Look at photos of Brit or US armour and they are usually, (understandably!), festooned with 'extra armour' in the form of track links and wheels. Wouldn't some Sherman and Churchill track sections be lovely? Oh, Panzers and T34s as well...lol. =)
Another company, whose name shall not be mentioned, is working on this as we speak, so PD had better hurry if they want to compete on this one :D
I agree also, and I add the request for a schwimwagen !
Votes added!
8)
Sherman road wheels would be very useful. Can make your own from right size Biro ink tubes...but can be a pain! Wish I could remember where I got racked Jerrycans...saw some resin ones on ebay but outbid by lots!
Hello HH
Quote from: Heedless Horseman on 27 September 2015, 10:40:25 PM
Wish I could remember where I got racked Jerrycans...saw some resin ones on ebay but outbid by lots!
Brengun in Czech Rep. makes fuel (Jerry) cans http://www.brengun.cz/e-shop/1-144-accessories-19?page=6 (http://www.brengun.cz/e-shop/1-144-accessories-19?page=6) (about half way down) in German, US and Modern flavours. About 4.50 Eur. Or UK and US distributors as well.
Cheers
GrumpyOldMan
Quote from: GrumpyOldMan on 28 September 2015, 01:11:33 AM
Hello HH
Brengun in Czech Rep. makes fuel (Jerry) cans http://www.brengun.cz/e-shop/1-144-accessories-19?page=6 (http://www.brengun.cz/e-shop/1-144-accessories-19?page=6) (about half way down) in German, US and Modern flavours. About 4.50 Eur. Or UK and US distributors as well.
Cheers
GrumpyOldMan
Belated thanks, but have found what I was looking for on ebay. Actually plastic taken from Takara models.
The track add on armour all the Tanks Are going to have (already Planned) add on armoured versions and camouflaged versions as well :D :D
It could look really good with the odd tank with extra protection, mixed in with some plain and camo'd tanks. Variety being the spice of life.
(http://www.ointres.se/strv_centurion-kedjor.jpg)
(http://photos.jibble.org/Vehicles/Tanks/Bovington%20Tank%20Museum/Finnish%20Stug%20III%20Ausf%20G%20with%20waffle%20pattern%20Zimmerit%20and%20concrete%20and%20log%20armour%20IMG_5964.JPG)
(http://gruntsandco.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/M4-Hillbilly-Armor.jpg)
Just to make sure I HAVE got the right end of the stick....... :-[
Applique armour is the name given to 'any old tat'.....(But presumably, something that actually helps, like spare tracks.) ....that's stuck/fixed to the exterior of a vehicle to give it a bit more protection ?
Cheers - Phil
I would use the term 'appliqué armour' to refer to stuff actually properly attached to the tank, usually metal plates welded or bolted on, in WWII
I'm not really sure what the proper name for some logs of sandbags is - improvised, or just plain hopeful!
I think applique has an element of design, rather than an improvised addition.
Quote from: RoyWilliamson on 22 March 2016, 04:48:15 PM
(http://www.ointres.se/strv_centurion-kedjor.jpg)
Bet this was really noisy when it drove about. No stealth Centurion, this!
Not my area at all - pretty much all I know is from watching "Fury" a dozen times (and don't know how accurate it is). Apparently the improvised armor fuses the AP round so it explodes BEFORE penetrating the actual armor? If so I wonder if the chains would offer sufficient resistance to trigger the fuse? The chains look pretty cool and far from improvised - is it possible they served some other purpose?
The chains will be to try to make RPGs and other shaped charge weapons denonate before they hit the armour, this will mean most of the jet that shaped charges use to create a hole will be dissipated before hitting the armour. Shaped charge weapons were just starting to appear in infantry anti-tank weapons at the end of WWII, bazookas panzerfausts, etc. Modern RPGs are very common, and some modern tank rounds use the shaped charge principle.
Old fashioned armour piercing shot, is really just a big slug of metal using speed and mass to punch a hole through the armour. Few carried an explosive charge as it wasn't needed, they made plenty of mess directly from the shot itself to and the effects of shrapnel / molten metal / etc from making a hole in the armour. I can't really see how a few logs is going to do much to stop these - they may have some effect against shaped charges by creating a stand off effect.
Fred,
Thanks! If AP rounds at that time relied on kinetics I can see where there is some skepticism about the use of logs. I must have been thinking about naval big gun rounds. Any opinions about the accuracy of Fury ( the movie)?
I've not seen Fury - I'm not much into going to watch movies - I tend to catch them years later on TV.
But I suspect that like most movies the story and the visuals outweigh history and accuracy by a huge amount!
Some early, small AP shot had an explosive charge in it, but it was generally dropped.
I don't know too much about naval shells - but I wouldn't be surprised if they had an explosive charge inside - they are trying to make a mess of a much bigger volume than the inside of a tank!
Yeah, most WW2 improvised armour was designed to deal with infantry anti-tank weapons. The Germans had some success with bedsteads, apparently bedsprings detonate RPG rounds. So I'm guessing logs and the like would work just as well.
Fury was pretty good on the accuracy front. There was some scepticism expressed about the ending where a lone, disabled tank held off an entire German infantry company but given the Audie Murphy was decorated for holding off a similar sized force with the AAMG of a tank destroyer which he fired from the engine deck of the vehicle .... WHICH WAS ON FIRE AT THE TIME! .... I think the crew of Fury were slightly less effective. :)
On "Fury" IMHO, it was reasonably accurate in uniforms etc, but completely lacklustre in terms of acting and story. Why didn't these crack SS troops just rustle up a Panzerfaust and blow the bas... tank to bits? Achilles et al seemed to spend all there time hunkering inside which did seem to leave them open to close assault.
Quote from: fsn on 23 March 2016, 08:07:10 AM
Why didn't these crack SS troops just rustle up a Panzerfaust and blow the bas... tank to bits?
One man stood on the engine deck of a burning tank destroyer and hosed an attacking German force with MG fire. Why didn't someone just chuck a grenade and kill him? Because they didn't.
Why didn't the film Germans use a panzerfaust? Perhaps the were out of them? Perhaps everyone thought someone else was about to? Perhaps some fresh-out-of-training 17 year-old officer wanted them to save panzerfausts in case they met a more formidable armoured force? So many options. :)
For me "Fury" was a much better film than some treadheads would have me believe :)
As a viewer with limited knowledge the tank vs tanks battle in "Fury" seemed particularly well done. Four American Shermans (?) take on one German Tiger (which model I know not). Actually three Shermans since one was taken out by ambush by the first shot from the Tiger on the American's flank as they advanced in column down a road. The three remaining tanks (one of which is "Fury") swing into line to engage the enemy. As soon as the Americans perceive they are up against a Tiger they fire smoke and rapidly pull back (until they are hemmed in by trees). I won't describe the rest of the action (since some may still want to see the movie without spoilers)
Apropos to the discussion, however, Fury takes one hit in the flank directly were a log bundle is attached to the hull. The shell destroys the logs but is deflected. Since later in the action Fury takes another hit near the front corner (I think) which caroms off, is it possible that the appliqué armor is added to produce as many angles as possible in addition to resistance to penetration?
In any case the tank battle (plus tanks operating with infantry assaulting a fixed position) are worth the price of admission to seeing the movie.
The Audie Murphy assessment was amusing Lthoriel! :).
Sometimes in wargaming we roll a six a dozen times in a row - and then say the final outcome isn't realistic - but maybe it is!
Fury was good hollywood, but not realistic. On the other hand, neither is reality, sometimes...
Zulu was inaccurate, but the real story is just as astounding.
didn't Audie Murphy call in artillery support though
and in Fury I think it was a Battalion of SS infantry not a company. Ruined the film for me which is a shame as Guy has pointed out the Sherman v Tiger battle was really well done.
Well, the Tiger commander would never have survived that long if he charged across open fields at enemy tanks, so not that well done. But it did let us see the Tiger, so I enjoyed it...
Quote from: d_Guy on 23 March 2016, 01:40:52 PM
Four American Shermans (?) take on one German Tiger (which model I know not).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_131 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_131) :D
Quote from: Matt J on 23 March 2016, 04:21:20 PM
didn't Audie Murphy call in artillery support though
and in Fury I think it was a Battalion of SS infantry not a company. Ruined the film for me which is a shame as Guy has pointed out the Sherman v Tiger battle was really well done.
"Lt. Murphy was serving as company commander in the Holzwihr forest on 26 January 1945. His unit had been completely decimated - he had 19 men left in his company that was once 128 strong - and had been assigned to hold the critical Colmar Pocket region from a German counterattack. He had two M-10 tank destroyers attached to his unit, and was expecting and additional two companies of infantry to come cover his flank.
It was a cold, rainy morning when Lt. Murphy first noticed the battalion of German mechanized infantry heading towards his position. Three companies of Nazi soldiers and half a dozen heavy Tiger tanks were bearing down on him. Murphy radioed to HQ, only to find that the two companies of supporting infantry he was expecting to hold the flank were not going to arrive in time. Audie was alone and outnumbered, but it was his duty to hold this position and he knew what he had to do.
He send his men back to take defensive positions behind him, and called the M-10s forward to take out some of the German armor. Within minutes, both vehicles had been knocked out like chumps. Now it was just Audie against an impossibly large force of German troops. Instead of falling back to safety like a regular, sane person, Murphy instead jumped up and manned the .50 caliber machinegun mounted one of the burning, disabled M-10s. He got on the radio with Command HQ and started calling in artillery strikes to hit the German positions. Shells rained down, taking out Nazis all over the place, but it wasn't enough. Lt. Murphy opened up the machinegun from his completely exposed position and stared mowing down Krauts left and right. Artillery continued to pound the Germans while Murphy shot the sh*t out of them. Before long the German losses were so great that the Tiger tanks had to pull back because they had lost most of their infantry support. Audie continued to fire until he ran out of bullets, then dismounted the M-10 only seconds before the entire vehicle exploded. He rallied his men, and the small group of Americans charged forward and routed the German forces. The Colmar Pocket had held."
The crew of Fury only had to deal with one Tiger tank and they were still mobile ... and not on fire ... wusses :)
Not saying the events in Fury are an everyday story of American tankies, just that it's not as unbelievable as some seem to think.
Quote from: fsn on 23 March 2016, 04:59:01 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_131 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_131) :D
Thanks for that link fsn. Followed others from that page and learned that all of the tanks in Fury were provided by the Bovington Tank Museum! That would be something to see! Feeling the usual stirring that arises when wanting to do another period! Must resist!
From things that go clank-clank in the night, dear Lord preserve us! :)
They have a "Fury"exhibit at Bovington now, and Tiger 131 is still to be seen.
There is a picture in one of the many Concord press style books which shows a Sherman in Normandy actually called Fury and I though the film portrayed life in a Tank very well as even today they design them but forget the Crew need to actually live in them and carry there own kit like change of uniforms sleeping bags oh! almost forgot Food :D :D
And a kettle. Got to have tea! Having several British tank crew they've always been most chuffed at the expression on other nations crews faces when they pop out the hatch complete with freshly made, steaming hot tea :D
ALL HAIL THE BV(boiling vessel) what a great addition to the British Army cook your food and Make nice cups of Tea or Coffee(depending on the crew)
It's just such a good idea, an doubly so in the age of NBC warfare...
To go with the forthcoming New Shermans...(although they would be in a long queue!)...some Sherman track links and roadwheels...and Jerry cans racked in 3's would be nice! ;)