The Youtube video thread!
-
- Lieutenant Commander
- Posts: 1181
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:34 am
- Location: Georgia, United States
- Contact:
Re: The Youtube video thread!
If you are referring to the scene where the Shermans get ambushed by the stationary Tiger, the tanks do initially pull back. Sherman tanks at the time had a high-speed AT shell, that if it came in too fast (i.e. fired from too close) would bounce off the Tiger's front armor. By pulling back initially they could get the shell slow enough to damage the Tiger.Atekimogus wrote: Have you seen "Fury"? Exactly the same. We have tanks rushing each other....never would have happened. All you do rushing an enemy tank in that time is botching the aim of the gunner. But......for a movie that would have been too boring.
But then the tanks ran into brush or other stuff and they couldn't back away. They are still within lethal range of the Tiger, and the only other way to kill it is to shoot the Tiger's rear. They didn't have immediate access to artillery or aircraft, so the Shermans took the only option available.
In Fury, IMHO the Shermans should have pulled back, and called in Artillery/air.
Relativity Calculator
My Nomination for "MVAM Critic Award" (But can it be broken into 3 separate pieces?)
My Nomination for "MVAM Critic Award" (But can it be broken into 3 separate pieces?)
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 13110
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:27 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award, Cochrane Medal of Excellence
- Location: New Hampshire
- Contact:
Re: The Youtube video thread!
This... this is a weird one.
- Graham Kennedy
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11561
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
- Location: Banbury, UK
- Contact:
Re: The Youtube video thread!
No idea how to embed vimeo videos here, so...
Fixed it for you (Ian)
Fixed it for you (Ian)
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: The Youtube video thread!
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 13110
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:27 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award, Cochrane Medal of Excellence
- Location: New Hampshire
- Contact:
Re: The Youtube video thread!
Kinda weird, kinda awesome too.Mikey wrote:
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: The Youtube video thread!
I just had the thought that, since that's in Brazil, maybe the catfish is just trying to breathe and the beer is the purest water it could find.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Re: The Youtube video thread!
I think they should have filmed her in all of her glory like old old times.Graham Kennedy wrote:No idea how to embed vimeo videos here, so...
Fixed it for you (Ian)
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 13110
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:27 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award, Cochrane Medal of Excellence
- Location: New Hampshire
- Contact:
Re: The Youtube video thread!
The sniper doesn't participate.
"Bible, Wrath of Khan, what's the difference?"
Stan - South Park
Stan - South Park
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 13110
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:27 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award, Cochrane Medal of Excellence
- Location: New Hampshire
- Contact:
Re: The Youtube video thread!
I'll admit, it's got some problems, but overall, I really like this one.
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 13110
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:27 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award, Cochrane Medal of Excellence
- Location: New Hampshire
- Contact:
-
- Lieutenant Commander
- Posts: 1193
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 11:10 pm
- Location: Vienna
Re: The Youtube video thread!
That is not exactly true. What you are refering to is something called "shatter gap" which means that if you are too close and the shell to fast the grenade - which in theory and calculation should penetrate - will shatter. However, as far as I am aware this was a problem mostly for russian low-quality made shells. (And british early sabot rounds....not sure about US ammunition though if they had the same problem...)Coalition wrote:If you are referring to the scene where the Shermans get ambushed by the stationary Tiger, the tanks do initially pull back. Sherman tanks at the time had a high-speed AT shell, that if it came in too fast (i.e. fired from too close) would bounce off the Tiger's front armor. By pulling back initially they could get the shell slow enough to damage the Tiger.Atekimogus wrote: Have you seen "Fury"? Exactly the same. We have tanks rushing each other....never would have happened. All you do rushing an enemy tank in that time is botching the aim of the gunner. But......for a movie that would have been too boring.
Which is nonsense of course since the rear is every bit as well armored as the side, even a bit better because the rear plate is angled at 10-15°. What they "should" have done is trying to get at it's side and try hitting it at an exactly right angle. Even the short 75mm of the normal Shermans should be able to get through that at the ranges we saw in the movie.Coalition wrote: But then the tanks ran into brush or other stuff and they couldn't back away. They are still within lethal range of the Tiger, and the only other way to kill it is to shoot the Tiger's rear.
So here is the situations and what should have happened.Coalition wrote: They didn't have immediate access to artillery or aircraft, so the Shermans took the only option available.
In Fury, IMHO the Shermans should have pulled back, and called in Artillery/air.
They get ambushed by a Tiger and loose a tank. They start pulling back. Now considering the reload of a Tiger, that it was in a very good ambush position obviously AND already had the range they should have lost another sherman shortly after that. At least it would have been quite likely. But considering that they killed the most rearwards tank first I guess it is save to assume that we have a very "green" Tiger crew here.
They take a while to locate the Tiger and immediatly drop smoke. That is probably the only valid move they make in the whole engagement. Now they have located the Tiger AND blinded him. Then they suffer from a sudden rush from shit to the brain and decide to rush it because some hollywood bloke read somewhere that it always took 5 shermans to take out one Tiger.
What they forget is that Fury is an Sherman with a long 76mm high velocity gun. One of the few guns actually able to engage a Tiger at some range. Meaning that after droping smoke at MOST they should have tried to maneuver into a good position and then just kill it. There was no need for rushing it at all.....(But then FURY also gets magic plot-armor when it was hit point blank into the side and are still alive somehow...so some of the stupidity cancels each other out)
But the Tiger commander isn't much better.....he got smoked and what does he do? He drives forward.......instead of pulling back himself he starts to charge. And when they are out of the smoke and see each other he conveniently kills those tanks first which are the LEAST likely to hurt him.....the short 75mm shermans he could have savely ignored frontally until 100m out or so.
tl,dr...in the time it took to drop the smoke they should have lost another sherman, maybe even two depending on how good the Tiger crew were, but after that the Tiger would probably be toast without any need for rushing or other overly dramatic stuff.
However...if they had given as a thrilling game of cat and mouse with the tiger as the grand finale instead of the stupid "last stand"...the movie would have been almost perfect. It should have been played like "Das Boot"...tense, both stalking each other and NOT rushing like some medival knights.
I'm Commander Shepard and this is my favorite store on the Citadel.
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: The Youtube video thread!
I think the makers were conflating WWII tank designs in general with an actual serious design problem of the Sherman, which was inordinately weak rear armor right over the gas tanks... so much so that Allied troops began to refer to Shermans as Zippos (you know, because they light every time) and German troops - with their typical penchant for nicknames - began to call them "Tommy-cookers." German troops are, of course, the ones who also came up with such monikers as "forked-tail devil" for the Lockheed P-38 and "devil dogs" for the USMC.Atekimogus wrote:Which is nonsense of course since the rear is every bit as well armored as the side, even a bit better because the rear plate is angled at 10-15°.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer