Comments on: In Defense of a "Bad" Tank http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm From the World's Largest History Magazine Publisher Sat, 25 May 2013 03:21:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Ross http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-270609 Ross Tue, 04 May 2010 09:20:29 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-270609 For me one aircraft I have always liked is the Westand Whirlwind. Much maligned by writers, however, by the end of its service life it was proving to be an effective platform. Unfortuanatly the problem with its engines took too long to solve and eventually it was overshadowed by, and replaced by, the Hawker Typhoon. I always wonder what 2TAF would have done with at least a wing of these aircraft. Ross http://warstudies.wordpress.com/ For me one aircraft I have always liked is the Westand Whirlwind. Much maligned by writers, however, by the end of its service life it was proving to be an effective platform. Unfortuanatly the problem with its engines took too long to solve and eventually it was overshadowed by, and replaced by, the Hawker Typhoon. I always wonder what 2TAF would have done with at least a wing of these aircraft.

Ross
http://warstudies.wordpress.com/

]]> By: GeraldS http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-125178 GeraldS Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:47:52 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-125178 The late collector of armored vehicles, Jacques Littlefield, did a podcast with HistoryNet in which he gave his reasons for why the much-maligned M-4 Sherman deserves more respect: http://historynet.libsyn.com/ The late collector of armored vehicles, Jacques Littlefield, did a podcast with HistoryNet in which he gave his reasons for why the much-maligned M-4 Sherman deserves more respect:

http://historynet.libsyn.com/

]]> By: Rob Citino http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-123193 Rob Citino Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:19:42 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-123193 Hello to Jake, and I agree: props to the Yak-9! David, any version of the Mk. III still around in April 1945 deserves our respect. I guess you are all proving my point: abstract discussions of when a particular piece of technology becomes obsolete" are just that: abstract. I remember keeping a computer than ran Windows 3.1 for YEARS after more modern stuff came out. It still ran the word processing software I used, and so, to me, it wasn't at all "obsolete"! --RC Hello to Jake, and I agree: props to the Yak-9! David, any version of the Mk. III still around in April 1945 deserves our respect. I guess you are all proving my point: abstract discussions of when a particular piece of technology becomes obsolete" are just that: abstract. I remember keeping a computer than ran Windows 3.1 for YEARS after more modern stuff came out. It still ran the word processing software I used, and so, to me, it wasn't at all "obsolete"!

–RC

]]> By: David Ilse http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-123153 David Ilse Tue, 22 Sep 2009 23:57:29 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-123153 Two under-rated weapons: The Hs 123, which served beyond it's call to 1944. Sturmpanzer III/PzKpfw. III ausf.N which served up to April '45 in the OOB of the 26. Panzer Division in Italy along side Pz IV Kz and Pz IV Lgs. Two under-rated weapons:

The Hs 123, which served beyond it's call to 1944.

Sturmpanzer III/PzKpfw. III ausf.N which served up to April '45 in the OOB of the 26. Panzer Division in Italy along side Pz IV Kz and Pz IV Lgs.

]]> By: Jacob DeWitt http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-119989 Jacob DeWitt Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:27:06 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-119989 I feel that the Red Air Force and their equipment is often looked down on. The Yak-9 and 3, and the La-5 were aircraft that had their quirks (Plywood on the wings and tails coming unglued under high G's being one of them) but were more than capable of taking on 109's and 190's. As for the Buffalo, I think its faults lay more with the British officers who threatened to court martial any pilots who used the "hit and run" tactics that allowed the American's to shoot down the manueverable Zero. It could have been worse; the Chinese shot their pilots who disengaged from a dogfight. I feel that the Red Air Force and their equipment is often looked down on. The Yak-9 and 3, and the La-5 were aircraft that had their quirks (Plywood on the wings and tails coming unglued under high G's being one of them) but were more than capable of taking on 109's and 190's. As for the Buffalo, I think its faults lay more with the British officers who threatened to court martial any pilots who used the "hit and run" tactics that allowed the American's to shoot down the manueverable Zero. It could have been worse; the Chinese shot their pilots who disengaged from a dogfight.

]]> By: Rob Citino http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-117915 Rob Citino Tue, 15 Sep 2009 01:43:05 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-117915 Here's to the Marder (further proof of the brilliance of Czech tank chassis design) and to the oft-maligned Brewster Buffalo. And thanks to Dennis for a heads up on the "Bates Bottle Thrower"! Here's to the Marder (further proof of the brilliance of Czech tank chassis design) and to the oft-maligned Brewster Buffalo. And thanks to Dennis for a heads up on the "Bates Bottle Thrower"!

]]> By: Bas Kreuger http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-117733 Bas Kreuger Mon, 14 Sep 2009 18:35:21 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-117733 The Brewster Buffalo is a fighter plane with a very bad name with the Western Allies. In the hands of the US Navy/US Marine Corps, it made a bad showing in the Pacific, also the Brits and Dutch were soundly beaten in their Brewsters against the nimble Japanese fighters. But at the other side of the world, in Finland, the Finns used their Brewsters with great effect against the Russians, first in the Winterwar of 1939-1940 and later in the Continuation War of 1941 - 1944 where Capt. Hans Hasse shot down no less than 41 Soviet aircraft. All in all, the Finish Brewsters claimed some 490 Soviets against losing 19 of their own. The Brewster Buffalo is a fighter plane with a very bad name with the Western Allies. In the hands of the US Navy/US Marine Corps, it made a bad showing in the Pacific, also the Brits and Dutch were soundly beaten in their Brewsters against the nimble Japanese fighters.
But at the other side of the world, in Finland, the Finns used their Brewsters with great effect against the Russians, first in the Winterwar of 1939-1940 and later in the Continuation War of 1941 – 1944 where Capt. Hans Hasse shot down no less than 41 Soviet aircraft. All in all, the Finish Brewsters claimed some 490 Soviets against losing 19 of their own.

]]> By: Dennis Largess http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-117717 Dennis Largess Mon, 14 Sep 2009 17:51:24 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-117717 Years ago, I think at the Bovington Museum, there was the prototype of the Bates Bottle Thrower. In the dim days after Dunkirk, the Army solicited anti-tank weapons that were to be quickly built. One solution came from a Mr. Bates. Inspired by the Molotov cocktails that the Finns used in the Winter War, he found a suitable weapon in Coca-Cola bottles. They were omnipresent and had a fairly aerodynamic shape. Testing them in his garden (to the chagrin of Mrs. Bates) he determined they were able to hold a good portion of gasoline, and strong enough to be a launched projectile. Taking a 25lbr gun as a model, he designed a tube like weapon with a defensive shield to protect the crew. Utilising industrial strength rubber bands (I'm not making this up), he found that the Coca-Cola molotovs could be propelled, oh a good hundred yards (with a following wind). Desperate the army gave them a try, but I really doubt they went into production. Years ago, I think at the Bovington Museum, there was the prototype of the Bates Bottle Thrower.
In the dim days after Dunkirk, the Army solicited anti-tank weapons that were to be quickly built. One solution came from a Mr. Bates.
Inspired by the Molotov cocktails that the Finns used in the Winter War, he found a suitable weapon in Coca-Cola bottles. They were omnipresent and had a fairly aerodynamic shape. Testing them in his garden (to the chagrin of Mrs. Bates) he determined they were able to hold a good portion of gasoline, and strong enough to be a launched projectile.
Taking a 25lbr gun as a model, he designed a tube like weapon with a defensive shield to protect the crew.
Utilising industrial strength rubber bands (I'm not making this up), he found that the Coca-Cola molotovs could be propelled, oh a good hundred yards (with a following wind).
Desperate the army gave them a try, but I really doubt they went into production.

]]> By: paul penrod http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-117700 paul penrod Mon, 14 Sep 2009 17:03:15 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-117700 For once the British had something bigger than a two-pounder to answer back with, a tactical surprise for the Germans. Of equal importance was the quantity factor. US lend lease was making it's presence known For once the British had something bigger than a two-pounder to answer back with, a tactical surprise for the Germans. Of equal importance was the quantity factor. US lend lease was making it's presence known

]]> By: Adam Rinkleff http://www.historynet.com/in-defense-of-a-bad-tank.htm#comment-117643 Adam Rinkleff Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:54:19 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13681444#comment-117643 I think the Marder III needs some love. I think the Marder III needs some love.

]]>