Purpose of this blog

Dmitry Yudo aka Overlord, jack of all trades
David Lister aka Listy, Freelancer and Volunteer

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

[WoT] Transmission Response from Mr. Doyle

I'm very proud that we were able to get an official response of highly-respected researcher in the field of German WWII tanks - Mr. Hilary L. Doyle regarding that "transmission thing" with E-series (namely front drive for E-50 & E-75). What's more important, this statement doesn't go against our suppositions.
 
"Firstly, in this case Overlord is completely correct.  Any engineer or logical person can see that these sketches do not make sense.  But he must avoid shooting the messengers!

We have talked about the philosophy that Tom and I adopted after the success of our “best-seller - the Encyclopaedia of German Tanks” (Arms & Armour Press, published in 1978).  We try only to report the facts that we find them in original documents.  As time has gone on we have become even stronger in our determination to avoid speculation.  There are more than enough charlatans prepared to sell snake oil concerning German Panzer development and users.  The “facts” are actually far more interesting and there is still plenty of new material to be unearthed but of course this involves really hard and expensive research that the home based enthusiasts is not prepared to do.

In our Panzer Tracts No.20-1 “Paper Panzers” on a single page we summarised of the “facts” available on the E50 and E75 proposals.  Most important are the five general requirements of a next generation of Panzers

Of course, behind our summary I have collected some seventy pages of original documentation.  Most are original calculation sheets on possible drive train and suspension ideas.  My drawings are based on the sketches attached.  Clearly, these first thoughts and proposals on future Panzer requirements were never given any priority and as the war situation deteriorated.  To me the “real“ engine/transmission package designers from Maybach never actively got involved and the armour designers certainly had not considered how a rear drive might be mounted.  What we see are proposals “that are the best ideas since sliced bread” being pushed by fringe companies and they certainly had no authority to  design the necessary new armoured hull.  Overlord should try to address his doubts to the inventors that made these sketches in 1944.

Any additional information published on E50 or E 75 besides that in Panzer Tracts No.20-1 and Spielberger's  Band 8 Special-panzerfahrzeuge  is merely fantasy and should be labelled as such. 

We do not need to dream up E50 & E 75  designs since  Porsche and Daimler-Benz  outlined a possible tank design for the Indian government in 1955 which incorporated many of the E50 & E 75 ideas. This also did not get off the proposal drawing board but two years later, as part of one of the consortia bidding for the Standard Panzer (later Leopard), Porsche used these ideas once again.  See the attached drawings." (see those HLD watermarks on the pics)






Once again many thanks to Mr. Doyle, whose works were a good source on many of German tanks in-game, and WG.net military expert Chieftain.

63 comments:

  1. So what does all this crap mean actually?
    I dont want to read it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It means all the whinners about the "transmission-gate" just got their asses handed to them (judging by your reaction you are one of them)

      Delete
    2. It just means Overlord, Serb & Storm found an expert who did not disagree with them so they can claim "historical reasons" when 7.4 nerf goes live.

      Delete
    3. Not just any expert. The same expert who's book was qouted by those who claimed that WGs changes are made u and that the E-series had the transmission in the back-

      Delete
  2. It means that moving the transmission to the front of the tank in E-50 and E-75 is historically credible. Which I'm not sure that many people argued against. Balancewise it certainly wasn't needed, but I guess the new E-50M needs to be somehow better than E-50.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I understood it, he meant that it was unlikely that they would have rear transmission because germany didn't have the recources to bet on a new transmission system. ( correct me if I am wrong) But if he thinks so, he has obviously not heard about the V 1 and 2 rockets, me 262 and all the other crazy things they made.

      Delete
  3. Still no answer to this about issues with your estimations:

    http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/703-eu-questions-answers/page__view__findpost__p__2087142

    ReplyDelete
  4. So let me get this straight:
    Already underpowered E50 will be nerfed even more,and the pre-nerf E50
    will be put in as a TX medium tank?
    Makes perfect sense to me,and also me and my friend have conducted a some kind of an experiment regarding the E series transmission,and it's clearly back-based.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What kind of nerf? No further adjusments for now. The rest will arrive upon the itroduction of the new tier 10s and will affect many vehicles.

      Delete
    2. I am sorry to say this but who cares about an experiment performed by "some guy and his friend" while WG/OL can refer to the research/archives that are in the possession of Doyle... You know, the guy that wrote the definitive book on late war German tank designs and is a proper academic, involving proper research, citing and lots more.

      Delete
    3. he is a proper expert, doing credible research so a high order of probability the transmission was to be front mounted. ok fine, can overlord ask him about transmissions being filled with nitroglycerin? because no one would care where it was mounted if wargaming didn't insisting they where glass vessels for incendiary chemicals mounted behind tinfoil armor. thats the nerf, get shot in the trans and burn. if it just knocked out mobility for a time I doubt people would care much. but it doesn't it lights you up and you better not be in sniper mode hearing the damage reports because of course fire is last priority to be reported and your a goner.

      Delete
    4. ^ Pretty much this.

      We don't care where is the transmission, its the way the game mechanics are made. Transmission was never filled with napalm or nitroglycerine... It would never lid you up like in WoT and even if it would in an impossible case, then it wouldn't burn the engine too...

      Delete
  5. Sure.

    Now may we know what he thinks about increased chance of "fire" by making it a front drive and not a rear drive then?

    And i dont see nerfing tanks that are already rarely used as a good idea...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks Overlord (and Mr. Hilary L. Doyle) for the effort. Very informative, and i hope, you didn't hear too much on the Flamers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have not tried the E tanks on test server have you? THEY are the flamers now... I won'T play them anymore due to they are just fucked up now. Every second fromt pen makes it slower than engine hit Löwe. Watch up the pic and lol on WG and it's nerfings on the wrong things. Sam thing for M103. THe driver is killed every single hit into the front same as Panther 2 burns every hit. I camped all time with it because it makes no fun to engage and being torched all time.
      Every patch it's getting worse to play the old tanks. THis game is out of balance.

      Delete
    2. No need to replay Overlord :) lemme do this ;)


      No Bloodmane1987 thats wrong...its "working as intended"

      Delete
    3. @Bloodmane1987
      Read the first comment.
      Or the other Comments. Most People insult Overlord/WG/Devs, only 25% make construktive Answer/discussions.

      Didn't you wondering, that the Devs not hear on the EU-Community? Because 75% of the EU-Community flaming/insult the Devs/WG at EVERY change on the Game.

      Delete
  7. Well, i see I made myself a proper idiot raging about reason of transmission issue. Sorry.
    I have admit that informations given by Doyle in Paper Panzer were very unclear I'm glad that he made them little clearer. And I'm glad that informations gathered and assumptions made by WOT fans concerning similarities between E-series and AMX M4 were right and we at last will get true E-50. Thanks WG.
    That whole rage was uneccessary and I guess we can all avoided it if you WG would be little clearer about plans and reason between them :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's unclear because they never asked him. They do what they can do best: Lying. An engineer who talks lika a bloody politician... or what is this? No clear estimation and no clear reasons... no engineer would talk like this.

      Delete
    2. Denial as a psychological compensation.

      Delete
    3. Or just the truth.
      Have you the number of Doyle? I'd like to call him and ask him some questions.

      Delete
    4. OL: And still you are avoiding answering:

      http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/703-eu-questions-answers/page__view__findpost__p__2087142

      Delete
  8. Q 1.
    Overlord, the drawing of the E-75 says, that the hull plus the tracks will weight 60 tons. Now, if your in game turret weights 18 tons, plus gun and ammo, it should be 25 tons MAX. so will we see a weight reduce on the E-75?

    Q 2.
    Is there any buff for the E-75 in the plans? (Greedy)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. they put 25 tons up on it to make it slower because they saied it's too fast.

      They nerfed it with the fron transmission to make it unusable in closer combat. It shall stay back hulled down OL sayed....
      BUT: How to snipe with that unaccurate low pen gun?

      They will never buff anything till it's WR is dropping. That's all they rely on. They fuck up the gameplay and don'T even notice it. Or just don't care for.

      Delete
  9. Buahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh my german tanks buhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

    Bloodmane1987, you should get out for a walk, enjoy the sun, do something fun with your friends, then get back here, and try to have fun. Or just don't come back. Just stop.

    Overlord have been quite patience already, WG, in case you didn't get it, even successfully contacted the author of the book from where the theory of biased WG was taken from. So far for WG ignoring the community, eh?

    Kudos WG, and kudos Ovi! :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. None of you seem to get it.

    The E-50 and E-75 should not catch fire from the front. It doesn't matter where the transmission is theoretically located, what matters is getting set on fire from a frontal shot.

    If you're going to be so accurate historically and argue with a good portion of the community you might as well make a transmission hitbox to make it historically accurate. No one will protest that.

    All of history can't help to justify frontal fires.

    ReplyDelete
  11. There is something i never quite understood... isnt Leopard made of a different material from what an E-50 would have been made? Im sure there are many different kinds of steel and i always believed even tough a Leopard has only 70mm it was made of a far better quality steel than WWII tanks where... so those 70mm would be equal to a lot more thickness of WWII steel. Even in WWII i always had the idea german steel was of better quality than American or Soviet steel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, the reason the leopard had such little armor was because sabot rounds made armor irrelevant. also, even though it was thin, it was 100% spaced armor everywhere (or so I read, I could be wrong...

      Delete
  12. Hello Overlord nice article, it really seattled the matter (I was really anti wg on this before) anyway I have a minor question about the upcoming E50M

    Since E50 and E50 "modernized" are so similar, except the length of the hull, (visually) do you think that "shurzen" or what I would call "large sheets of metal attached to the sides of the tank" - will be added to the E50M? Like Panther II got that differs it from the Panther I (except the new turret of course). What is your response? :)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hello,

    Overlord I've asked you (and I think many players did) if the transmission could be made into a separate hit-box. The thing is- if you get hit in the engine filled with gasoline it may cause fire, if you get hit in fuel tanks filled with gasoline it may also result in explosion, but transmission and gearbox is filled with non-flammable oil. The thing is- couldn't a shot in the transmission cripple your tank's mobility but not cause fire? I'm really curious about thoughts on this.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There's still the question of whether this nerf has foundation in balance. Does their performance need to be reduced, even if only marginally?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Interview with SerB (translated by Kruzenshtern):

    "Q: [Back on the E-50 Ausf. M changes]...and a new gun, too...what about armor? Mobility? An 1,800 HP engine - I can dream, right?

    A: Gun is the same.
    Armor is the same.
    Engine is the same.
    But the transmission is rear-mounted, and that's a huge advantage!!!"

    So even SerB admits that frontal transmission is a huge disadvantage...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dude SerB is know for extreme sarcasm and irony. E50M will most likely be better armored, have better mobility and better ammo for the gun with a rear transmission (the reason the chassis will be longer).

      Delete
    2. Point taken. I was just looking for whatever I could find on the matter, and this didn't look too sarcastic considering the gun is definitely going to be the same.

      Delete
  16. The sketches have nothing to do with the transmission or engine, they are solely about the suspension. Also Doyle did not say a word about the transmission being in the front, he just argues about the credibility of drawings.
    Doyle also mentions the concepts of the E-50/E-75 as being the influence for the Leopard 1 which is also rear wheel driven...

    "but two years later, as part of one of the consortia bidding for the Standard Panzer (later Leopard), Porsche used these ideas once again."

    ReplyDelete
  17. Tnx Overlord for the post.
    And for all the whiners please stfu and appreciate some kind of information... If you don`t like E-50 anymore then chose another tank!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Lets turn it in a more open way... i dont want to argue for any position. I just want to add somthing. All other arguments can be found in the forum:

    In Overlords post its now official said by the author, that the scratches WG used were purly "fantasy" ...so no possibility of the argument "this could never fit". Aditionally in the later documents presented here, are only rear mounted transmissions shown. This would even strenghten the arguments of the "reargearers".

    Addionally lets quote The_Chieftain on 09 June 2012 - 10:43 PM in Heavy Tanks:
    "I pinged Hilary Doyle on his opinion on the Overlord post, and the response was interesting. He agrees that there was no way that the E-50/E-75 could have had a rear-mounted transmission as drawn.
    [GGG: like WG already said]

    [GGG: The Sentence that now will follow is not mentioned in Overlords post]
    However, he affirms that the intent was to have a rear-mounted transmission, and believes that the tank design would have probably changed by the time the vehicle entered physical production.
    [GGG: Sounds different to Overlords post. This would also mean only a early prototyp could have eventually a front transmission.]

    [GGG: now the same content like in Overlords post]
    He merely reproduced the drawings that were available at the time, one of the things about the Doyle/Jentz publications is that they do not taint their books with speculation or analysis: If the designers screwed up in the proposal, the screw-up is in the Doyle/Jentz book as well.

    Bottom line, is it's a fantasy vehicle either way, moving the transmission in the front makes as much 'real' sense if the 3D model is not significantly changed."


    Conclusion: Simply seperate the transmission and the engine and no one would argue about this topic. ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I second that conclusion. Make the transmission a separate module, and put it in the turret if you like.

      Delete
  19. The issue too me has nothing to do with where the transmission is located more to why it explodes into fire like an engine. Many IFV's and AFV's used the transmission forward design with out ever bursting into flames when struck as they do in WoT. Remove the fire from the module and then it move it where you want it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Colour me confused. So the gist of it is that the designers wanted rear drive, but the sketches available don't show rear drive?

    Wouldn't that then mean there is a case either way? My Doyle seems a bit noncommital either way from "avoiding speculation".

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hello Overlord,

    I feel the problem many have with this rear-mounted gearbox being moved to the front is not so much the "fact" of where it's supposed to be, but mainly the results that it entails. In World of Tanks a gearbox is cause of engine fires, in reality a hit in the gearbox in the front would never cause the engine (which is in the back) to spontaniously massively catch fire. However, in WoT they are linked. THIS is the problem with a frontal gearbox. If the frontal gearbox would only result in engine damage without the chance of fire i'm sure a lot more people would be more than happy to accept the fact the gearbox will be moved from the back to the front.

    Please comment and understand this, the gearbox and engine should become seperate (fire-wise) for balance's sake.

    Sincerely,
    Ascender.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Q: Overlord what do you think about this 3 tanks and u think they could be added to the german tree ?

    -The first one is the KpfPz. 70 the joint project with the US the german did develop they own prototype , but i dont know if its no beyond the time frame from the game

    - Second the Löwe , its already as a premium tank but in a odd configuration. Its not the Leichte Löwe or the Schwere but a mix of both. I think that the Leichte would be a better Tier 8 for the maus Line because it had a rear turret ( making the line more homogenous ) abd the schwere could be added as a high tier tank

    - And the last is the indien-panzer project from the 1954 , from this one i know very little but it seems like a good option for a medium tank ( i think the last 2 img belong to this project )

    ReplyDelete
  23. According to Wikipedia (at least some of it must be right), the T-62A had the following features:
    + 21 degree turret traverse
    + Reloads gun only between -3.5 and 3.5 degree elevation
    + 4 RoF and lower when moving
    + Turret traverse is inoperable during reload
    + Tank built specifically for the smoothbore gun

    Now, who wants to bet that WG is going to ignore history for the sake of "game balance"?

    Not to mention the fact that the E-100's lower front plate was supposed to be as strong as it's upper plate. We don't see WG being too concerned about that historical inaccuracy.

    Meanwhile, WG has decided that E-50/E-75 would definitely have frontal transmission if they were ever built, and that this would result in frontal fires. All this despite significant opposition from the community.

    And Overlord isn't responding anymore. All he wanted to do was put in his "Denial as a psychological compensation" comment and claim victory.

    What WG needs to stop doing is balancing tanks for historical reasons. Balance them for gameplay reasons only, because history is a mess, especially in the case of tanks that were never built.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know its going down that way, the battle of golan heights fully illustrates the HUGE deficiencies in these tanks even in huge numbers. But that won't effect the game and we all know it.

      Delete
  24. So, you dragged the big name expert in to back up your arguments for why the E-series should have a front transmission. That's nice, kudos to you. I'm surprised you managed to get his attention and I'm certain you're happy about that.

    It also doesn't matter.

    It has been made very clear why the Germans almost certainly wouldn't have been able to make the E-Series a rear transmission design during the war. Lack of time and resources being clear issues by the time the design specifications were created. But this game is not limited only to the time frame of WW2, and Mr. Doyle's arguments and info only apply to that time frame. With a couple more years and sufficient resources I'm certain the German teams would have come up with the same fix to the problem that the French teams did working of the initial German designs and specs.

    It's a paper tank series, the rear transmisison was the stated intended configuration, and it has been shown to be accomplishable within the design parameters. With just how much of a negative experience the stupid frontal transmission fires are for the players it should have been a no brainer to honor the design intent.

    ReplyDelete
  25. You people are blowing the whole transmission thing massively out of proportion..

    Typical of German players..

    In 250 games in the E-75 on the 7.4 test server, where gold ammo is flung around like jelly beans, my E-75 has not once caught fire. Despite countless frontal penetrations.

    My IS-8, however, has caught fire at least 10 times from frontal shots in the 80 games I've played in it.

    Stop sulking and play the tanks before you bitch. They're still fine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where can I download the 250 replays bigmouth?

      Delete
  26. Also, isn't it funny how the one E-series tank that DID start production had a front-drive transmission?

    But magically, all the others were going to do something no production German tank before them had done, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can you then explain how the transmission fits in the front then? With the current model in the game, the transmission doesn't fit in the front or the back.

      Delete
    2. Because they didnt even have a rear drive unit/engine combo ready since the E-100 wasnt even meant to be worked on since the design was supposed to be /devnulled in favor of the Maus even b4 all superheavy tank work was supposed to be scrapped. E-100 was worked on by a very very small work team ( 2 ppl IIRC ) on the manufacturers own initiative.

      Delete
  27. When you were at it, why didn't you just ask them about the 4m high King Tiger which got this big for historical reasons? Or is it the Sherman that is too small ingame? Ever saw those two side by side in reality and ingame? You'll notice the difference.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Hi Guys,
    Overlord, as a Developer, can you just explain to me why the German Tanks are always getting changed (be it nerfed or op'd or other). I've been playing WOT since the days of beta, remember when the Ferdy was one of the most feared tanks? Now its laughable. I'm not complaining, I was just wondering why certain tanks aren't balanced. Take the TIER 7 heavies... Tiger I is the worse by far, then IS then T29 is op, will they be balanced? If not then I'll shut up. Just wanted to know if it doesn't make it better... why change it?
    Note: When you guys brought out the E-series it was awesome, could finally take on an IS-4... now just seems to be going back to what it was before 7.1?

    ReplyDelete
  29. so if you carefully read the experts response you see that he does not state anything about the position of the transmission besides pointing us to his original book (stating transmission in the back), he also points out that that book is based on original documents and can be considered as closest to actual "plans" for the tank
    he also states that further data other than specifications can not be derived because companies that produce those parts never actually got to work and that changes in the design at later stages MIGHT me changed because of war situation (but if we count in deviations from plans and all the conditions literally we can finally stop equating russian crap they called steel to german RHA plates and take all the defects, cramped crew space and imaginary mods on russian tanks into consideration)
    see we dont mind germans getting nerfed for some BS reasons (yeah some game developers know more about WW2 tanks than most advanced country of that time) as long as all sides get scrutinized equally...
    but as it is now germans and americans get nerfed for gameplay AND historical reasons and russians get buffed for historical AND gameplay reasons

    PS: get that fvcking tiger 2 and sherman size issue sorted...

    ReplyDelete
  30. LOL
    the five things listed in the book he mentions but doesn't qoute include rear drive.
    Period.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I think Overlord is reading what he wants from mr Doyle's reply. quote "these first thoughts and proposals on future Panzer requirements"
    That does include the preliminary sketches ( which focused on the suspension ) it's unfortunate that our current E-50 as modelled is based on these sketches. But it does stand that one of the major design goals was rear drive. The problem for WoT gameplay is that no one would give a flying f*** about the transmission unit location if it wasnt for WoT's modelling these as part of the engine ( and the chance to burst into flames as being an engine ).

    The E-50 change removes something unique from WoT ( namely not bursting onto flames from frontal hits as a german tank ) and instead leaves us with essentially a tiger II with a higher RoF and more Horsepower. Which is kinda Meh if you think about it. Also the E-50M as tier 10 MT is suspicious as it reeks of the Panther II as tier 9 MT debacle, minor upgrade by giving back what we had in the first place. M48 atleast has a much better hull and turret.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Hi Guys,
    Overlord I brought "best-seller - the Encyclopaedia of German Tanks” (Arms & Armour Press, published in 1978), and I can't find any reference to the E-series having a front transmission! Could someone give me the page reference?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. quit trying... all there is in that book is information about rear drive being planned all along

      Delete
    2. I know... I just thought I missed something... this sucks... why change something that wasn't broken... I don't wanna go back to Russian or USA tanks (french suck :p)

      Delete
  33. As we all know, in territory war, People use T-54, M46, and 25t in their team. E50 seldom appears in team battle. In random battle, E50 almost have the lowest win ratio as a tier 9 medium. E50 works as a high speed tier 8 heavy tank. In version 6.6-6.7, we had the 90 points team battle. There were some teams used E50 in their team battle because E50 was the only tier 9 medium that can fight tier 9 heavy. After version 7.0, we cancelled 90 points team battle; as a result, people only use tier 10 heavy (usually IS-7,E100 in 7.0, now T110 and AMX50B) as main battle tanks and tier 9 medium (usually T-54 and M46 in 7.0, now 25t) as scouts. There is no place for E50 in team battle currently. The reason is simple; E50 does not have enough firepower and armor as a main battle tank, neither enough mobility nor sight as a scout.
    If E50M do not have any significant improvement on armor and firepower, E50M will be useless as a tier 10 medium tank. The weight of E50M decides that E50M will never have better mobility than T-62A, M48, or chat bat 25t. M48 and chat bat 25t will definitely have better guns(like 105mmL7), and M48’s front armor will be as strong as E50. There will be not advantage for E50M against M48.
    As tier 10 medium tanks, chat bat 25t will eventually have the best mobility and firepower. M48 shall have the highest penetration and the farthest sight. T-62A, I guess it should have a strong armor and high mobility as T-54 performed in tier 9. All the tier 10 medium tanks seem to have their role in team battle or territory war except your version of E50M. If E50M, as a tier medium, has no use in team battle or territory war, what is the meaning of the existence of the germen medium tanks line?
    IF E50 performs as a high speed tier 8 heavy tank, why E50M cannot perform as a high speed tier 9 heavy tank? Why not give E50M a better armor (like 140mm-150mm upper front hull, all the germen tanks’ lower front hull is weak. ) and a better gun (like 240- 260 AP pen)so that E50M can work as a main battle tank in the team battle or territory war. E50M is a 60t level tank(almost have the same weight as IS-7, T110 and AMX50B);why E50M needs to be performed as 40t level medium tank.
    I seek that E50M can have a chance in the team battle or territory war.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Overlord, can you tell what gun was supposed to mount on Indien Panzer?
    I only found that the main gun calibre was 90 mm.

    ReplyDelete