TANK MEGATHREAD

Poll

More tanks?

Yes
24 (51.1%)
Yes
11 (23.4%)
Yes
7 (14.9%)
Yes
5 (10.6%)

Total Members Voted: 47

Author Topic: TANK MEGATHREAD  (Read 23067 times)

Heavy tanks of the Cold War period:
M103 (US)


Conqueror (UK)


Hon'd to death ARL-44 (Baguette)


IS-3 (USSR)


T-10 (USSR)


Who needs rotating turrets anyway


Stridsvagn 103

The S-Tank is of worst design. Swedish production of German Leopard 2 is of better design.
Also there engineering is pretty ass backwards seeing as how they made a turretless tank and made a turreted tank destroyer known as the IKV 91:
« Last Edit: July 16, 2014, 10:16:41 AM by Harm94 »

When you consider the doctrinal application of the S-Tank it's a brilliant design, it just so happens that Sweden is the only nation with a military doctrine that can accommodate it

True though, it was made to fight in the forests and occupy narrow roads surrounded by trees with the intent of slowing down the advancing soviet tanks. It would have been better off in the tank destroyer role like the Stug than in the tank role.

It should also be noted that they still hade the British centurion in service alongside with the S-Tank and IKV 91:
« Last Edit: July 16, 2014, 10:40:25 AM by Harm94 »

Considering the way the S-Tank is used wouldn't it be reasonable to just label it as a Tank Destroyer anyway?

Considering the way the S-Tank is used wouldn't it be reasonable to just label it as a Tank Destroyer anyway?
That works.



needs more tanks
we're giving her all shes got captain



~but senpaaai
"piles of crap"

can u not


YA'LL forgetERS ARE WEAK

That thing has factory funnels for cannons

I've seen homes smaller than that tank

What would happen if the Rat was successful in battle?
I mean like, ACTUALLY USEFUL
and USED IN BATTLE

What would happen if the Rat was successful in battle?
I mean like, ACTUALLY USEFUL
and USED IN BATTLE
it wouldn't be able to hit anything close