Super Heavy Tank unit concept

Super heavy tanks would never work. It would be terribly slow. Also, vurnuble to air strikes. That is why no super heavy tanks were produced in the Cold War, instead all tanks were turned into main battle tanks. Which, were closer to medium tanks.

vietcong2005 wrote:

Super heavy tanks would never work. It would be terribly slow. Also, vurnuble to air strikes. That is why no super heavy tanks were produced in the Cold War, instead all tanks were turned into main battle tanks. Which, were closer to medium tanks.

vietcong2005 wrote:

Super heavy tanks would never work. It would be terribly slow. Also, vurnuble to air strikes. That is why no super heavy tanks were produced in the Cold War, instead all tanks were turned into main battle tanks. Which, were closer to medium tanks.

XXpheonix wrote:

vietcong2005 wrote:

Super heavy tanks would never work. It would be terribly slow. Also, vurnuble to air strikes. That is why no super heavy tanks were produced in the Cold War, instead all tanks were turned into main battle tanks. Which, were closer to medium tanks.

i mean,the closest we got to operational and serving super heavies were the behemoth tanks and multi turreted ones such as the French Char 2b,they did okay but they were outnumbered so meh,early war there was potential,but by mid war there was basically no hope for them

The only operational super-heavy in WW2 (in tiny numbers - 10) was the Char 2C, and it was so bad (designed in the WW1 for trench warfare) that the French avoided as much as they could putting it in harm's way not to give the Germans a propaganda victory.

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

vietcong2005 wrote:

Super heavy tanks would never work. It would be terribly slow. Also, vurnuble to air strikes. That is why no super heavy tanks were produced in the Cold War, instead all tanks were turned into main battle tanks. Which, were closer to medium tanks.

i mean,the closest we got to operational and serving super heavies were the behemoth tanks and multi turreted ones such as the French Char 2b,they did okay but they were outnumbered so meh,early war there was potential,but by mid war there was basically no hope for them

The B1Bis was an heavy, certainly not a super heavy. For instance, it was the same weight as a Panzer IV, though more "compact".The only operational super-heavy in WW2 (in tiny numbers - 10) was the Char 2C, and it was so bad (designed in the WW1 for trench warfare) that the French avoided as much as they could putting it in harm's way not to give the Germans a propaganda victory.

XXpheonix wrote:

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

vietcong2005 wrote:

Super heavy tanks would never work. It would be terribly slow. Also, vurnuble to air strikes. That is why no super heavy tanks were produced in the Cold War, instead all tanks were turned into main battle tanks. Which, were closer to medium tanks.

i mean,the closest we got to operational and serving super heavies were the behemoth tanks and multi turreted ones such as the French Char 2b,they did okay but they were outnumbered so meh,early war there was potential,but by mid war there was basically no hope for them

The B1Bis was an heavy, certainly not a super heavy. For instance, it was the same weight as a Panzer IV, though more "compact".The only operational super-heavy in WW2 (in tiny numbers - 10) was the Char 2C, and it was so bad (designed in the WW1 for trench warfare) that the French avoided as much as they could putting it in harm's way not to give the Germans a propaganda victory.

the 2C was superior to german tanks at the time,they just suffered the same fate as early kv-1s which was they were outnumbered and outmanoeuvred

You mix up with the B2 and B2Bis, which I would not call superior due to its strategic limitation (limited autonomy, mechanical failures). Way more broke or just ran out of gas in a place they could not be resupplied than were destroyed by the Germans.

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

vietcong2005 wrote:

Super heavy tanks would never work. It would be terribly slow. Also, vurnuble to air strikes. That is why no super heavy tanks were produced in the Cold War, instead all tanks were turned into main battle tanks. Which, were closer to medium tanks.

i mean,the closest we got to operational and serving super heavies were the behemoth tanks and multi turreted ones such as the French Char 2b,they did okay but they were outnumbered so meh,early war there was potential,but by mid war there was basically no hope for them

The B1Bis was an heavy, certainly not a super heavy. For instance, it was the same weight as a Panzer IV, though more "compact".The only operational super-heavy in WW2 (in tiny numbers - 10) was the Char 2C, and it was so bad (designed in the WW1 for trench warfare) that the French avoided as much as they could putting it in harm's way not to give the Germans a propaganda victory.

the 2C was superior to german tanks at the time,they just suffered the same fate as early kv-1s which was they were outnumbered and outmanoeuvred

The 2C was certainly not superior to even a Panzer II. Its military value was close to 0, if not negative.

You mix up with the B2 and B2Bis, which I would not call superior due to its strategic limitation (limited autonomy, mechanical failures). Way more broke or just ran out of gas in a place they could not be resupplied than were destroyed by the Germans.

XXpheonix wrote:

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

vietcong2005 wrote:

Super heavy tanks would never work. It would be terribly slow. Also, vurnuble to air strikes. That is why no super heavy tanks were produced in the Cold War, instead all tanks were turned into main battle tanks. Which, were closer to medium tanks.

i mean,the closest we got to operational and serving super heavies were the behemoth tanks and multi turreted ones such as the French Char 2b,they did okay but they were outnumbered so meh,early war there was potential,but by mid war there was basically no hope for them

The B1Bis was an heavy, certainly not a super heavy. For instance, it was the same weight as a Panzer IV, though more "compact".The only operational super-heavy in WW2 (in tiny numbers - 10) was the Char 2C, and it was so bad (designed in the WW1 for trench warfare) that the French avoided as much as they could putting it in harm's way not to give the Germans a propaganda victory.

the 2C was superior to german tanks at the time,they just suffered the same fate as early kv-1s which was they were outnumbered and outmanoeuvred

The 2C was certainly not superior to even a Panzer II. Its military value was close to 0, if not negative.You mix up with the B2 and B2Bis, which I would not call superior due to its strategic limitation (limited autonomy, mechanical failures). Way more broke or just ran out of gas in a place they could not be resupplied than were destroyed by the Germans.

it had a better gun a superior frontal armour (not turret),but i meant to say the B1

There is a reason the Germans almost always removed the 75mm gun in the hull in their conversions - that 75mm was meant to use against fortifications, which usually don't move, so you can align your tank properly.

Better frontal armor and superior gun are not sufficient, or even necessary, to have a good tank. Else, the KV-2 would be considered a better tank than the T-34.

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

vietcong2005 wrote:

Super heavy tanks would never work. It would be terribly slow. Also, vurnuble to air strikes. That is why no super heavy tanks were produced in the Cold War, instead all tanks were turned into main battle tanks. Which, were closer to medium tanks.

i mean,the closest we got to operational and serving super heavies were the behemoth tanks and multi turreted ones such as the French Char 2b,they did okay but they were outnumbered so meh,early war there was potential,but by mid war there was basically no hope for them

The B1Bis was an heavy, certainly not a super heavy. For instance, it was the same weight as a Panzer IV, though more "compact".The only operational super-heavy in WW2 (in tiny numbers - 10) was the Char 2C, and it was so bad (designed in the WW1 for trench warfare) that the French avoided as much as they could putting it in harm's way not to give the Germans a propaganda victory.

the 2C was superior to german tanks at the time,they just suffered the same fate as early kv-1s which was they were outnumbered and outmanoeuvred

The 2C was certainly not superior to even a Panzer II. Its military value was close to 0, if not negative.You mix up with the B2 and B2Bis, which I would not call superior due to its strategic limitation (limited autonomy, mechanical failures). Way more broke or just ran out of gas in a place they could not be resupplied than were destroyed by the Germans.

it had a better gun a superior frontal armour (not turret),but i meant to say the B1

The "better gun" not turreted was almost never used against tank because it had no left-right traverse [yes, I know, the Eure in Stonne got some tanks with it - but that's one exception due to actually engaging a bunch of stopped tanks at super close range], so really the B1 relied on its (actually pretty good, but one-man) turreted 47mm against tanks.There is a reason the Germans almost always removed the 75mm gun in the hull in their conversions - that 75mm was meant to use against fortifications, which usually don't move, so you can align your tank properly.

Better frontal armor and superior gun are not sufficient, or even necessary, to have a good tank. Else, the KV-2 would be considered a better tank than the T-34.

XXpheonix wrote:

wasn't saying the kv-2 was better

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

wasn't saying the kv-2 was better

You were saying the B1Bis was better than German tanks, and then explained that it was because bigger gun and frontal armor

XXpheonix wrote:

i was saying that for at the time it was,if the french had more of them and better co-ordination they could've held out longer,the soviets started fighting in 41' a year after the invasion of france,by then the germans had made a few different variants and such,i am by no means saying german tanks were terrible,it's just that the B1 and 2C were superior in firepower and armour,so a upfront attack would usually fail,but what the french did not interpret was speed as such and stuck to the old ways and they got overwhelmed,for example,tigers were superior to early T-34s yet the soviets overwhelmed them and beat them,i am talking about a singular battle not the whole war as the german supplies dwindled

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

i was saying that for at the time it was,if the french had more of them and better co-ordination they could've held out longer,the soviets started fighting in 41' a year after the invasion of france,by then the germans had made a few different variants and such,i am by no means saying german tanks were terrible,it's just that the B1 and 2C were superior in firepower and armour,so a upfront attack would usually fail,but what the french did not interpret was speed as such and stuck to the old ways and they got overwhelmed,for example,tigers were superior to early T-34s yet the soviets overwhelmed them and beat them,i am talking about a singular battle not the whole war as the german supplies dwindled

The fact that you even mention the 2C as an example of superiority in firepower in armor "so an upfront attack would usually fail" says a lot I believe on how much you know about the Battle of France beyond pop-culture.

XXpheonix wrote:

what? i'm stupid? yeah i get that,but i doesn't change what i said,the french and british thought it was gonna be the exact same thing

Eg, you are talking about the 2C as something actually encountered by the Germans

Chimere wrote:

XXpheonix wrote:

what? i'm stupid? yeah i get that,but i doesn't change what i said,the french and british thought it was gonna be the exact same thing

I don't think you are stupid, few people are, I just think you don't know as much as you think you do about the Battle of France, which is different.

Eg, you are talking about the 2C as something actually encountered by the Germans

Yes the Germans did run out of time to use it but before the war ended there were 2 Maus tanks built and stored at a secret facility in Germany.

When this facility was discovered by the soviets they were blown away by the immense size of the Maus tanks so they decided to test it.

After the test the determined that the tanks were too heavy for any practical battlefield use.

Also if they had a few problems with the weight of the Tiger tanks, a tank roughly 3 times the size would cause more than a few problems.