|
|
Post by LouisXIV on Apr 22, 2012 13:51:41 GMT 1
I thought it'd be a little tougher though Which British tank design of the Second World War had the lowest operational loss - built ratio?
If it wasn't WWII, then it would have to be something like:  Only one built, and I understand it still exists.
|
|
|
|
Post by LouisXIV on Apr 22, 2012 14:18:33 GMT 1
I hate to sound rude here, but I believe it was Nephilim's turn to ask a question. Herr Kodax was out of turn.
|
|
tedi88
General
Blitzkrieg State Prosecutor
Posts: 1,228 
|
Post by tedi88 on Apr 22, 2012 22:37:30 GMT 1
19 prototypes built. I'm not sure regarding exact date. To my knowledge first run was in September '43. After that i'm certain it was fitted into He 111 in '45, but nothing more specific.
Regarding the bonus: The BMW 003s were discovered to be subject to catastrophic failure due to the propwash entering the intakes during operation and they were permanently removed from the program in favor of the relatively reliable Junkers Jumo 004.
Also Jumo's were slightly more reliable than BMW 003 and of course more Jumo 004's were produced than BMW 003's. The downside of the Jumo 004 was that it was heavier than BMW 003.
Only two 262's were fitted with BMW's as a prototypes, but there was a case when both engines failed. I think that was another reason why they chose Jumo 004.
|
|
tedi88
General
Blitzkrieg State Prosecutor
Posts: 1,228
|
Post by tedi88 on Apr 23, 2012 15:04:11 GMT 1
 This is obviously taken on D-Day. Now the question is: What unit and how was this picture named? Shouldn't be hard. |
|
lozos
Zastavnik 1. klase
Posts: 84
|
Post by lozos on Apr 23, 2012 17:34:35 GMT 1
Hello from Greece..
Nice photo tedi..its been a long time since i saw it..
"jaws of deaths" i think is the name of the picture and its the 1st division...mechanised infantry...
i search for photos like this after i saw "saving private ryan"
|
|
tedi88
General
Blitzkrieg State Prosecutor
Posts: 1,228
|
Post by tedi88 on Apr 23, 2012 17:57:54 GMT 1
Correct. Except 1st was not mechanised inf. division, but just infantry division.
Anyway you can proceed l0z0s.
Drop me a PM in case you need more pictures on Normandy landings.
|
|
lozos
Zastavnik 1. klase
Posts: 84
|
Post by lozos on Apr 23, 2012 18:37:41 GMT 1
 where are they...? who are they...? |
|
|
|
Post by fallschirmjager on Apr 24, 2012 0:40:41 GMT 1
Stalingrad and those would be Russians trying to get across of river Volga.
FJ
|
|
lozos
Zastavnik 1. klase
Posts: 84
|
Post by lozos on Apr 24, 2012 3:06:50 GMT 1
that's right my friend...keep going...
by the way...incredible picture.....images like that and as tedi's with D-Day show what war is...
|
|
|
|
Post by LouisXIV on Apr 24, 2012 12:59:57 GMT 1
Except 1st was not mechanised inf. division, but just infantry division.
I specifically remember that in 1940 the Germans designated all the British infantry divisions as motorized. |
|
tedi88
General
Blitzkrieg State Prosecutor
Posts: 1,228
|
Post by tedi88 on Apr 24, 2012 15:57:08 GMT 1
Well, when 1st ID is compared to German division it was certainly mechanised or even lightly armored div. But then again most if not all US divisions had armored elements and were using trucks (inc. half-tracks) , yet they were still designated inf division.
Also as you are aware many German divisons had horse drawn transport until the end of war. I believe except Großdeutschland, Panzer Lehr, Fallschirm-Panzer Division 1 Hermann Göring and a couple of SS Panzer divisons they all had some horse drawn transports in them.
Btw although I am European, I prefer to use native designations (in case of 1st, infantry division, in case of Großdeutschland, infanterie regiment, infanterie division (mot.), panzergrenadier, panzer division), but that is just personal opinion. ;D
|
|
tedi88
General
Blitzkrieg State Prosecutor
Posts: 1,228
|
Post by tedi88 on Apr 24, 2012 23:11:23 GMT 1
Well i think that it really comes to types of commanders. Many of them don't want to experiment with new types of technology, tactics or strategy.
|
|
Ocelo
General
Map Artist/Eastern Front enthusiast
Posts: 1,400
|
Post by Ocelo on Apr 25, 2012 1:37:20 GMT 1
@sj: but on the other hand, before Hitler came to power, the most likely conflicts Britain was going to be in were imperial uprisings in africa/asia, and possibly Japan. They really didn't need those kind of divisions for that; they are actually bad for that. Britain was an island-nation with an overseas empire, that is why so much effort went into the navy and RAF vs armored/mechanized divisions. Germany/SU, on the other hand, weren't going across any ocean, and clearly had to focus on modern, large land forces.
As for armored offensives, I'm assuming you're referring to Renaults and such light tanks, not the Mark Is (which I think infy could just follow on foot). Interesting; most certainly don't regard WWI as a conflict with extensive use of armored offensives (at least for a short period).
|
|
|
|
Post by LouisXIV on Apr 25, 2012 13:07:58 GMT 1
As for speed, bear in mind that a man trudging through muddy broken ground carrying 70lbs or more of equipment whilst under enemy fire is likely to be even slower than a Mk.I
fallschirmjaeger, I believe you have a question .... |
|
|
|
Post by fallschirmjager on Apr 26, 2012 23:36:45 GMT 1
Sorry guys to disappoint - but I am very busy fitting our newly arrived kitchen units . . . . .
Is anybody out there willing to take my turn please?
FJ
|
|
