 1000x600px

:DDDD

>>34712342
>SUPER
>HEAVY
>TANK
>T28

I'll take "What is reading comprehension" for $500, Alex.

File: 1462173883582.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

This

File: M4A1 76W.jpg (593KB, 3054x2036px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 3054x2036px

>>34710983
>>34710998
The entire design philosophy of the M18 was highly flawed. The vehicle's speed was rarely put to use in combat conditions, as it's light armor and open top made crews even more cautions of the types of battlefield dangers that regular tanks (many armed with the same 76mm gun) didn't need to worry about.

The M18 did well thanks, and only thanks, to it's crews. American tank destroyer crews were among, if not the best in the world at the time. Their success in the M18 came in spite of the vehicle, not because of it.

File: Stridsvagn 103.jpg (91KB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 800x480px

>>34715482
So you think that what defines a tank destroyer is just in the name ? That semantic autism is ridiculous. Now I will call every AFV a tank just to piss you people off. :^)

Tricky question : is the Stridsvagn 103 a tank, or a tank destroyer ? According to people here, you can only chose one...

>>34705416
Morality and individual conscience are how you prevent another Holocaust or My Lai. Efficiency does not make it right.

>>34713488
>isn't a bad idea if you want them to give in.

Policymakers consistently underestimated the amount of suffering a populace is willing to endure to spite a foreign invader. It didn't break the Brits. It didn't break the Soviets, and certainly did not break the Germans. Terrorizing a modern nation state's population into submission is just about the least effective thing you can do.

>Tanks are classified by their features
>Not the countries doctrine and use of the vehicle

k

>>34716226
Should we call the Panzer IV an Assault Gun, then ? Because that's what the German intended it to be used for.

And if we're going by the doctrinal definition, then it's entirely theoretic and this is a distinction that has no mean in the scope of a thread about TANKS.

File: Centauro II.jpg (1MB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1333px

>>34715959
>So you think that what defines a tank destroyer is just in the name ?

No, I think what defines any type of AFV is it's intended role on the battlefield. That's why the T28 is a tank; it was designed to engage a wide range of both hard and soft targets from range while surviving significant return fire.

The Strv 103 is also a tank; an MBT. It was designed to fight tanks, support infantry, perform some degree of battlefield reconnaissance, survive return fire, etc. It, like the T28, was not designed for the sole task of killing tanks (the T28 wasn't really designed to kill tanks at all. It could, but it wasn't a priority.

The point here is that your retarded turret boner has as little to do with what makes a tank a tank as the color it's painted.

Example; pic related
>A tank destroyer with a turret.
>Strv 103: a tank without a turret.
>M10 Wolverine: A tank destroyer with a turret.
>Super-Heavy Tank T28: A tank without a turret.

>>34716226
It's a mix of both. Generally speaking, in the modern world what a tank has and what it does tends to fall under pretty universal alignment between both designers and foreign observers (thanks in no small part to the widespread adoption of MBTs)

>>34716333
The Wehrmacht intended the Panzer IV as an infantry support tank; lacking anti-tank capability but still a tank through and through. There were assault gun variants, but this was never in question and is simply hyperbolic. A more fitting question, for example, would be whether or not the Panther should be considered a medium tank (by German designation) or a heavy tank (as compared to Allied medium tanks). I won't say which I believe, but if we're going to have this argument we can at least keep it to reasonable terms.

>>34712342
>defining a tank by its physical characteristics

>>34716543
Why do tank destroyers have machine guns and HE shells, then ?

File: M10.jpg (637KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

637KB, 2048x1536px

>>34716874
>implying nobody ever gets out of a burning tank

But seriously, there can be a fairly substantial line between what an AFV is designed to do, what it actually does 99% of the time, and what it may have to do under odd circumstances.

Look at the M10 for example; A dedicated tank destroy, without debate. However, due to the rarity of large German armored attacks, especially in the Italian campaign, the M10 frequently found itself acting as an indirect fire support weapon. This never changed the fact that, by designation and practice, it was still a tank destroyer.
On a more modern note, it's idiotic to give any AFV a single type of ammo, as is it to classify any type of AFV based solely on the types of ammo it fires (especially if that ammo type is a tiny minority of ammo carried on that given vehicle). I'm not sure of the numbers, but the vast majority of rounds fired by the M4 Sherman, and likely most cannon-armed AFVs of the war, were high explosive. This doesn't make them assault guns any more than an M12 firing concrete-piercing rounds would be a tank destroyer.

>>34716939
Pretty much-

Most U.S armor was capable of accurate indirect fire-In that they all mounted accurate azimuth indicators and clinometers.

Not sure why people find this hard to understand. A 76mm gun in a tracked vehicle will lob a HE shot as accurately as a 105mm on a wheeled carraige.

>>34716874
because, besides what >>34716939 says, infantry and aircraft don't exist in your world?

File: d4b200d330a88b9050fb76ad81cfe2e3.jpg (89KB, 512x685px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 512x685px

>>34716939
Fair enough. By they way I'd like to know where we can find details about historical payloads of ta- I mean AFVs (like : which number of HE, which number of APCR, etc...)
Googling that just returned me War Thunder links and it gets on my nerves.

>>34704106
The "tank" a 10 year old with a Molotov cocktail could take out

>>34717015
the 1943 tm for the m4a2 sherman says 50% he, 40%ap, 10% wp. the 1943 tm for the m10 gmc says 90% ap, 10% he

File: IS-2 Mod 1944.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>34717015
I won't lie, games like War Thunder, to my knowledge, do a fairly good job of modeling historical ammo capacities. Specific loadouts varied greatly, especially in WWII when supply lines could be broken and some units may be using captured ammo.

On the other hand, some vehicles are much better documented. The IS-2 is a good example, being 20 HE and 8 AP on a standard loadout. Wikipedia has a few good examples, although I'd highly suggest the Osprey New Vanguard series if you're looking for information on specific vehicles. I even think we have a dropbox with a ton of them floating around, although I don't have the url.

File: Jagdpanzer V Jagdpanther(1).jpg (204KB, 960x709px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 960x709px

>>34717015
Also think you for your civility. I will fully acknowledge that the Jagdpanther was, undoubtedly, the sexiest vehicle fielded during WWII

>>34692568
Why didn't they angle it even just a little?

File: Panzer VI Ausf.B Early.jpg (37KB, 587x370px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 587x370px

>>34717150
Angling the upper glacis plate would require either sliding the base of the plate forward, or the top of the plate back. Doing the former would mean eliminating the driver's direct vision viewport as the plate it was mounted on would now be too far from his face, and the vehicle's transmission prevented his position from being moved up. The same is likely, although probably not as problematic for the bow machine gunner. Doing the latter would close the space between the plate and the turret ring, meaning both the driver and bow gunner would lose their hatches and quite a bit of personal space.

Alternate answer: they did. Pic related.

File: main-qimg-5470d2fb5a41453c4c6da0b3916eb393.png (295KB, 1200x708px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1200x708px

>>34717150
They did.

>>34717218
>just a little

File: L133_2.jpg (19KB, 510x314px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 510x314px

>>34709624
>Western jets were 5 years behind German jets,

Nonsense.

Realize that the U.S in the late 1930's was working on a jet-powered interceptor.
Only a lack of funding slowed it's development.

>>34717207
>>34717218
Thanks, I just thought it would make sense to do a very steep angle viewing comfort is minor, I'd rather bounce shells

>>34717015

Look for old TM's and FM's. Then understand that what a vehicle carried was dictated less by the manual,and more by what they had on hand, and what they were mostly shooting at.

File: Leopard 1_2.jpg (2MB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2592x1944px

>>34692374

Because it looks like a mature design or an early Main Battle Tank and not like all the primitive-looking WW2 tanks.

>>34710764
looks like a 58 Chevy and some old Buick

File: enPENRU.jpg (32KB, 500x367px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 500x367px

>>34692374

>>34692504
This is a great choice.

File: Roy-abendroth-1955-buick-busonic3.jpg (119KB, 609x425px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 609x425px

>>34718603
The left car reminds me of the John Schott designed custom 1955 Buick Century nicknamed "Busonic". Also those sexy canted quad headlights, such an underrated design nowadays for custom car building.

File: 57 chevy 15.jpg (329KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 1280x960px

>>34718603

>58

I meant 57

>>34718843
Fuck I meant to include >>34710731

The lines on the left car look like a late 40s/early 50s Chevy/Buick/Pontiac/Oldsmobile/other gm brands, just really worked over.

File: Mansfield Kaserne 1963 13 600.jpg (269KB, 600x348px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 600x348px

picture should show a '57 GM vs. a '57 Chrysler

File: QwnEacn.jpg (151KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 500x375px

>>34718993 #
'58 is still a great year for GM cars so good enough

>>34711239
Are you crying because I posted a single thing? Harden up, buttercup.

File: 180px-METALBOXES.jpg (14KB, 200x249px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 200x249px

>>34711534

File: 1490639126084.jpg (150KB, 931x708px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 931x708px

>>34702447
>Churchill
my man

File: Carro Armato P26-40.jpg (113KB, 600x387px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 600x387px

>P-p-p-pizza...
>P-p-p-pasta...
>P-p-p-pizza...
>P-p-p-pasta...
>P-p-p-pizza...
>P-p-p-pasta...

>>34716049
>Implying either of your two examples were efficient
They weren't. Weren't even necassary towards the war effort.

>>34701786
do it again Bomber Harris

>>34711210
>You could accurately bomb a factory without any bombs hitting anything close by during world war two
>Not destroying the homes of workers, their way to work, preventing them from repairing and working in the repaired factories was a good idea
Once again a child is attempting to view this from a modern perspective. It was TOTAL WAR, what part of that do you understand? Almost no one wasn't involved in the military effort, Germany was fucked from at least '42;but they weren't giving in, it was fair enough to try to utterly destroy their means of production, be it factory workers or factories themselves. They'd plunged Europe into a global war for second time in two decades because they got greedy.
I don't know why you people keep moaning, maybe if they'd have surrendered quicker they'd not have lost half their country.
As it is, the Germans got off lightly when it came to the western allies, certainly a lot better than any civilians unlucky enough to be in a German occupied country. Two words; 'Marshal Plan'. Didn't see them bitching about the billions of dollars those mean old allies gave them, meanwhile Britain, on the winning side, was still rationing until the fucking 50's.

German seem to always do this, you lose a world war and five minutes later your an industrial/economic/whatever powerhouse of Europe again (unless you tank your own economy in purpose, out of spite) and yet people still bang in about the poor Germans.

The allies mistake was not steamrolling Germany in 1918 and utterly wiping it out as a country, it's only been united for half a century, it would have been easy.

>>34708158
Carro Veloce more like Cute Vehicle

>>34720895
>steamrolling Germany in 1918

You do realize that in WW1 the german army was still quite intact at the wars end? Not like in WW2?
It was tired and battered, yes, but still nothing you could simply "steamroll"...
also, same thing applied for the allied armies, more or less. See how the french army was in shape after the Chemin de Dames battle.