Purpose of this blog

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

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

[WoT] Get Expert Opinion. Updated

Updated. September17. No more questions, please.

With high probability later this week I will be seeing Mr. Hilary L. Doyle whose proficiency in German (and not only German :)) WWII vehicles is totally unquestionable.

To take even more advantage of the upcoming meeting (barring standard business issues) I would like to gather player questions regarding (preferably) German tanks, so as to get Doyle's answers. Post them in comments to this post, I will shortlist everything with love and care and subsequently provide replies. While considering what exactly to ask, keep in mind that Doyle maybe not knowledgeable of the game itself, thus try to keep your inquiries more reality-related than WoT-related.

On a related note, you can also post your Qs on Soviet tanks, since I will also be able to poke one of the WoT warfare experts Yuriy Pasholok whose materials are mostly used for "Digging Through Archives" posts.

88 comments:

  1. Some ideas:

    Does he play WoT?

    The spaced armor of the Panzer IV and Stug III, Did it have much affect on the battlefield?

    Maybe some unbiased 88mm gun stats? To settle the matter once and for all?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'd like to hear some more about that 88mm.
    Realistic penetration values and the lot.

    Also, how about that Maus armor design...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Definitive performance stats and expected/observed performance of the Panther / Panther II on the battlefield. I've never had a tank that had so much potential perform so poorly. It's playable, but damn. Everything and it's mother seems to front pen it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Whatever the expert opinion, please: stop putting in features to make the game more random oriented so to let unskilled players win.
    This results only in frustrating skilled players, whom will then leave the game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Never had such an aim. Skill ftw.

      Delete
    2. if thats the case, why all the 0 damage hits and accuracy nerfs? rounds come out the guns and right angles! no way were guns as inaccurate as they seem in this game, you can be 20 meters away from an enemy and still miss your aiming point by meters.... that negates skill and adds randomness.

      Delete
    3. That's you lagging. No other possible explanation. Its the first time I'm hearing things like that.

      Delete
  5. Also, maybe some remarks on the poor gun depression on almost every German tank?

    ReplyDelete
  6. And how about high gun depression in e75? its impossible to get gun so low in that tank!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I feel Soviet tanks have a bias in game because it's Russian. Everyone dislikes the E100 over the IS7 for example. I want him to list all Germany tanks that he feels were better than Russian counterparts and why (armour sloping, gun penetration, vulnerabilities etc) let's see if the community feel the game reflects his answer's... The biggest discrepancies then become you're priority overlord.

    ReplyDelete
  8. In the "battle" between Henschel and Porsche, did the best designs actually win, or were there other political factors at play and what affect does he think this had on the tanks that emerged?

    Also, I'd like to know whether he preferred Henschels or Porsches designs for things like the eventual Tiger?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. +1

      Also, assuming the basic problems could be overcome - how would the 7002 DB have fared in battled?

      Delete
  9. What was the great advantage of the JagdPanther IRL? Compared to other TD's it is huge and still has weak frontal Armor.
    Did it see much combat action and did it prove to be a valid design?

    ReplyDelete
  10. 1. I would like to ask about tank destroyer on E-100 chassis. Were there any plans of such vehicle or it was just and idea to do somewhere in future tank destroyer on this chassis, but no plans and specifications? In other words, how much true is popular in the internet Jagpanther-like model E-100 Krokodil.

    2. What was Germans biggest mistake in tanks development and what was their biggest success?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ad 1: Guys, those questions were already answered (this particular one in the Think Tank show). The Krokodil is a design made up by kitbashers and model makers, there was no real background on that at all.

      Delete
    2. You do not read all my question, I supppose. All beginning is about what is known about E-100 TD in general. And I want it from expert to have good source, cause in those sources I could find, informations are very scare. Also I have never seen something called Think Tank show.

      Delete
  11. What was the top-speed of the Jagdtiger in 'real life'? Does the ingame speed of the JT differs greatly from its RL value?*

    * Hint for WG team to buff Jagdtiger a little bit.

    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. *you know, you couldnt even turn the jagdtiger without moving, because it would loose his tracks. moving in general has been a bad idea with porsche-suspension cause you wouldnt hit anything after this. ah! and to keep realism even more up, you should cap the possible crew training to roughly 60% :)

      Delete
    2. "you know, you couldnt even turn the jagdtiger without moving, because it would loose his tracks."

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6LL4tCTXEs

      Keep in mind that this Jagdtiger is even missing wheels and still it turns without any problem.

      Delete
  12. What where the german armys views on the soviet 122mm and 152mm guns ?

    ReplyDelete
  13. 1. Any performed test on the Jagdtiger armour, and results?

    2. Clarify the E-100 Crocodille story, so much rumour. A expert could give us a good answer.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'd love to hear his thoughts on armor penetration values, and have him compare the merits of the testing methods used by various nations.

    I know we've confirmed the validity of front mounted transmissions in German vehicles, but was there ever a design push to move the drive assembly to the rear, as was found in their Russian counterparts?

    I know the Germans copied the sloped armor idea from their encounters with T-34s on the Eastern front. Were any other design ideas directly adapted from things they saw in their opponents?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I wonder at the stats on the 88mm L100 used on the Pz Panther. There were reports of high penetration at 1000 meters at various thicknesses of armor.
    I know that WoT has to limit the distance due to cost and end-user computer power, but this cannon is not the sniper that I was hoping for.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I would like to know more on possible guns for E-100, and if they had low pentretion like the in game one?

    P.S. The low penetration on a tier 10 gun is making people hate E-100. :(

    ReplyDelete
  17. I would like to ask:

    As we know most german tanks used the Maybach engine series. These petrol engines originaly designed for planes.

    1. Did the Germans/Maybach (MTU Todays) company made any alternative engines for specificly tank usage during the war? If they did why they didnt implemented them?

    Panthers main problem came from the gearbox which was designed for lighter tanks, and the engine which was designed for planes. Also the repairs were hard because to repair something you always had to remove alots of other part of the tank to get to the damaged part.

    2. Were there any plans during that time to improve the repair times, by copying the modularity of the M4 shermans (front gearbox change in 15 min) or the easy to reach parts of the T-34 and IS-2?
    Todays Leo2 is now a very modular "plug and play" tank. Very is and fast to repair.

    3. Suspension: double torsion bar, interleaved road wheels.
    This was germans way to stabilize the tank hull and with it the gun on the move. Was this solution worth it enoguh while making the tank tall and heavy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You should really buy the book "Panther und seine Abarten". Its all mentioned there. You will like it ;)

      1. Maybachs HL230 was really an advanced engine and specifically made for tanks between 30-40t (the Heereswaffenamt demanded even more power for the panther). Very good ratio of power/volume. Without Maybachs engines the Panther would have been much longer --> Much heavier. Also the biggest problem was not the gearbox but the underdimensioned side intermediate gearbox. There was no room to use bigger pinions. They often broke, leaving the Panther immobile.

      2. The Panther itself was a way in the direction of modulizing. But more for the producing process than repairing. It was so good constructed that it didnt need much more ressources the a PanzerIII.

      3. The double torsion bars have been THE innovation of the Panther! It had such good driving characteristics that there was no going back. On rough terrain the Panther drove much times smoother than M4 or T34 who couldnt drive faster than 25km/h there due to extreme vibrations. The Panther could nearly reach his top speed also on very rough terrain.
      And see it vice-versa: Suspension didnt made the Panther heavy, but the suspension was needed for the high mass of >40t.
      About the highness: Without the double torsion bars the panther would have been only ca. 55mm lower. The tunnel for the cardan shaft increased the highness much more by ca. 140mm.

      Delete
    2. Germans successfully tested/installed a Gas Turbine on a Panther tank. Stat wise it would have been extreamly effective (Panther would have had the best hp/tone valuse from all IRL WW2 tanks)

      But the war ended before the new engine could have been mass produced.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_101

      Q1: Overlord can Mr Doyle give any additionl info about Gas Turbine engine development of Germany in WW2?

      Q2: Why did the germans used wielded armour insted of the more effective cast armour (Sherman turret and front hull, some Russian Turrets and hulls) The German enginers couldn't/didn't know the tecnology how to manufacturing it?

      Q3 What info can Mr. Doyle give us on the gun penetration tables which where shown to us on this blog a few weeks ago.
      What numbers did he gather during the huge amount of research he made.

      Delete
  18. 1. Which was the Turret which would be most likely built on top of the built E100 chassis.
    http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/1-Vehicles/Axis/1-Germany/03-sPanzers/E-100/E-100%282%29.htm
    http://www.nast-sonderfahrzeuge.de/fotosammlung/displayimage.php?pid=2552&fullsize=1


    2. Same goes for the JPZ E100 If such a tank would have been manufactured, what kind of gun would it become, what would its specs be (weight/ armor/ place for the on-top casemate = more likely to be close to jtiger, ferdi or jpanther?


    3. Place of the E50 - E75s Transmission and the "fact" that they wouldnt be able to mount it in the rear?


    4. Some infos about the Waffenträger line - especially Top Tier vehicles and possible compositions of Hull Engine and Guns.
    Some things to get proven:
    http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/142551-waffentragers-the-real-deal/


    5. Some info about the myth of the "Stuf E90 Crocodile".. was it likely to be produced. Same goes for some other Tanks like the E90 itself.

    - E90?
    http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/8436/heer4702n6my.jpg

    - Krokodil
    http://www.nast-sonderfahrzeuge.de/fotosammlung/displayimage.php?album=25&pos=3

    - Some other tanks?
    http://www.nast-sonderfahrzeuge.de/fotosammlung/displayimage.php?pid=2881&fullsize=1



    Id really love some data there from a real expert, to get some competitive German tanks for CW atleast! :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. For all of you who want to know so much from him about Tiger, Panther and Jagdpanther: Buy The books from Doyle and Walter J. Spielberger. I have the book "Panther und seine Abarten" and it ist really, really good. You need to have a bit understanding of engineering though to benefit from all the infos provided by the book.
    So i envy you, Overlord, that you can meet him ;)

    I have some questions that i cant answer from his books:
    1. Why was the Panzer III so long produced? Wouldnt it have been better to produce only Panthers after 1943?
    2. How developed German steel and welding quality over the years in war? Did it got better or worse? Many people claim much nonsense about this topic (espc. in WOT-forum ^^). I really want to hear the opinion of an expert.
    3. Infos about the Maus and Löwe! All you can get! There are so many legends and so little truth. Ask Doyle to write a book about the Maus ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Q: Ask Doyle to write a book about the Maus ;)

      A: He already did by the way.:)

      Delete
  20. Mr Doyle,

    Could you please discuss in detail the test methods and results of gun & armor penetration for the Germans? It seems the standard these days is the Wa Pruef 1 report from Oct 5 1944.

    2. Do other nations confirm the Germans findings? Why or why not?

    3. It's been discussed that the Germans had a higher standard regarding shell quality (tank/artillery/etc), while some other nations rather than test simply used a mathematical formula. Could you pleas provide some further insight?

    4. Given the few known advantages of German tanks late in the war (2.5 & 5x sights, smokeless powder rounds, superior doctrine) is there anything else that is constantly overlooked and forgotten?

    Thank you for your time.

    ReplyDelete
  21. 1. On the eve of the 0.8.0 what are the most accurate and reliable sources for Penetration values of 5cm Kwk 39/L60, 7,5cm Kwk 40/L43, 7,5cm Kwk 40/L48 and of course 8,8cm Kwk 36/L56 guns.
    2. Was E-100 Krokodil considered as a possible design during the war or is it just a modern idea?
    3. And Krokodil again. So time ago the idea of Tank Destroyers with front casemate (outside of Jagdpanther) was branded as impossible by WG developers, due to weight distribution (supposedly too much weight on the front). Is that statement true from the engineering point of view?
    4. T-34 in it's early versions is generally considered (outside of propaganda sources) to be a coffin on tracks (no or poor radio communication, dreadful transmission, woeful quality of armour, none or close to none targeting equipment). Yet first encounters with this tank reportedly caused panic and envy among German commanders. And captured tanks themselves were used by Wehrmacht. Where is the catch?
    5. A commonly known weakspot shared by most of the German tanks is their frontal transmission. Are there any reliable sources confirming that penetrating hits received in the transmission, caused ignition of gear oil and internal fire?
    Thanks Overlord

    ReplyDelete
  22. 1)Something about Sturmtiger:
    A)It performance(effectiveness) in combate?
    B)what ammunition it use in combate?
    C)I heard that Sturtiger use HE and HEAT, and this ultimate can penetrate 2,5 meters of reinforced concret. What is the penetration of this munnition over steel?

    2)Captured tanks
    A)What can he say about captured tanks? It have differents guns?
    B)For example: I find that, Pz KV-1 756 ® have the gun 75 KWK 40 L/43. Is this true?
    C)What can he say about other captured tanks? like: Captured Panther, PzIV, Pz T34 747 ® and Pz BT 742 ®. What is differences between this captured tanks and the this normal tanks?

    3)E series
    A)Something about utility of E-5? he can give us some picture about any proyect of E-5 tank.
    B)E-10 was planned to have the same armor as hetzer or better? What about its suspension system? Some picture please
    C)E-25 was planned to charge 7,5cm L/70 or 8,8cm L/56? Some picture please

    4)RBT-5 (some picture please ;) )
    A)Wich was the utility of its rockets?
    B)Can its rockets destroy tanks?
    C)More info about this tank, i don`t have enough.

    5)Please he can give us some information about crazy projects in any nation?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Panther and Tigers machine gun nest have a ball shaped form.

    I saw a picture of a destroyed Panther and those gun nest looks like are extra thick. In WoT these parts know to be weakpots as the whole ball shape part.

    1. So I wish to know if these part had worse or better armor then the rest of the front?


    2. German Optics and view range know to be much better then allied and soviet tanks had.

    How much advantage this gave to germans?
    How long did it take for the allies and soviets to catch up with germans in this area? (name the firt tank which was as good in terms of optics like Panther or Tiger had.)


    3. How long would it take for a stationary Tiger H to aim in properly and make a perfect shoot on a stationary T-34-85 which is 700m away? (The Tiger hull is facing the enemy, the turret is 15° off target at the start)

    4. What is the range where the Panther/Tiger commanders usually would spot enemy movement in the distance? Identify targets and so on.
    So how aware can be someone in a tank? How clearly can they see the situation around themm?




    ReplyDelete
  24. I'd like his comments on German efforts to fit the larger guns WoT uses, into the following tanks:

    StugIII - 7.5cm L/70
    JgdPzIV - 8.8cm L/56
    Tiger I - 8.8cm L/71
    Tiger II - 10.5cm anything
    Ferdinand - 10.5cm or above, anything
    JgdPanther I - 10.5cm anything

    His comments could be more general than specific, I'm mostly interested in understanding if such mountings were attempted with any feasibility, or they pursued heavier vehicles like the Tiger II in part because of the need for a machine to match the gun.

    I'm still pondering your posting of the "revised - historical" German tree that ditches a-historical gun mountings for lowered tier listing. Re-arranging things like that would solve a lot of problems with "squishy" German armor at their tiers.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Some info about: 1)Jagdtiger II
    2)Krokodil
    3)Jaguar
    4)Hetzer II
    http://imageshack.us/f/705/germantd.jpg/

    ReplyDelete
  26. Question: If the German tanks had wider tracks to deal with snow/mud i.e. Barbarossa etc. would it have possibly tipped the balance in the Wehrmachts favour?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Please ask him why the German engineers supposedly put the transmission in the front of the E75 tank, where it could catch fire every time the weak lower hull was penetrated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. maybe because tanks were not designed around being penetrated. if you get penetrated you'll have a shitload of shrapnel flying around in your tank. sth the crew certainly does not enjoy.
      in fact even TODAY there are MBTs with a frontal engine using this big chunk of metal to protect the crew. an immobile tank can at least shoot, a tank without a crew doesn't do much anymore.

      but then again i have no idea what i'm talking about

      Delete
  28. Question: "Would you trust Soviets who had family members killed by Germans in WW2 to impartially make a game about WW2?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JSW225,

      included this silly one specially for you.

      Delete
  29. Can we get his opinion on the penetration of the German guns ingame? Do the following have more penetration or less penetration than compared to historic?

    50mm L/60 - more or less than 67mm @ 0°?
    75mm L/43 - more or less than 98mm @ 0°?
    75mm L/48 - more or less than 110mm @ 0°?
    75mm L/70 - more or less than 150mm @ 0°?
    88mm L/56 - more or less than 132mm @ 0°?
    128mm L/55 - more or less than 246mm @ 0°?
    128mm L/61 - more or less than 276mm @ 0°?
    150mm L/38 - more or less than 235mm @ 0°?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I would like to know that too!
      And I think that we are not alone :)

      Delete
    2. the 128 guns and 150mm gun have more penetration than real life

      Delete
    3. why nonsense? is the true... do you think in that time a tank will needed more penetration?

      Delete
    4. Germans tested their guns against sloped armor while russians not, so if germans had the same penn value as russians on some of their gun, its real penetration value was higher for german guns because they used sloped armor for penetration tests (30° or so). Russians tested against 0° unsloped armor. And WG penetration ballancing is based just on those numbers, without taking into account that 30° slope on german´s tested steel plates. And thats it...

      Delete
  30. I want to know more about the different kinds of shells the germans used, from quality to types of shells used in same gun.

    ReplyDelete
  31. First thanks Overlord for this opportunity, and that Mr. Doyle takes the time.

    My question is a little specific; it is about a german light tank desgins. As Im currently gathering information about the VK 2801 Daimler Benz desgin; I had found in: Walter J. Spielberger (1994): Panther & Its Variants. Schiffer Military/Aviation History. Atglen, on page 176 a picture of a drawing about this tank (see here: http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/141263-suggestion-tier-vi-german-light-tank/). This picture/drawing was made by Mr. Doyle. So my question is:

    Q1: Has Mr. Doyle any more information about this tank (VK 2801 Daimler Benz) or can he give a hint where and in which books I may find some more infos?

    Q2: What is his favorite light tank desgin (any nation is welcome, timeline 1916 - present :P )?

    As I saw there were many question to the E-100 and his turret; so maybe I join the club. Q3: Which turret would be in use on the E-100... if it saw later ~1948ish production?

    Q4: Can the french AMX 50 series and the AMX M4 series be seen as an further step of the E-series and/or other german desgins (Panther, Tiger II); or have those series seen more influenz by other desgins (like IS-3, Pershing, ARL 44)?




    To Yuriy Pasholok as we all hope to see some new tanks.

    Q1: Is there any new information about russian tier VI to tier VIII light tanks? Can you give us a hint which tanks may come?

    Q2: Is there any plans for a second russian medium line? And if yes; will a be the line go from the Object 416? What will be the main feature (low profile, speedy, tanks like the "later" T-72)?

    Q3: Will we see a third soviet heavy tank line (in the near future)?

    Q4: Which soviet tank, TD, SPG - which isnt currently in the tech tree - would he like to see? And why :) ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Q2 for yuriy pasholok. The object 416 is allready in the techtree check it like a tier 8.

      http://worldoftanks.com/dcont/fb/media/media/art_techtree/tech/ussr__full_com.jpg

      Delete
    2. Thx for the link....

      As for the question... It was more in the meaning... If we see a second line; If that is true; will this line start over the Obj 416 or will we even see a new medium tree which starts deeper on a lower tier tank?

      By the way:

      For Mr. Pasholok:
      Bonus: Q1: Will we see the Объект 907 and/or Объект 430?

      For Mr Doyle:
      Bonus: Could the E-50 Ausführung Мартыненко turret hold the 10,5cm gun (as both Tiger II turrets arent big enough)? Would it be to small; would the gun destroy the turret and kill the crew/commander; would by give gun depression (-6), the use of the gun lead to the destruction of the turret-roof etc..... :)?




      Delete
  32. Q1 How succesful would the Germans of been if they just built a specialized Heavy armored tank as their main one and just improved and made variations of it for what that role was?
    (Also they managed to make it Fairly cheap & Simple)

    ReplyDelete
  33. Q1. why was Dr ferdinand porsche so insistant on using the petro-electric drive system in both the porsche tiger prototype (and subsequent elefant tank destroyer) and the Maus tanks? did it have any advantages to justify its temperamental and matinance heavy nature

    Q2. the common conception is that the engines of german tanks were underpowered compared to their allied counterparts. Was this a matter of german inabillity to build a suitable tank engine, pollitical pressure resulting in an increase in armour an arrmament beyond engine capabillity (like in the case of the tiger and panther) or another factor?

    Q3.aside from the obvious advantage of not requiring rubber, what advantages did the german use of interleaved roadwheels have over allied suspension types, such as the christie or E8 suspension?

    Q4.i have heard that in early model panther tanks there was a design fault in the turret ring which meant that if the gun whas fired with the turret facing 90 degrees to either the left or right from the front plate, the turret would come off the tank under the force of recoil. is this true?

    Q.5 was the sturmpanzer 1 ever used for indirect artillery support? or was it mainly an interim assault gun?

    Q.6 i have read articles describing a prototype panzer IV Ausf.G which used a 'hydro static drive' would you be able to explain this vehicle in greater detail?

    Q.7 do you think any of the second world war german tanks(production and prototype) such as the Panther, King tiger, E-75 and Panther II would be able to relliably compete with any of the allied post war designs as they do in world of tanks? (such as the US M46, M103 or russian T-54 and IS-7)

    ReplyDelete
  34. So I have a question too. Was it possible to set a German transmission on fire after hitting it, like in game? /sarcasm
    In game, it just doesn´t make any sence. I´m ok with idea that it will damage your engine, but it´s imposible to set the tank on fire by hitting it...
    + I´ve heard that E-100 should´ve had 200mm thick armor on its upper but even on lower glacis, is that true?
    + And what about the real muzzle velocity and penetration of 128mm and 150mm guns? If it was tested...
    Thx, cant w8 to read the answers Ovi ;)

    ReplyDelete
  35. There was also interesting letters from Predrag Popovic about VK3002(DB), Е-50, ”Indienpanzer” and KW30 =)
    https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1gbVVKB7VmIlVBBEWjWdq7DV9q_UxETrDlSBhVODjjvc

    ReplyDelete
  36. How long would the germans have continued with developing huge tanks like MAUS etc before realizing mobility and firepower would prevail?

    ReplyDelete
  37. How realistic is it for a game like WOT to have all players aim for the lower front plate and facehug people all the time? I assume most tank battles were 500m+ but I bet he knows better...

    ReplyDelete
  38. I want to know why the Germans numbered Panther as Pz 5 and Tiger as Pz 6 . If Panther was newer , and better in battlefield , and even wasn't in parallel development with tiger Pz 6 .

    ReplyDelete
  39. overlord, could u show this picture to mr doyle please? https://dl.dropbox.com/u/101202887/11092012125.jpg
    i found it in the scrapyard at my work (belgian airfoce base wich was used during ww2 by the germans and allies) yesterday and i think it might be a roadwheel from a WW2 german halftrack. inscriptions found so far: "Avon 1944" "DIA 20""

    also, could he maybe explain what the advantages and knowledge was around that time of having front or rear transmission? it is not that i want to restart the discussion about the e-series change, its just that i am busy modifying a rc tank and i want to know why i would choose what

    many thanks in advance!

    Crazytony

    ReplyDelete
  40. I'd be interested in hearing about just how effective HE rounds were in tank-tank combat, and i'd also like to hear more about the accuracy of tank-mounted guns at that time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Weaponology covered that in some episode, cant remember which, when an explosive device hits the steel plate of a tank and if the explosive is strong enough it would detach a plate from the inside of the tank propelling it forward and most likely killing a crew member it a big enough piece would break of the armor, not to mention the headache everyone would have from the impact =)

      Delete
  41. 1. what was the difference in testing the gun penetration between Germany, Russia, and America?

    2. how fast did the Henshel tiger's turret rotate?

    3. how was the standing of Dr. Porshe throughout the war? he couldn't have been to popular with all of his failed prototypes.

    ReplyDelete
  42. What materials were used to make the armor of the Panther and King Tiger?

    ReplyDelete
  43. Hi there!
    Some question about the Jgdpz E-100 and some others were already
    answered in the Operation think tank Q&A session! Mr. Doyle was there too, to answer questions. It's about 4 hours of Q&A and it is very inforative and entertaining.

    http://wargamingamerica.com/OTT/

    ReplyDelete
  44. Okay. For german tanks. Was there any sturmpanzer similiar to Sturmtiger planned based on latter chassis? (Heavily armored with big gun)
    For soviet. There is IS-7 based TD and SPG and this tank was not mass produced BUT IS-4 was. Were there any vechicles based on IS-4 chassis?:)

    ReplyDelete
  45. For Mr. Pasholok:

    1. I would like to know angle and thickness information for "Pike Nose" of IS-3, T-10, and IS-7

    2. Also angle information for IS-4's "shoulder armor" (the armor part connecting glacis and side armor) would be great.

    3. What is the reason for dropping "pike nose" design? structural problem? difficulty at manufacture? realization of "forward 60 degrees arc protection level" concept?

    4. It seems not only all-around armor thickness but also angle had been changed when USSR replaced its heavies from IS-3 to T-10.
    Especially lower hull profile seem to be increased, thus rendering the tank more vulnerable. What are the reasons behind those changes in armor design?

    5. Are the scans/detailed information of various test reports from Kubinka proving ground available online? Maybe as purchasable physical copies?


    For Mr. Doyle

    1. What is your opinion about reports from Soviet tests of King Tiger and Panther?
    I'm not trying to argue that those are Soviet propaganda of German Wunderwaffe.
    Rather, I want to know if, in your opinion, the reports from the tests correctly assess and expect threat level of then-current and future German tanks and the adequacy/standing of Soviet equipment in relation to the perceived threats.

    2. I also like to hear your opinion of the (in)famous Soviet ARTKOM penetration table for Soviet and German guns.
    Some entries on the table are thought to be calculated while some are based on live fire tests.
    In your opinion, which entries seem to be calculated/extrapolated from domestic shells?

    3. (Con't) Controlling for the different test criteria, how does the table compare to gun penetration tables prepared by Germans?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Dear Mr. Doyle

    If you could please tell us, what is your estimation as to the thickness of the lower glacis / nose plate of the E-100 design?

    and

    Would a 15cm gun ever feasibly been mounted in the Maus-turm produced by Porsche? Is there any evidence as to what the realistic main armament of the E-100 was going to be?

    ReplyDelete
  47. I'd like to hear his opinion about the testing methods the various countries used and why we see so many differences in gun performance from source to source.

    ReplyDelete
  48. i'd like to add something to the penetration questions.
    what about:
    I) partial deflection of sloped armor which meant that shells did not follow the initial trajectory even if they penetrated.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Projectil_deflection_effects.jpg

    see in c) the 'effective thickness' vs 'line of sight thickness' and in d) 'inertia' vs 'resistance force'

    II) linearity of the 'penetration quality' -> % of fragments behind the plate (the 50 vs 75% thing) and to what extent this allows you to make assumptions about a certain shell in a different nation's test


    i'd like you to bring these up if possible and try to find out if you need to adjust your stuff because of these things.

    while all i REALLY care about is game balance i do feel kinda sad about german guns being a little weak in some tiers.

    hope i'm not too late !

    ReplyDelete
  49. I would really like to hear the impact and role and performance of the Tiger (I and II)class tanks in battle's during the WWII......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh nevermind, i just found out myself.....
      Not to hard to find an article that proves the Tiger isn't really Historical made in WoT:
      http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm

      Quote:

      The Tiger dominated the battlefield, and this occurred basically because the it managed to maintain a stand off ability which was made possible by a combination of thick armor and a high-velocity, very accurate gun, coupled with superior optics - thus being capable of first hits at ranges well beyond 1.000 meters. As it was, the Tiger could choose its targets at will, and destroy them at ranges they either couldn't hit; or if they could hit, couldn't defeat the Tiger's thick armor. The Tiger I maintained this stand off capability until nearly the end of the war, as it was only outclassed by the Russian Josef Stalin heavy tank.

      Erm...lets see......i play my Tiger, i get 1 hit: Engine on fire, another hit, Driver dead, another hit, Gun broken....

      something about; or if they could hit, couldn't defeat the Tiger's thick armor.

      ??????????? I guess WoT must be the same as WoW, fantasy based....

      Delete
    2. You do not see that in game tanks, which Tiger was outclassing in real life, are tiers V and VI, while Tiger is tier VII.

      In WoT you are also exterminating T-34's and Shermans, when you play Tiger. All other tier VII tanks in game are younger then Tiger. Development of T-29 was started in 1944!

      Delete
    3. Game designers from Blizzard .. What can you expect ? A tank simulation ?

      Delete
    4. @MuppetOne

      It's not the tanks that are fantasy-based, it's the battles that they're in. I doubt there was ever a battle between a Pershing and a Tiger, even though it happens all the time in WoT. In real life you had mostly M4 Shermans with the M3 Lee or 105mm gun which of course did nothing. When the Fireflies started rolling in they outnumbered Tigers and Panthers and destroyed them. So Tigers were great tanks, but they were very expensive (only about 1000 were ever produced) and eventually advances in gun penetration on the Allied side made their armor useless, so there... I suppose you could make the Tiger Tier 6 by shaving off 500 HP and the 88L/71 (which it didn't have in real life) to make its armor more meaningful. There's an idea for a premium tank.

      Delete
  50. I would like to hear what were the merits and drawbacks of the VK3002DB design compared to the MAN version and why it was not chosen in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  51. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  52. A question for Sir Doyle :

    Could you confirm historical top speed for the PzVI Tiger and the pzVIB Tiger 2 ? If such tanks were going down a hill, could the top speed increase realistically and to which limit ?
    According to Sir Boyle, what could have been the top speed of the E-75 and E-50 ?

    ReplyDelete
  53. Were the E-90 and Krokodil real german concepts or are they fantasy tanks ?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Why are so many people asking questions that were already covered in Operation Think Tank?

    Anyway, my questions are for Mr. Hilary L. Doyle:

    1) What can you tell us about the belleville washer suspension intended for the E-series? Did the single E-100 hull completed actually have this type of suspension? How well did this suspension work on the Swiss tanks that used it? For that matter, how and why did the Swiss end up using belleville washer suspension? I'm particularly curious if the stack of belleville washers doubles as a friction snubber.

    2) How much is known about the VK3002(DB)? How many hulls were built? Did they have elliptical leaf spring or torsion bar suspension? Osprey's _Panther vs. T-34_ suggests that the type of suspension for the panther was a point of major contention and political intrigue; is that so, and if it is so, how did Porsche get away with using his goofy suspension designs on all his tanks? Finally, were there any planned variants of the VK3002(DB) that got as far as drawings or other proposals?

    3) How much information is there yet to be discovered in old German wartime archives? Has everything pretty much been looked thoroughly, or is new or under-examined material still surfacing?

    4) How long did it take for the Germans to build their tanks in WWII? Again, according to Osprey's _Panther vs. T-34_ the panther took eighteen times more man-hours to build than a T-34-76. Do you have any idea where these figures came from, and whether they are accurate? If German tanks did take longer to build than allied tanks, was it because their designs were complicated or because German industrial techniques were inefficient?

    Thank you in advance.

    My questions for Mr. Yuriy Pasholok:

    1) Were there any particularly interesting Soviet tank designs either on the drawing board or in trials that got cancelled because Khrushchev reduced the emphasis on conventional forces and heavy tanks?

    2) How well did the half-length torsion bar suspension on the IS-7 and T-64 work? How on earth are the mechanics supposed to replace a broken torsion bar on these designs when the torsion bars are anchored in the center of the underside of the hull as opposed to the opposite side of the hull in conventional designs where they can simply be driven out?

    3) To what extent were the Soviet heavy tank programs politically favored by Stalin?

    4) How did the Soviet engineers hit upon the concept of the pointed hull (pike nose) on the IS-3, T-10 and IS-7 heavy tanks? Did they have any special techniques for welding armor that thick?

    5) Why were the Soviets so far ahead in using transversely-mounted engines (i.e. with the driveshaft of the engine perpendicular to the tracks)? Why is the recent Object 187 said to use a longitudinally-mounted engine? Isn't that a step backwards?

    6) Did Soviet designers ever experiment with interleaved roadwheels like on the panther and tiger?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Could you ask him to write some stuff on the Maus II? Its hard to find information on that subject. Would love if you could ask him about the drawing (bz.3250) and the armor scheme for that turret? What does he mean about "rework the maus with maus II features"?

    Source: panzertracks 6-3 e-100 und maus

    ReplyDelete
  56. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  57. A question about E100:

    turret and weapons for E100
    http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/151246-flak-e100/

    and no its not total fantasy as been claim to have found later in 1945 a mild steel mock up of the turret was reportedly discovered.

    http://fingolfen.tripod.com/superheavy/fze100m.html

    Yes many might say that this would be to weak but as support tank this would be really cool. Some ideas from RU forum but admins there found it is "fan art" not an prototype as current turret for E100

    http://forum.worldoftanks.ru/index.php?/topic/504399-%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B9-%D1%82%D1%8210-%D0%B3%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8-%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80/page__p__12735765#entry12735765

    Some really good ideas pop up from RU forum as for gun rebalance for this flak gun. I would 100% use this instead of 150mm as the turret just looks so much more legen-wait for it -dary.... give me this setup for E100 and I dont mind weak lowerplate as it could really be burst dmg sniper as WG tells German tanks should be.

    When an expert takes a look at these turrets (currently ingame, maus turret and this flak e100 turret) by historical accuracy shouldn't E100 have a option to mount flak as also 150mm cannon? This might also change the community wishes for german top tier sniper heavy. What is the opinion about this model form devs? is it realistic to 1 day see one of those rolling on world of tanks?

    ReplyDelete
  58. Updated. September17. No more questions, please.

    ReplyDelete
  59. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete